Colombiana

Having worked in film and television for the last 10-plus years, Zoe Saldana has made quite a name for herself over the years. She's been in comedy, drama and action but yet hasn't been able to make herself into that HUGE star. How about an effort to make her that star? That would be an action flick that tries to go for something a tad different with a female lead, 2011's Colombiana.

It's 1992 in Bogota, Colombia and young Cataleya (Amandla Stenberg) is witness to the deaths of her parents. Her father was tied up with a drug lord and had some damning information against him, prompting a hit on both him and his wife at the hands of the drug lord's enforcer, Marco (Jordi Molla). In the aftermath, Cataleya escapes, getting out of the country with some help from American law enforcement and traveling to Chicago where she meets her crime-connected uncle (Cliff Curtis). Even as a young girl she knows what she wants to do. Cataleya wants to be a killer, a hired gun, and Emilio begrudgingly agrees to train her. Some 15 years later, Cataleya (Saldana) has grown into a terrifyingly effective killer. She has turned into a bit of a vigilante, but her sights never change too much. Cataleya intends to exact her revenge on the drug lord and his enforcer, Marco, no matter what it takes or what it costs.

The ingredients were here for a solid movie from the cast to the story to a not so ordinary female lead in an action movie. Yeah, they were here, but in the end they didn't add up to a winner. Director Olivier Megaton (Transporter 2 and 3, Taken 2, soon to be Taken 3) tones down some of his usual over the top schtick in terms of style-heavy action, but working off a script from Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen, something is just missing. Lots of good elements -- potentially at least -- that don't quite gel in the end. It received pretty middling to negative reviews and did okay at the worldwide box office, earning about $60 million, but was far from a big success. So what's good? What's bad?

With the Star Trek movies, Avatar, The Losers, Takers, and most recently Guardians of the Galaxy, Zoe Saldana has shown she's a tough actress more than capable of holding her own with a tough guy cast around her. So how about her getting a crack at a lead role? Like most of the characters here, the issues aren't with the acting. It's the script. The Cataleya character is interesting but never developed in truly interesting fashion. Why does she take so long to exact her revenge? Her desire for revenge becomes an obsession but she seems surprised when the drug lord fights back in brutal fashion. Think things through! Now just as an action star, Saldana nails the part. She looks like a stiff wind would knock her over, but my goodness, does she look good dispatching countless nameless henchmen. Saldana is given all sorts of chances to undress, wear tight clothing, wear very little clothing and generally look good doing it. She's got the potential to be an excellent action star if she so chooses.

But what about everyone else? The other characters seem like cardboard cutouts of interesting people. They're ideas of characters more than red-blooded people who...ya know, might actually exist someplace. I love seeing Jordi Molla's name pop up in the credits, and his Marco is a smooth villain but he's simply not around enough to be effective. The same for the drug lord he works for, Don Luis Sandoval (Beto Benites), an under utilized bad guy too. The similarly reliable Curtis is kept in the background, his few scenes with Saldana providing some solid dramatic moments but simply not enough. Michael Vartan is Cataleya's lover, a painter who's curious about this beautiful woman's mysterious qualities, and Lennie James plays the FBI officer trying to track Cataleya down as her kill count piles up. Max Martini plays his assistant and right-hand man.

It's a movie I wanted to like more. The action-packed finale packs a pretty good wallop -- stylish and bloody and slow-motion -- but getting there can be a trip at times. There are too many portions that feel rush and/or disjointed. As well, there are some cringe-worthy moments from young Cataleya turning into a parkour runner and evading an army of drug gunmen to Curtis' Emilio opening fire in public to prove a point and simply walking away as police pull up in force. Say what now?!? It doesn't help that the film is "filmed" in Chicago but the city I grew up in sure looks like Los Angeles, at least a west coast city. It sure had some potential, but it ends up being a disappointment.

Colombiana (2011): **/****

3 Days to Kill

I don't know what's gotten into Kevin Costner, but I'm not complaining. A huge star in the 1980s, he didn't have the same success in the 1990s, a couple big box office bombs to his name. He kept acting throughout, but there....just....weren't....as....many roles. Then 2014 came along, and Costner WAS EVERYWHERE with movies like Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, Draft Day, and for today's review, 3 Days to Kill.

An experienced CIA assassin with plenty of years of experience under his belt, Ethan Renner (Costner) has been tasked with another dangerous mission, capturing two terrorists in Belgrade suspected of selling a dirty bomb. Nothing goes right though, Ethan wounding one and unintentionally spotting the other, previously unknown to security forces. He's wounded in the process, only learning after that he has brain cancer that's spread to his lungs. The prognosis for survival? Three-to-five months at best. With his time running out, Ethan leaves the CIA behind and heads to Paris to try and make up for lost time with his ex-wife and teenage daughter, Zooey (Hailee Steinfeld). His plan is thrown for a loop though when a fellow CIA assassin, Vivi (Amber Heard), approaches him with an offer. She can give him an experimental drug that could significantly prolong his life, but she'll only give him the drug if he agrees to finish the job, killing the two dangerous terrorists, sited again in Paris.

So that Kevin Costner guy, he's pretty cool. The star of Field of Dreams, Bull Durham, No Way Out, he's a movie star that can act and as a movie fan, it is definitely cool to see him in more theatrical releases. In the Liam Neeson vein, Costner isn't necessarily a romantic lead anymore. Yeah, at 59 years old, he's just too old. I'm kidding of course. My girlfriend would certainly disagree. But like Neeson, there's potential for him to be that gruff, grizzled action star, and this seemed like a good jumping off point. As a tough guy, as an action star, Costner is the best thing going in this pretty bizarre 2014 action flick. The script has some fun with Ethan's portrayal as a modern-day American cowboy in Europe, and it works at times, even if it is overused. So Costner is an ideal action hero, more than capable of handling himself in said action scenes. How then does the rest of the movie hold up? Not nearly so well.

Dying secret agent, nuclear bomb potentially being sold to terrorists, the future of mankind on the line. A cool formula, don't you think? I do. It may be familiar for spy/espionage/thriller fans, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing. So what did director McG and screenwriter Luc Besson (of Taken, Transporter fame) do with that movie? They make it a story about a family torn apart by the father's job -- expert CIA assassin -- trying to reunite because said father is months away from a tragically young death. Wow, I wasn't expecting an after school special when I sought out a movie about Kevin Costner saving the world all across stylish Europe. Costner is excellent at that gravelly, chiseled way and Steinfeld has shown with her limited roles that she could an actress to watch out for in the coming years. They do have some chemistry together, two talented actors working together, but when the script does them absolutely no favors? Well, this movie got bad, and it did so quickly.

I think that becomes the biggest issue. What kind of movie is this? Is is a stylish action movie with Belgrade and Paris serving as the film's backdrop? Or is more a family drama with some action thrown in. Unfortunately, it's both. There are some very cool moments, and wouldn't you know it? They're the action scenes! Renner's mission to catch The Wolf (Richard Sammel) and his malicious assistant, the Albino (Tomas Lemarquis) -- yes, there is a villain named the Albino, so you know he's a villain -- is especially cool as a gunfight goes pretty wrong pretty quickly. The same for a car chase through the streets of Paris, two cars slamming into each other, managing to not kill hundreds of folks, avoiding obstacles left and right, it's all those things that Besson can be so good at...when it works. Simply put, there aren't enough moments like this because....someone decided no one likes action movies? Your guess is as good as mine.

It becomes laughable, even painful. Tasked with finding that terrorist duo, Renner is also trying to redeem himself in the eyes of his daughter. At different points, he menacingly looks at her very French boyfriend, teaches her how to dance, teaches her how to ride a bike (are you kidding me?!?), all these cutesy little things that scream 'Lifetime Movie gone wrong!' more than action-packed thriller. For goodness sake, he teaches his teenage daughter to ride her bike!!! It's awful, all the attempts at humor falling short basically across the board. By the time the Wolf shows up at the most ridiculously convenient place to set up the finale, wow, I was just done. Renner also yells at a snitch tied up in his trunk "Shut up! I'm trying to have a conversation with my daughter!" and later asks a kidnapped, about to be tortured Italian (appropriately named Guido) what his family recipe is for making pasta sauce is because.....Renner's daughter needs advice. Eek, just eek. That's not good.

Who else to look for in this pile? Heard goes from button-downed, plain-looking CIA agent to puppet master and CIA assassin expert specialist in the matter of like 4 days, bringing countless cool outfits and wigs with her. Connie Nielsen plays Renner's wife, tasked with gasping and covering up tears every time she sees her ex-husband bonding with her angry daughter. Oh, and the daughter sets her Dad's ringtone as I Love It by Icona Pop, an annoying shrill song you can listen to here. Don't say I didn't warn you though.

So yeah, this movie was rough to get through. Almost two hours long, it drags anytime action gets left in the background. Costner is exceptionally cool, but even that cool factor couldn't save this one. Steer clear in a big way.

3 Days to Kill (2014): */****

The Family

If movies have taught me anything about the Mafia, one thing rises above all else. Don't turn on the Family. They will get you for it and make you pay for it. What about those who do and get away with it? Well, kinda get away it. Let's get going with 2013's The Family.

It's the middle of the night in Normandy and the Blake family has arrived, their furniture, clothes and possessions waiting for them in a quiet, corner house. They move in glumly, unpacking and getting ready to set up their new lives. There's a problem though. This isn't really the Blake family. This is the Manzoni family, including patriarch Giovanni (Robert De Niro), a former Mafia family from New York City now in the Witness Protection program. Giovanni and his wife, Maggie (Michelle Pfeiffer), and their kids, Belle (Dianna Agron) and Warren (John D'Leo), keep getting in trouble though, forcing them to move from town to town all over Europe with the FBI's help and surveillance. They keep reverting to their old ways, forcing the FBI to keep moving them. Their idyllic lives (of sorts) could be in trouble though. Giovanni testified against his former mob boss (Stan Carp) after a failed hit, and wasting away in jail, he's enlisted the help of a hitman to find the Manzonis and kill them.

There sure are a lot of movies out there, huh? Great lead-in, right? I mean it though. This dark Mafia comedy was released in theaters last summer without much in the way of fanfare or positive reviews, but it did okay in theaters, earning over $68 million. It's one of many movies I was aware of, knew what it was about and had some interest in seeing. But getting to the theaters proves to be kinda difficult at times so here we sit courtesy of Netflix. The complaints in negative reviews were pretty much across the board from too violent to too schizophrenic to too goofy. I'm not saying this was a classic movie by any means, but I was entertained throughout, a talented cast and an interesting premise rising above some of its flaws. I find myself saying it more and more as I defend movies, but is it so wrong to just be entertained by a movie?

For starters, 'Family' is very stylish and very dark. It wastes no time revealing its darkness, the lead hit man, Rocco (Jon Freda), blowing away a whole family in the opening scene, an innocent family at that as he suspects they're the Manzonis. That's the whole tone of the movie, the moments where that schizo nature works well. The line "You can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy" kept coming up for me. You can move this Mafia family to France, but they're still a tough, hard-edged, take no prisoners family. Giovanni still resorts to strong arm tactics to get what he needs (including drastic measures to get clear water, not brown water from the faucet), Maggie doesn't appreciate the American hate and takes out a grocery store, Belle fights off the "charms" of the locals and young Warren sets up a crime ring within days. It's these moments that are the most fun. Even better? Giovanni's mental asides as we see what he'd like to do to those who come up against him for any number of reasons.

I didn't understand the hate some reviews had, mostly because of the cast. The last couple years have been up and down for De Niro with some of his roles, but he shows off here that he as good a dramatic actor as he is, he's also a really funny actor. He doesn't try too hard. He just is funny, getting the laugh from playing a ridiculously brutal straight man. His facial expressions are priceless, his deadpan deliveries even better. He's got an excellent chemistry with Pfeiffer as his wife, a similarly dark, funny part. Her highlight? Her confession to the village priest is so startling (we don't hear it) that the priest wants nothing to do with her. The kids have their moments too, virginal Belle turning back advances from some less than smooth village boys, turning her attention to a dreamy college student/teacher while Warren gets beat up badly the first day at school and goes to work setting up his own little crime ring. As bizarre and dark and goofy as this group is, I liked them all.

There's more though, starting with Tommy Lee Jones as Agent Robert Stansfield, the FBI agent placed in charge of the Manzonis as they move from one place to another in Witness Protection. Jimmy Palumbo and Domenick Lombardozzi have some fun too as the two surveillance agents assigned as security over the Manzonis in their cozy French house.

It all builds to an inevitable showdown, the Mafia finally tracking them down in their new French home. A squad of Italian hit men descend on the village, the Manzonis forced to improvise as they come under attack. There's some cool action in this finale, even if it is more than a little ridiculous in the end results. That's the movie in itself. It is all over the place, struggling to find that one tone that works and sticking with it. The script at times in director Luc Besson's film depends far too much on coincidence -- like how the Mafia finds Giovanni and Co., not to mention finding the house -- for my liking, but the moments that work, really work. How about Giovanni (posing as a writer) asked to be a guest speaker at a film screening, originally intended to be Some Came Running but it ends up being....Goodfellas. Yes, it's a self-conscious script/movie decision (De Niro starred in said movie) but it works and the payoff is excellent.

Good movie, not great, with some very funny, very dark moments.

The Family (2013): ***/****

Taken 2

As far as action movies go, 2008's Taken was pretty decent. Some surprisingly effective casting, an impressive body count, and European locations provided quite the formula for success. A hit with audiences, it not surprisingly produced, what else? A sequel, an unnecessary repetitive one at that. Oh, boy, here we go with 2012's Taken 2.

Having rescued his daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace), from sex traffickers and the Albanian mob in Europe, former CIA specialist Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) is back in Los Angeles working as a security official for all sorts of international types. He's grown closer to Kim since the rescue, and is even on good terms with ex-wife Lenore (Famke Janssen). The relationship is good enough that Kim and Lenore visit Bryan after he finishes a job in Istanbul, a hopefully relaxing trip. Not so fast. The Albanian gangsters who he dispatched saving his daughter have organized and want nothing more than exacting revenge for their fallen comrades, especially mafioso Murad Krasniqi (Rade Serbedzija). All the underworld is looking for Bryan, and Murad and his army of vengeful mobsters are closing in. Can Bryan save his family from a brutal death?

I've had this conversation with my aunt several times before, and I keep coming back to the same thing. She questions why Neeson takes these more commercial (some would say dumb) action movies as opposed to showing off his acting chops. I love Neeson in either so let's say this; Liam Neeson is cooler than you. He's cooler than me. There aren't many people who can keep up with him in terms of pure badass-ness (Yes, I'm making up words again). Seeing him as a brutally capable CIA operative has been my biggest reasoning for checking out both movies, and he doesn't disappoint. He's more than believable as Mills, trained and ready to use a very unique set of skills to get some very dangerous missions done. Above all else, it's fun to see Neeson in these more commercial parts.

Unfortunately though, having watched this unnecessary sequel, I'm forced to say that Neeson is one of the only good things about this flick. Having written and directed the first movie, Luc Besson only writes this one, passing off the directing reins to Olivier Megaton. Did he not like his script? I certainly didn't. It comes across as both lazy and rushed at the same time. Take away the closing credits, and it only runs 86 minutes. Not bad for an action movie? You'd think, but the first half hour plays like an after school special about a single dad looking out for his daughter -- who has a new boyfriend (Luke Grimes) -- while also trying to get ex-wife Lenore through some difficult times in her second marriage. Who cares?!? Let's get to Neeson killing nameless bad guys! The final scene actually has Neeson, Grace, Janssen and Grimes sitting at an ice cream parlor laughing it up over.....I don't know, something amusing.

I'm not against all sequels when handled correctly. Take the characters and situation we like, and develop something, add something new. Don't settle for the same old, same old. So it doesn't seem like I'm completely ripping this one, '2' does try something new. What is that you ask? Take what made the first one entertaining, and pack it into about 48 minutes of non-stop action. By my count, Bryan and Lenore are kidnapped, but everything is righted and back to normal within an hour or two in real-time. Escaping from the Albanians (Oh, no, quasi-spoilers!), he finds Kim and manages to re-find the place within maybe 12 minutes. He chases some Albanians, some Albanians chase him, usually meeting a graphic PG-13 ending, and then -- as mentioned -- Bryan and family go out for some well-deserved ice cream. It is fun to watch because it plays so quickly, never slowing down, but that doesn't mean it's even remotely good.

As for that action, '2' continues to use the ultra-fast, hyper-kinetic editing that makes the actual action pretty much indecipherable. What exactly is the point? Do producers/directors/editors/studios think this looks cool? It never did. Slow things down, and actually let the viewing audience see all the cool fight moves, not a blur that's gone in a second. Oh, and in the criminally underused department, Leland Orser, Jon Gries, and D.B. Sweeney play Bryan's former C.I.A. cohorts. They're introduced -- just like in the original -- but do absolutely nothing except for a horrifically stupid scene late in the movie.

Beyond all the dumb choices in storyline and over-edited action, I think this is a movie that is simply stupid. It reminded me of The Expendables I and II, movies interested in nothing other than action. Scene transitions, explanations, all those good little things that average movies take advantage of are brushed off to the side here. At one point, Bryan literally disappears from a car while cornered. There is no physical way for him to have escaped sight unseen other than he's really cool and has cool guy skills. Later, Bryan and Kim crash through the security gate at the American Embassy in Istanbul. Bryan calls Orser's Sam and tells him to call the Embassy and tell them not to shoot him and Kim. That's dumb in itself, but when we next see Bryan? He's hunting Albanians again. The movie is in too much of a rush to even show how him and Kim got out of that sticky situation in a freaking heavily guarded American Embassy. Dumb much?

Okay, I'm surprising myself here. I'm disliking this movie more and more as I write this review. Neeson is cool, but it's just not very good. And come on, are you telling me that Kim, survivor of almost being a sex slave, would be so willing to go back to international travel? Eh, that's just one apparently minor complaint I had for a pretty bad movie. Ouch, this one lands with a thud. Oh, Istanbul looks cool so there's a positive.

Taken 2 (2012): */****  

The Transporter

So what does an action star need more than anything? Above all else, he needs a character, a series, a franchise, someone and/or something that audiences will keep coming back to see.  Arnold Schwarzenegger had the Terminator, Sylvester Stallone had Rambo, and Bruce Willis had John McClane in the Die Hard movies. One of the biggest action stars around right now, Jason Statham has been lucky enough to be in two franchises, Crank (awful, truly awful movies) and the Transporter series, the first of which, 2002's The Transporter, I watched for the first time recently.

An ex-Special Forces soldier, Frank Martin (Statham) is a transporter. For a price, he will deliver questionable and dangerous packages from one place to another, no questions asked. He has a special skill-set, and he's made quite a career out of his driving ability. One mission goes wrong in a big way though when his employer, Wall Street (Matt Schulze), tries to take him out when Frank finds out he's transporting a person, a young woman named Lai (Qi Shu). He has no idea what he's stumbled into and doesn't even want to know. All Frank's looking for? Survive, and get out alive. As the transporter runs for his life, a French police inspector, Tarconi (Francois Berleand), follows the evidence and gets closer and closer to getting his hands on Frank.

You know what surprised me about this movie? And before you guess, remember I'm a fan of Jason Statham and love a good action movie. Can't figure it out? I absolutely hated this movie. Not a mild dislike or bored watching it...I hated it. Little interest in anything going on, atrociously bad choices in soundtrack, a general feel of Euro-trash entertainment mixed with Hong Kong action, and action that is so over-choreographed I couldn't stand it. Oh, okay, it wasn't all bad.  I enjoyed the first 20 minutes, and Statham is cool so there's that.

There's no way this next statement is going to come out the right way, but here goes anyways. Where a movie is made has an impact on the feel, the style, the look of a movie. Not all European movies -- mostly the bad, real bad ones -- have this overdone, cheesy, ridiculously exaggerated feel and look to them. The Transporter (from French writer Luc Besson and Hong Kong director Corey Yuen) unfortunately does. The bad guys are so out of this world stupid and evil, they cease to be bad guys. They're comedically bad. Maybe the biggest strike against 'Transporter' is the soundtrack though, an off the wall mix of Euro-pop and rap/hip-hop songs thrown in with some themes that sound like they would be more at home in a softcore porno. It wouldn't be bad in small doses, but the score from Stanley Clarke never stops to take a breath. A score that ruins a movie, and that's saying something.

Looking for a saving grace, you can find it in Jason Statham. Check that, saving grace isn't the right choice. Statham doesn't save the movie, but he keeps it passably watchable. Now there is a ringing endorsement for you. His Frank Martin character somewhat...just a bit...a tiny bit....resembles Alain Delon's hitman in Le Samourai. It is a minimalist part; a superbly trained and skilled operator who lives a simple life. He's impeccably good at what he does with no rivals. Frank lives by a few easy rules. 1. Can't change the deal. 2. No names. 3. Never look at the package. We find out little about Frank, and we don't need to know much. I like Statham as an action star and as an actor, and in a lost movie, he manages to make something worthwhile.

As for the acting department, Statham is all The Transporter has going for it.  I don't know if I've ever seen worse "performances." Playing the troubled Lai, Qi Shu delivers one of the worst, most incredibly annoying performances I've ever seen. There's a damsel in distress, and there's Lai, putting the damsel idea a long ways back in the rearview. From the Fast and the Furious movies, I didn't think Schulze was much of an actor anyways, and he confirms that here. He sneers and leers, glares and "intimidates" as Wall Street. Why Wall Street? Who the hell knows. Ric Young -- sporting the most insanely obvious wig/toupee I've ever seen -- is hilariously bad as Mr. Kwai, Lai's father with his hand in human and slave trafficking.  

What people keep coming back to with the Transporter movies -- two sequels have been released since 2002 -- is the action. I thought that might save things a bit, especially after the opening car chase/getaway in Nice after a bank robbery. It serves as a perfect example of how to do a car chase, keeping it entertaining and allowing the viewer to keep up. It goes downhill after the opening sequence. There are fake action scenes, and then there's fake. Is it possible for a fight scene to be over choreographed? I don't need a scene to be realistic (far from it), but watching Frank battle countless waves of henchmen quickly becomes tedious. They're too polished, too choreographed. It's a shame right on through to the end, a high-speed chase on a mountain road that should have been much, much cooler.

It is hard to film a movie in Europe -- Nice, Marseilles, Paris -- and mess that up. The movie looks great because of that. Statham's character has potential like so much else in the movie. I'm just curious enough to see if Transporter 2 or 3 is even a little bit better because this one was that bad. Statham's scenes with Bertreand's Inspector are one of the few bright spots, actual conversation between two characters, two men who aren't admitting everything they know. Not enough by a long shot to save this dud. Bad, bad and bad.

The Transporter <---trailer (2002): */****

The Professional

Two years ago, the first Jean-Pierre Melville movie I saw was his classic Le Samourai.  Starring Alain Delon, it was a very stylish look at the life of a hit-man who meticulously went about his business as the police desperately tried to track him down.  I didn't love the movie, but I certainly liked it enough to give some other Melville crime thrillers a chance.  But then I kept seeing references to Le Samourai coming up, some major and some more minor, but it was hard to miss them.  Over 40 years later, this Melville flick is still making its impact felt on countless action movies in terms of style and story.  One of the few to even come close to measuring up is 1994's The Professional.

In past reviews, I've written about some of my favorite character actors from the era of classic Hollywood between the 1930s and 1960s (even into the decade of the character actor, the 1970s).  When I think of current actors who can pull off supporting roles perfectly in movies now being released in theaters, it's harder to think of many.  One exception is Jean Reno, a veteran of Hollywood and European movies.  He's the type of actor who legitimizes a movie just by being there.  When given a rare chance at a starring role like the one in The Professional, Reno doesn't miss, swinging for the fences and hitting a home run with this very Melville-like character.

Working for a mid-level mafioso (Danny Aiello) in New York City, a man known only as Leon (Reno) is one of the best "cleaners" around.  For a price of $5,000 a person, Leon will kill any man, but he refuses to kill a woman or a child. He leads a simple life when he isn't on the job until one day his routine is shaken.  In the apartment building he lives in, Leon's next door neighbors are gunned down by a rogue D.E.A. agent, Stansfield (Gary Oldman).  The only survivor is 12-year old daughter, Mathilda (Natalie Portman), who hides out and convinces Leon to let her live with him. Leon doesn't know what to do other than the fact that he can't just put her on the streets. Mathilda has an offer for him, teach her to be a cleaner like him.  Leon isn't so sure it is a good idea though, knowing that Stansfield is eventually going to track her down looking to finish the job he started.

Like Melville did in Le Samourai with Delon's main character, director Luc Besson builds up Leon, his main character, without much in the way of describing his background, instead just showing his daily routine and hearing a few quick snippets of his principles. A middle-aged man living by himself almost like a monk, Leon constantly drinks milk and nothing else -- especially hard liquor or beer -- while caring for his small house plant.  He sleeps sitting up in his chair for quick catnaps, never resting for too long.  Leon can't read or write well, and he watches old movies at small NYC theaters in the morning hours.  As deadly capable as he is, Leon is also a vulnerable, somewhat innocent, even naive individual.  He trusts Aiello's word to a fault, letting him hold onto the money he earns.  All these little things add up to this great character that is hard not to like, even considering his career.  Even then, he's a bit of a righteous killer, taking out the worst society has to offer.

Reno is clearly channeling Delon's Samourai character, and I mean that as a compliment.  Usually relegated to key supporting roles in movies like Ronin, Godzilla, Mission: Impossible, and quite a few other movies, Reno makes Leon into this ultra-cool, killing machine.  The visual alone of his retro glasses and black overcoat quickly became an iconic image associated with the movie and wisely used on DVD boxes.  It can be a difficult challenge making a hired killer a sympathetic character, but Reno's Leon is as human as they come.  For her sake and his, he contemplates killing Portman's Mathilda to put her out of her misery, even putting a gun to her head as she sleeps.  He has countless opportunities to leave her or kick her out, only to realize he should and will do the right thing.  Call it a father-daughter, brother-sister relationship, but he starts to look out for her like family, like a guardian angel doing his damnedest to protect her.

In the news recently for her performance in The Black Swan, Portman is as well known for her parts in the Star War movies and V for Vendetta as this performance in The Professional.  More impressive? This was her first feature film role, and it's clearly an example of the talent she's working with.  Her chemistry with Reno is flawless and instantly believable.  She should have won awards for one scene alone when she stands outside Leon's apartment crying after walking past her dead family, pleading in a whisper for him to open the door.  The 13-year old Portman is a revelation here, and any fans of hers should see this movie. And for an off his rocker, eccentric DEA agent, who better than Oldman (one of the greatest villainous actors of all-time)?  His part is hamming it up and over the top, a necessary counter to Leon's quiet, smooth demeanor.

As the viewer, our introduction to Leon is about as well-handled as possible.  His hit attempt on a well-guarded mafioso is action at its tense best, guards being picked off one-by-one by this unseen, fast moving killer.  Before we know anything about Leon, we know he's an expert at what he does with few if any rivals.  For the most part, that's all the action until the end when SPOILER ALERT Stansfield finally tracks down Mathilda with Leon holding off countless SWAT team members and DEA agents.  Big, loud and chaotic, the finale is a spectacle to behold.  The ending itself isn't necessarily a happy ending, but it's an appropriate one, and a moving one at that.  A great movie overall.

The Professional <---trailer (1994): ****/****   

From Paris With Love

Directing 2008's Taken, French director Pierre Morel basically made the most perfect action movie around.  No sense of humor, no tongue in cheek action, just all-around badass Liam Neeson taking people out left and right in some cool, exotic European locations.  Well, if you look at Taken and add in all those elements that typically ruin or at least bring a movie down a notch, you've got Morel's follow-up movie in 2009's From Paris With Love.

This is an action movie that got mixed reviews, both positive and negative saying the same thing.  This is a stupid action movie that requires no real work watching it and is instantly forgettable the second it's over.  I guess it depends from critic to critic what mood they were in when reviewing the movie.  It's a flick that doesn't seem to know what to do with itself, making nods left and right to other similar but better movies of the same ilk.  I'm okay with some winks at the audience, but this felt like one big wink the whole time.  Buddy cop, no real plot, lots of action, you've seen it all before and probably in a better movie.

As a low-level intelligence agent working for the U.S. Embassy in Paris, James Reese (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) is bored out of his mind, just waiting for his chance to become a field agent. After months and years of tedious paperwork and menial tasks, Reese gets his chance when he's ordered to pick up a highly efficient, highly touted field agent, Charlie Wax (John Travolta), and basically serve as his chauffeur through Paris. Get the job done and he'll get his promotion.  Reese doesn't know what he's in for though as Wax's mission ranges from cocaine and drug dealers to pimps and terrorists planning an attack on a U.S./Africa delegation meeting in Paris.

Written by Luc Besson, I was expecting a little bit more out of this story, if you can call it that. After Reese is introduced at work and home, we're basically treated to a series of running gun battles as Reese desperately tries to keep up with Wax, an agent who actually knows what he's doing.  They spend a day, maybe a day and a half, running through Paris shooting bad guys in every direction as the story jumps from a hit mission to a narco takeout to a terrorist cell.  The writing is more of an excuse for this Odd Couple pairing of agents to drive around Paris yelling at each other.  The bright spot is the last 30 minutes which does deliver a twist I didn't see coming.

Surprisingly after seeing Taken's action, the gun battles and hand-to-hand combat set pieces are incredibly dull as they pull out just about every cliche in the Action Movies 101 textbook.  Lots of bullet impacts tearing props apart, bad guys unable to hit the good guys despite firing thousands of rounds of ammo, slow-motion used to death, and a blaring in your face soundtrack.  These scenes sample everybody from John Woo to Sam Peckinpah and everyone in between, but not in a good way as they produce a tedious pace.  The action comes together in the end as Travolta's Charlie hangs out the window of a car on a freeway outside Paris, trying to pick off a terrorist's car with a big honking rocket launcher.  Now, that's an action scene.

Not so surprisingly is that Travolta is the main reason to waste 93 minutes and watch this flick.  I've always liked Travolta in over the top mode (like the Pelham 123 remake) where he gets to scream, swear and shoot things up.  With a shaved head, goatee and a unique sense of style, his Charlie Wax certainly doesn't blend in as a secret agent, but Travolta looks to be having a ton of fun with the part in all its outrageous glory.  The same can't be said for Rhys Meyers who just doesn't seem like much of an actor to me.  He's pretty monotone throughout, and his character is downright dull at times.  Thankfully, Travolta carries the movie and manages to infuse some energy into this otherwise awkward buddy cop relationship.

Other than that, I don't know what else to say about this one.  It's just there as opposed to leaving any sort of mark or impression on the audience.  It's an unpretentious action film if nothing else, content to stay in a comfort zone instead of trying something new, but even in that respect it fails.  Travolta as ultra-crazy, loony secret agent Charlie Wax is pretty much the only reason to check this out.  Instead, save yourself the time and go rent Taken instead.

From Paris With Love <----trailer (2009): * 1/2 /****