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): ***/****
The Sons of Katie Elder

"First, we reunite, then find Ma and Pa's killer...then read some reviews."
Showing posts with label Melissa Leo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Melissa Leo. Show all posts
Sunday, November 8, 2015
Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Prisoners
It was a movie that seemed like it was a sure thing to snag some Oscar nominations. Powerful, dramatic acting, incredibly dark subject matter, and a whole lot of talent assembled for a cast. And what did 2013's Prisoners get nominated for? Exactly....one, that nomination for Best Cinematography. Okay, yes, that's fair. It's certainly a visually interesting film, but nothing else?!? Come on now. So....anyways, yeah, this was an excellent movie.
On a gloomy, rainy Thanksgiving Day, Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman) and his family walk down the street to celebrate the holiday with their neighbors, the Birch's. After dinner as the Dovers get ready to go, they realize their daughter and the Birch's youngest daughter are both missing, nowhere to be found. Minutes turn to hours, hours to a day, and there's no trace of either girl. The police are called in, including lead detective David Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal), a suspect, Alex Jones (Paul Dano), found just a few hours after the disappearance was first reported. Looking for clues/evidence tying Jones to the girls though, the police come up empty and are forced to release him after a 48-hour hold. Keller remains convinced that Jones is the one who kidnapped the two girls and decides to take drastic measures to bring them back. All the while, Loki becomes progressively more obsessed with the case, leads drying up in one dead end after another. The clock is ticking for the two girls.
From director Denis Villeneuve and writer Aaron Guzkowski, this movie is a doozy. Movies about serial killers, murderers, diseases running rampant, they can all be uncomfortable in countless ways. But as for a movie about someone kidnapping two young children? Unsettling doesn't begin to describe that ever-developing story. I watched this one, and I couldn't help but think of my five-year old niece. This is a movie that isn't intended to entertain (obviously) but one you appreciate. Audiences responded to the film, 'Prisoners' earning $122 million, and it's easy to see why. The acting here is what acting is all about. It's human and real, and when it calls for some big, dramatic moments, it doesn't feel authentic. It is authentic, credit to Villeneuve and cinematographer Roger Deakins for making a film with a bleak, dreary look that doesn't pull any punches. Deakins picked up an Oscar nomination for his cinematography. Tough to see him winning against Nebraska or Gravity, but he deserved that nomination.
The 2013 film year was very loaded when it comes to acting, especially for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor. Maybe the issue here was deciding between Jackman and Gyllenhaal in nominations? These are two powerhouse performances and for different reasons. A family man and middle-class dad torn apart by his daughter's kidnapping? A detective with a troubled childhood past who similarly becomes obsessed with finding two missing girls? These are great parts, both actors stepping up to the plate and delivering. Jackman handles his role in the right way with scenes that could feel forced or overdone. He's driven down a road that most would never want to even contemplate, but he's going to get his daughter back. He doesn't care what he does, if it's right, morally or in the eyes of the law, or what his decisions will ultimately do to him. I thought Gyllenhaal's part was underrated, reminding me some of his part in Zodiac. His detective is tough, brutally efficient and the pressure is starting to wear on him, especially with Jackman's Keller pressuring him to close the case and bring his daughters back.
Brace yourself for the rest of the cast though. It is a halfway decent group if you're into that sort of thing. Maria Bello plays Keller's wife, Grace, progressively losing her mind as hours turn into days, needing her husband more than ever as he takes desperate measures to get their child back, Dylan Minnette playing their teenage son. The parents of the second kidnapped girl are played to perfection by Terrence Howard and Viola Davis while Zoe Borde plays their teenage daughter. Dano seems to be typecast a bit as the possibly crazy/unhinged guy but there's a reason. He's good at it, really good. We're never quite sure of his intentions, his background, his motivation, Melissa Leo playing his aunt. Also look for Wayne Duvall, Len Cariou and David Dastmalchian in key supporting parts.
Beyond the general uncomfortable feeling in tone and emotion that basically permeates every single scene in a 153-minute movie (It never drags), what makes it especially memorable and tolerable is that the story becomes a whudunnit story. Yes, obviously, we want to see the girls rescued. But as clues and leads and evidence dry up, we also want to see who did the kidnapping. Why did they do it? Guzkowski's script does a great job keeping us guessing right until the reveal. Hints are dropped here and there, but it's difficult to peg everything down as it comes along. Uncomfortable? Yes, but the mystery aspect makes it interesting on a far different level.
It all builds to an impressive reveal and finale, including a great final scene. Some viewers/critics call it ambiguous, but it really isn't if you think it through. I very much liked this movie, or at least as much as you're supposed to like a movie about child kidnapping. Appreciate it for the top to bottom strengths of the cast.
Prisoners (2013): ***/****
On a gloomy, rainy Thanksgiving Day, Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman) and his family walk down the street to celebrate the holiday with their neighbors, the Birch's. After dinner as the Dovers get ready to go, they realize their daughter and the Birch's youngest daughter are both missing, nowhere to be found. Minutes turn to hours, hours to a day, and there's no trace of either girl. The police are called in, including lead detective David Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal), a suspect, Alex Jones (Paul Dano), found just a few hours after the disappearance was first reported. Looking for clues/evidence tying Jones to the girls though, the police come up empty and are forced to release him after a 48-hour hold. Keller remains convinced that Jones is the one who kidnapped the two girls and decides to take drastic measures to bring them back. All the while, Loki becomes progressively more obsessed with the case, leads drying up in one dead end after another. The clock is ticking for the two girls.
From director Denis Villeneuve and writer Aaron Guzkowski, this movie is a doozy. Movies about serial killers, murderers, diseases running rampant, they can all be uncomfortable in countless ways. But as for a movie about someone kidnapping two young children? Unsettling doesn't begin to describe that ever-developing story. I watched this one, and I couldn't help but think of my five-year old niece. This is a movie that isn't intended to entertain (obviously) but one you appreciate. Audiences responded to the film, 'Prisoners' earning $122 million, and it's easy to see why. The acting here is what acting is all about. It's human and real, and when it calls for some big, dramatic moments, it doesn't feel authentic. It is authentic, credit to Villeneuve and cinematographer Roger Deakins for making a film with a bleak, dreary look that doesn't pull any punches. Deakins picked up an Oscar nomination for his cinematography. Tough to see him winning against Nebraska or Gravity, but he deserved that nomination.
The 2013 film year was very loaded when it comes to acting, especially for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor. Maybe the issue here was deciding between Jackman and Gyllenhaal in nominations? These are two powerhouse performances and for different reasons. A family man and middle-class dad torn apart by his daughter's kidnapping? A detective with a troubled childhood past who similarly becomes obsessed with finding two missing girls? These are great parts, both actors stepping up to the plate and delivering. Jackman handles his role in the right way with scenes that could feel forced or overdone. He's driven down a road that most would never want to even contemplate, but he's going to get his daughter back. He doesn't care what he does, if it's right, morally or in the eyes of the law, or what his decisions will ultimately do to him. I thought Gyllenhaal's part was underrated, reminding me some of his part in Zodiac. His detective is tough, brutally efficient and the pressure is starting to wear on him, especially with Jackman's Keller pressuring him to close the case and bring his daughters back.
Brace yourself for the rest of the cast though. It is a halfway decent group if you're into that sort of thing. Maria Bello plays Keller's wife, Grace, progressively losing her mind as hours turn into days, needing her husband more than ever as he takes desperate measures to get their child back, Dylan Minnette playing their teenage son. The parents of the second kidnapped girl are played to perfection by Terrence Howard and Viola Davis while Zoe Borde plays their teenage daughter. Dano seems to be typecast a bit as the possibly crazy/unhinged guy but there's a reason. He's good at it, really good. We're never quite sure of his intentions, his background, his motivation, Melissa Leo playing his aunt. Also look for Wayne Duvall, Len Cariou and David Dastmalchian in key supporting parts.
Beyond the general uncomfortable feeling in tone and emotion that basically permeates every single scene in a 153-minute movie (It never drags), what makes it especially memorable and tolerable is that the story becomes a whudunnit story. Yes, obviously, we want to see the girls rescued. But as clues and leads and evidence dry up, we also want to see who did the kidnapping. Why did they do it? Guzkowski's script does a great job keeping us guessing right until the reveal. Hints are dropped here and there, but it's difficult to peg everything down as it comes along. Uncomfortable? Yes, but the mystery aspect makes it interesting on a far different level.
It all builds to an impressive reveal and finale, including a great final scene. Some viewers/critics call it ambiguous, but it really isn't if you think it through. I very much liked this movie, or at least as much as you're supposed to like a movie about child kidnapping. Appreciate it for the top to bottom strengths of the cast.
Prisoners (2013): ***/****
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Oblivion
I think the western genre will always be my favorite. Even though there just aren't many westerns released anymore, it's still No. 1 in my head. What's No. 2 on that list? The more and more I delve into it, I have to say it's science fiction. Like a western, there can be something familiar, even comforting about it. On a different level though, even lousy efforts can still be entertaining because something new was tried. What about when something new is tried....and it works on basically any level? Somewhat familiar but still an excellent film, 2013's Oblivion.
It's 2077 on Earth, but it's unlike the Earth we know. In 2017 there was an alien invasion that destroyed much of the Moon and ravaged Earth, the human race winning the war but destroying their planet in the process. Now some 60 years later, surviving humans live on Titan, a moon of Saturn, while the Tet hovers in the Earth's atmosphere, harvesting energy from the oceans to help the colony on Titan survive. A man named Jack Harper (Tom Cruise) works with the Tet but down on Earth as an engineer, a fix-it man of sorts who helps the Tet's drone operate and stay functional, receiving help from Vika (Andrea Riseborough), his mission control. Jack and Vika are just weeks away from the end of their tour before they too can fly to Titan, but Jack has begun to question things. He has memories of long ago, long before the war that ravage Earth, but that doesn't make sense. He hadn't even been born yet. Where do these memories come from? On patrol one day, he sees a ship crash in a dangerous zone populated by Scavengers, the remaining aliens. What answers will he find, if any? Will he even survive?
This is a difficult movie to review, but I'll say this early. I loved this movie....a lot. From director Joseph Kosinski, 'Oblivion' was a relative success in theaters but struggled to recover its rather large budget. Critical reviews pointed out a thin story with a very strong visual look and strong performances. I liked the story so I'll disagree there, but on we go. The script went through some rewrites and studios in getting made, finally ending up with the version we see in 2013. It does what I like best about science fiction. It lays something out for you, explains it a bit, and then builds the tension as we look for answers. Why does it stand above the rest? It does all those things, and the payoff works extremely well. The revelation works. It doesn't disappoint like high-reaching science fiction stories sometimes do. Visuals, story, characters, for me it all worked. I can't say enough about this one, but I'll try.
Maybe the coolest thing about Oblivion is that while it is its own film, it also knows where its science fiction roots come from. Its post-apocalypse world has some cool nods to previous sci-fi classics, a nice touch by Kosinski and screenwriters Karl Gajdusek and Michael Arndt. The alien invasion left much of the planet ravage by nuclear weapons, leaving "Radiation Zones" behind, a modernized updated of the Forbidden Zone from Planet of the Apes. Cruise's Jack searches the world for evidence of a world long since gone, finding books all over, a cool touch that reminded me of Fahrenheit 451. Jack's Zone 49 is stationed somewhere on the east coast, a key part of his zone being a ruined New York City. On these ventures down to the surface, it certainly has the feel of I Am Legend, The Last Man on Earth, Omega Man, all those last surviving man sci-fi flicks. It's these little touches that bring it up a notch in my head, a tip of the cap to those that came before while on its own journey to carve out its own niche.
What Oblivion is able to do is that much more impressive because of the scale. A war-ravaged, dying Earth is huge in scope, but we only get six real speaking parts. Cruises commits himself like he always does, bringing a very real, personal edge to Jack. It's easy to root for him, especially as he begins to look for answers for questions that just don't seem to add up. Riseborough is excellent at his side as Victoria, his mission control from their Zone 49 headquarters, a futuristic high-rise up above the clouds. Melissa Leo plays Sally, more of voice work than anything, the Tet's representative that gives Jack, Vika and Zone 49 their daily updates and missions. Olga Kurylenko plays Julia, a survivor of a wrecked ship Jack comes across who knows more truths than he could have counted on. Without giving too much away, Morgan Freeman and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau play Beech and Sykes, two men who end up playing key parts in Jack's decision.
I typically try to mention the not so glamorous parts of a movie as part of a paragraph with other stuff mentioned. Here, it's hard to do when talking about the visuals the music. The visual look of the movie is a stunner, a sea of dull, cool blacks, whites, grays and blacks as we see what Earth has become. The CGI blends seamlessly with the real-life action, Iceland serving as much of the backdrop for this post-apocalyptic Earth. The story is interesting in itself so the beautiful backdrop and location shooting works almost like a bonus. As for the soundtrack from M83's Anthony Gonzales, I loved it. It balances out the big, booming epic action scenes with the quiet, personal emotional scenes like the best scores do. The song over the final credits -- listen HERE -- featuring Susanne Sundfor is a great conclusion to it all as well.
I don't want to give away too much here. Things take a big turn nearing the hour-mark in a 124-minute long movie, but in a good way. As I mentioned, the revelations don't feel forced. They're surprising in their revelations, but you never get the sense that Kosinski and the script were giggling to themselves. "Oh, baby, the audience will never know what hit them!!!" It's twists, surprises and revelations that work within the natural flow of the story. It's a beautiful film, and like the best sci-fi, it manages to create its own world from the war-torn Earth to the futuristic home in the clouds, Jack's Bubble Ship to his honed-in motorcycles, it all works. The ending payoff won't disappoint either as a handful of scenes left a lasting impression on me. Can't recommend it enough. Seek this one out.
Oblivion (2013): ****/****
It's 2077 on Earth, but it's unlike the Earth we know. In 2017 there was an alien invasion that destroyed much of the Moon and ravaged Earth, the human race winning the war but destroying their planet in the process. Now some 60 years later, surviving humans live on Titan, a moon of Saturn, while the Tet hovers in the Earth's atmosphere, harvesting energy from the oceans to help the colony on Titan survive. A man named Jack Harper (Tom Cruise) works with the Tet but down on Earth as an engineer, a fix-it man of sorts who helps the Tet's drone operate and stay functional, receiving help from Vika (Andrea Riseborough), his mission control. Jack and Vika are just weeks away from the end of their tour before they too can fly to Titan, but Jack has begun to question things. He has memories of long ago, long before the war that ravage Earth, but that doesn't make sense. He hadn't even been born yet. Where do these memories come from? On patrol one day, he sees a ship crash in a dangerous zone populated by Scavengers, the remaining aliens. What answers will he find, if any? Will he even survive?
This is a difficult movie to review, but I'll say this early. I loved this movie....a lot. From director Joseph Kosinski, 'Oblivion' was a relative success in theaters but struggled to recover its rather large budget. Critical reviews pointed out a thin story with a very strong visual look and strong performances. I liked the story so I'll disagree there, but on we go. The script went through some rewrites and studios in getting made, finally ending up with the version we see in 2013. It does what I like best about science fiction. It lays something out for you, explains it a bit, and then builds the tension as we look for answers. Why does it stand above the rest? It does all those things, and the payoff works extremely well. The revelation works. It doesn't disappoint like high-reaching science fiction stories sometimes do. Visuals, story, characters, for me it all worked. I can't say enough about this one, but I'll try.
Maybe the coolest thing about Oblivion is that while it is its own film, it also knows where its science fiction roots come from. Its post-apocalypse world has some cool nods to previous sci-fi classics, a nice touch by Kosinski and screenwriters Karl Gajdusek and Michael Arndt. The alien invasion left much of the planet ravage by nuclear weapons, leaving "Radiation Zones" behind, a modernized updated of the Forbidden Zone from Planet of the Apes. Cruise's Jack searches the world for evidence of a world long since gone, finding books all over, a cool touch that reminded me of Fahrenheit 451. Jack's Zone 49 is stationed somewhere on the east coast, a key part of his zone being a ruined New York City. On these ventures down to the surface, it certainly has the feel of I Am Legend, The Last Man on Earth, Omega Man, all those last surviving man sci-fi flicks. It's these little touches that bring it up a notch in my head, a tip of the cap to those that came before while on its own journey to carve out its own niche.
What Oblivion is able to do is that much more impressive because of the scale. A war-ravaged, dying Earth is huge in scope, but we only get six real speaking parts. Cruises commits himself like he always does, bringing a very real, personal edge to Jack. It's easy to root for him, especially as he begins to look for answers for questions that just don't seem to add up. Riseborough is excellent at his side as Victoria, his mission control from their Zone 49 headquarters, a futuristic high-rise up above the clouds. Melissa Leo plays Sally, more of voice work than anything, the Tet's representative that gives Jack, Vika and Zone 49 their daily updates and missions. Olga Kurylenko plays Julia, a survivor of a wrecked ship Jack comes across who knows more truths than he could have counted on. Without giving too much away, Morgan Freeman and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau play Beech and Sykes, two men who end up playing key parts in Jack's decision.
I typically try to mention the not so glamorous parts of a movie as part of a paragraph with other stuff mentioned. Here, it's hard to do when talking about the visuals the music. The visual look of the movie is a stunner, a sea of dull, cool blacks, whites, grays and blacks as we see what Earth has become. The CGI blends seamlessly with the real-life action, Iceland serving as much of the backdrop for this post-apocalyptic Earth. The story is interesting in itself so the beautiful backdrop and location shooting works almost like a bonus. As for the soundtrack from M83's Anthony Gonzales, I loved it. It balances out the big, booming epic action scenes with the quiet, personal emotional scenes like the best scores do. The song over the final credits -- listen HERE -- featuring Susanne Sundfor is a great conclusion to it all as well.
I don't want to give away too much here. Things take a big turn nearing the hour-mark in a 124-minute long movie, but in a good way. As I mentioned, the revelations don't feel forced. They're surprising in their revelations, but you never get the sense that Kosinski and the script were giggling to themselves. "Oh, baby, the audience will never know what hit them!!!" It's twists, surprises and revelations that work within the natural flow of the story. It's a beautiful film, and like the best sci-fi, it manages to create its own world from the war-torn Earth to the futuristic home in the clouds, Jack's Bubble Ship to his honed-in motorcycles, it all works. The ending payoff won't disappoint either as a handful of scenes left a lasting impression on me. Can't recommend it enough. Seek this one out.
Oblivion (2013): ****/****
Labels:
2010s,
Melissa Leo,
Morgan Freeman,
Olga Kurylenko,
Sci-Fi,
Tom Cruise
Monday, April 1, 2013
Olympus Has Fallen
There was a time when action movies were simple. Ah, yes, we're going in the Wayback Nostalgia Machine again so brace yourself. There were movies where the good guys were good guys, and the bad guys were bad guys, despicable without an ounce of anything even remotely redeeming. I like to call this time in Hollywood history.....the 1980s. That's simplifying the premise too much, but my point is valid. We had the Russians/Soviets/Commies to root against. In the vein of those straightforward, black and white action movies come 2013's Olympus Has Fallen.
A longtime Secret Service agent and the head of the Presidential detail, Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) is removed from his post when President Benjamin Asher (Aaron Eckhart)'s wife is killed accidentally in a winter car wreck. Banning leaves the Secret Service and takes a job in Washington D.C. as a U.S. Treasury agent. Some 18 months pass, and Mike still yearns to get back to what he was so good at and loved. He may get his chance. Sneaking into the White House as part of a South Korean diplomacy party, a North Korean paramilitary terrorist, Kang (Rick Yune), leads a well coordinated attack that decimates Washington and takes over the White House, capturing the President and much of his cabinet. As the bodies mount in the lightning-quick strike, Mike is among those fighting back, even managing to get into the White House in all the bloody, bullet-riddled chaos. As the terrorists make their demands and the nation and the world wait to see what happens, Mike works from the inside, using all his know-how and skills to take down the North Koreans.
Does this movie sound even remotely familiar? It should. From director Antoine Fuqua (Training Day, Tears of the Sun), 'Olympus' is a not so subtle tweaking of Die Hard meets Air Force One. Whole scenes from those movies are tweaked, twisted and prodded here and there to make it slightly different. More than just those two movies, it plays like every action movie you've ever seen and will see ever again down the road. So what to say about this one rather than wrap it up here? Ready for a twist? I LOVED this movie. It's so epically stupid I can't even describe, but I loved it. I betcha didn't see that one coming, now did you? Don't be confused. This isn't a good movie with all its mindless action, cardboard characters and goofy one-liners. What is it then? This is a popcorn movie. Sit back with a big tub of popcorn, turn off your brain and just enjoy a movie for a change.
So how to explain why I liked this movie? Action movies aren't just action movies anymore. So often they have to throw a ridiculous twist at you or telegraph a horrifically unsubtle, heavy-handed message at you. 'Olympus' gets back to the basics in a big way. Americans = Good. North Koreans = Bad. The timing is also interesting considering North Korea's recent threats of firing nuclear weapons at the U.S. but that's for someone significantly more cultured and intelligent than me to analyze. I'm more of an explosions and gunfight kind of guy. If familiar, the premise is very cool, an unsettling attack on Washington D.C. setting the tone for the rest of the movie. It's incredibly uncomfortable to watch civilians get shot down in the street, the Washington Monument crumbling, the White House under heavy attack with Secret Service and military forces shot down in droves doing their duty. In a very straightforward movie, there's something primal in these scenes. If it sounds simplistic on my part, so be it. America gets attacked, and Americans fight back. Cue a pissed-off Scotsman in Gerard Butler, and we've got ourselves an action flick.
I like Gerard Butler. I don't always like his selection in movies, but I like him just the same. This is him doing what he should be doing. He handles himself well in drama and comedy, but I think he's best as an action star. Here as the ex-Army Ranger turned Secret Service agent turned Treasury agent, it's ideal casting. His past haunts him, and he wants to make things right. When the White House, the President, and America (cue dramatic music), Butler's Banning steps to the plate. As an action star, he's extremely capable. He's believable in his fight scenes, believable as he sneers and snides his way through countless cheesy one-liners. The dynamic between Banning and Yune's Kang is eerily reminiscent of Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman in Die Hard so as long as you're going to rip a movie off, at least rip off a good one. Moral of the story is this, Gerard Butler is cool and a more than worthy leading man as an action hero.
The casting on the whole is solid. It's also fair to say not much of the talent assembled here is given much to do, but whatever, minor complaint. Eckhart is a solid President, an everyman who wants the best for his country and his son (not shrill but talented Finley Jacobsen). His Cabinet and the government higher-ups include Morgan Freeman as the Speaker of the House, Melissa Leo as the Secretary of Defense, Robert Forster as Army Chief of Staff, Sean O'Bryan as Deputy National Security Advisor and Angela Bassett as the head of the Secret Service. Oh, yeah, also look for Dylan McDermott, Ashley Judd, Radha Mitchell and Cole Hauser in key supporting roles. Lots of people, lots of talent. Underused and/or misused maybe, but it's fun seeing so many big names together.
Enough with all this acting mumbo-jumbo. This is a movie about action and gunfights and stabbings and explosions! Borrowing heavily from Die Hard, Banning works from inside-out at the White House, trying to take down the North Koreans one by one. Oh, and those North Koreans are highly trained commandos so we're in store for some good, old-fashioned hand-to-hand combat. If it's a little cliched, so be it. The bad guys for the most part can't hit anything (Mike), but Mike can hit everything (North Koreans). The North Korean attack on D.C. is something else to watch, a meticulously coordinated attack that's brutal in its efficiency. Without giving away too much, the action is brutal, hard-hitting and even features some solid surprises along the way.
Is this one predictable? Oh, yes. You've probably got a good sense of where this one is heading as of right now....without having seen a second. Wait!!! Morgan Freeman becomes the President?!?! The North Koreans are brilliant in executing a plan but can't capture one freaking man?!? We get lots of shots of American flags blowing in the wind -- to composer Trevor Morris' patriotic score -- and a general feeling of patriotism and national pride. It's a good movie. Don't overthink it or its rather obvious influences. Enjoy it for what it is, a shoot 'em up action flick with a cast that looks to be having a lot of fun.
Olympus Has Fallen (2013): ***/****
A longtime Secret Service agent and the head of the Presidential detail, Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) is removed from his post when President Benjamin Asher (Aaron Eckhart)'s wife is killed accidentally in a winter car wreck. Banning leaves the Secret Service and takes a job in Washington D.C. as a U.S. Treasury agent. Some 18 months pass, and Mike still yearns to get back to what he was so good at and loved. He may get his chance. Sneaking into the White House as part of a South Korean diplomacy party, a North Korean paramilitary terrorist, Kang (Rick Yune), leads a well coordinated attack that decimates Washington and takes over the White House, capturing the President and much of his cabinet. As the bodies mount in the lightning-quick strike, Mike is among those fighting back, even managing to get into the White House in all the bloody, bullet-riddled chaos. As the terrorists make their demands and the nation and the world wait to see what happens, Mike works from the inside, using all his know-how and skills to take down the North Koreans.
Does this movie sound even remotely familiar? It should. From director Antoine Fuqua (Training Day, Tears of the Sun), 'Olympus' is a not so subtle tweaking of Die Hard meets Air Force One. Whole scenes from those movies are tweaked, twisted and prodded here and there to make it slightly different. More than just those two movies, it plays like every action movie you've ever seen and will see ever again down the road. So what to say about this one rather than wrap it up here? Ready for a twist? I LOVED this movie. It's so epically stupid I can't even describe, but I loved it. I betcha didn't see that one coming, now did you? Don't be confused. This isn't a good movie with all its mindless action, cardboard characters and goofy one-liners. What is it then? This is a popcorn movie. Sit back with a big tub of popcorn, turn off your brain and just enjoy a movie for a change.
So how to explain why I liked this movie? Action movies aren't just action movies anymore. So often they have to throw a ridiculous twist at you or telegraph a horrifically unsubtle, heavy-handed message at you. 'Olympus' gets back to the basics in a big way. Americans = Good. North Koreans = Bad. The timing is also interesting considering North Korea's recent threats of firing nuclear weapons at the U.S. but that's for someone significantly more cultured and intelligent than me to analyze. I'm more of an explosions and gunfight kind of guy. If familiar, the premise is very cool, an unsettling attack on Washington D.C. setting the tone for the rest of the movie. It's incredibly uncomfortable to watch civilians get shot down in the street, the Washington Monument crumbling, the White House under heavy attack with Secret Service and military forces shot down in droves doing their duty. In a very straightforward movie, there's something primal in these scenes. If it sounds simplistic on my part, so be it. America gets attacked, and Americans fight back. Cue a pissed-off Scotsman in Gerard Butler, and we've got ourselves an action flick.
I like Gerard Butler. I don't always like his selection in movies, but I like him just the same. This is him doing what he should be doing. He handles himself well in drama and comedy, but I think he's best as an action star. Here as the ex-Army Ranger turned Secret Service agent turned Treasury agent, it's ideal casting. His past haunts him, and he wants to make things right. When the White House, the President, and America (cue dramatic music), Butler's Banning steps to the plate. As an action star, he's extremely capable. He's believable in his fight scenes, believable as he sneers and snides his way through countless cheesy one-liners. The dynamic between Banning and Yune's Kang is eerily reminiscent of Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman in Die Hard so as long as you're going to rip a movie off, at least rip off a good one. Moral of the story is this, Gerard Butler is cool and a more than worthy leading man as an action hero.
The casting on the whole is solid. It's also fair to say not much of the talent assembled here is given much to do, but whatever, minor complaint. Eckhart is a solid President, an everyman who wants the best for his country and his son (not shrill but talented Finley Jacobsen). His Cabinet and the government higher-ups include Morgan Freeman as the Speaker of the House, Melissa Leo as the Secretary of Defense, Robert Forster as Army Chief of Staff, Sean O'Bryan as Deputy National Security Advisor and Angela Bassett as the head of the Secret Service. Oh, yeah, also look for Dylan McDermott, Ashley Judd, Radha Mitchell and Cole Hauser in key supporting roles. Lots of people, lots of talent. Underused and/or misused maybe, but it's fun seeing so many big names together.
Enough with all this acting mumbo-jumbo. This is a movie about action and gunfights and stabbings and explosions! Borrowing heavily from Die Hard, Banning works from inside-out at the White House, trying to take down the North Koreans one by one. Oh, and those North Koreans are highly trained commandos so we're in store for some good, old-fashioned hand-to-hand combat. If it's a little cliched, so be it. The bad guys for the most part can't hit anything (Mike), but Mike can hit everything (North Koreans). The North Korean attack on D.C. is something else to watch, a meticulously coordinated attack that's brutal in its efficiency. Without giving away too much, the action is brutal, hard-hitting and even features some solid surprises along the way.
Is this one predictable? Oh, yes. You've probably got a good sense of where this one is heading as of right now....without having seen a second. Wait!!! Morgan Freeman becomes the President?!?! The North Koreans are brilliant in executing a plan but can't capture one freaking man?!? We get lots of shots of American flags blowing in the wind -- to composer Trevor Morris' patriotic score -- and a general feeling of patriotism and national pride. It's a good movie. Don't overthink it or its rather obvious influences. Enjoy it for what it is, a shoot 'em up action flick with a cast that looks to be having a lot of fun.
Olympus Has Fallen (2013): ***/****
Wednesday, March 20, 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 /****
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 /****
Monday, April 18, 2011
The Fighter
Of all the actors currently working in movies, one of my favorites is Mark Wahlberg. The first movie I saw him in was 1999's Three Kings, and I was immediately a fan. Over the years then, I've been surprised to read and hear all the hate directed toward him. Some of it you can chalk up to his Marky Mark days, others to his limited range as an actor. Is he Pacino or De Niro? No, few people in the world have that ability, but he's an underrated actor. Partially I'm a fan because he's likable and always consistent, but also because his choice of movies is typically very audience-friendly.
Criticize him all you want for a limited acting range, but he delivered his best performance yet in 2010's The Fighter. It is a performance that was overshadowed by two other parts in the movie, both of whom won Academy Awards for their supporting roles, but he gets a chance to show off his acting chops and doesn't disappoint. I'm more or less making Wahlberg-hater fans' point because he does play a similar character to one he's played several times before. But you know what? He's good at it, and in telling the true story of boxer Micky Ward, Wahlberg does a great job bringing his character to life.
A boxer in his late 20s, Micky Ward (Wahlberg) out of Lowell, Massachusetts is at a bit of a crossroads in his life. He's a good boxer who has potential but has never really amounted to anything. Part of the problem is his family, dragging him down at all times even though they claim to be in his corner, always ready to support him. First, there's Dicky (Christian Bale), his half-brother and trainer who struggles with his addiction to crack. A great boxing mind and strategist, but completely unreliable. Second, there's his mother, Alice (Melissa Leo), a completely self-serving woman who says she has his best interest at heart, but that's clearly not the case. Struggling through all these family problems, Micky meets Charlene (Amy Adams), a bartender he hits it off with. But when push comes to shove, Micky is going to have to make a decision, go for what's best for him or what's best for his family?
As a warning going in, I feel like I should warn people about this movie. As a sports fan, I got the impression this was a heavy boxing story which it isn't. Yes, there is boxing, but it's more a part of the story than actually being the story. Just so there's no confusion, I'm not comparing it to Raging Bull, but in terms of storytelling it is similar. The boxing is a way to get somewhere, but it isn't a "boxing movie." The Fighter is more about family and the struggles you go through at times putting up with them, loving them, fighting and arguing with them. They may be bad for you and your life, but they're your family. How do you get away or turn away from your family? As Micky finds out, it is no easy task.
Just a few months ago at the Academy Awards, Bale and Leo made news as they won Oscars for the best supporting actor and actress awards, respectively. Of the two, I think Bale was more deserving for the win, but they both deserved it. If anything, I would have given Supporting Actress to Amy Adams, but that's just me. Ever since his ridiculous outburst on the set of Terminator Salvation, I've been an iffy fan of Bale's, but all personal feelings aside, the guy can act. This is one of those performances where you watch it and just know this is what acting is all about. His Dicky Eklund is a mess of a person, all of it to blame on himself, who had all sorts of potential but instead derailed his life. Leo as Alice is the same way, a hypocrite on so many levels who can't even see what she's doing to her son, Micky. These are the flashier performances, not quite Oscar bait, but close.
The heart of the movie though is Wahlberg as Micky Ward, a boxer teetering on the brink of a has-been and a never will be. There's that underdog element to the character and the man, the fighter from the lower middle class family rising above his surroundings to amount to something...hopefully. He wants to make it on the big time, wants to be the best fighter he can be. At the same time, he feels an obligation to his family even as they drag him down, holding him back from achieving all the things he wants. His relationship with Adams' Charlene -- similarly troubled, similarly wanting something more out of life -- is key as these two individuals find some sort of happiness together through each other. They have a great chemistry together even though going in I thought Adams was an odd, somewhat interesting choice to play the character. My bad, I was wrong. Other supporting parts include Jack McGee as Micky's father, George, and Mickey O'Keefe playing himself as Micky's trainer/mentor as he rises through the boxing ranks.
Watching clips of the movie, reading reviews, watching the trailer repeatedly, I wasn't sure what to expect going into the movie. It's by no means a flashy sports movie, and I debate even calling it a sports movie. It is about the people, their relationships and interactions, the day to day struggles to get along and survive with yourself and your family. This is an acting movie from Wahlberg to Bale to Leo to Adams. Director David O. Russell knows what he's doing and presents a real, moving story that feels like a throwback to movies of old, something right out of the 1970s (and I mean that in a good way).
The Fighter <---trailer (2010): ***/****
Criticize him all you want for a limited acting range, but he delivered his best performance yet in 2010's The Fighter. It is a performance that was overshadowed by two other parts in the movie, both of whom won Academy Awards for their supporting roles, but he gets a chance to show off his acting chops and doesn't disappoint. I'm more or less making Wahlberg-hater fans' point because he does play a similar character to one he's played several times before. But you know what? He's good at it, and in telling the true story of boxer Micky Ward, Wahlberg does a great job bringing his character to life.
A boxer in his late 20s, Micky Ward (Wahlberg) out of Lowell, Massachusetts is at a bit of a crossroads in his life. He's a good boxer who has potential but has never really amounted to anything. Part of the problem is his family, dragging him down at all times even though they claim to be in his corner, always ready to support him. First, there's Dicky (Christian Bale), his half-brother and trainer who struggles with his addiction to crack. A great boxing mind and strategist, but completely unreliable. Second, there's his mother, Alice (Melissa Leo), a completely self-serving woman who says she has his best interest at heart, but that's clearly not the case. Struggling through all these family problems, Micky meets Charlene (Amy Adams), a bartender he hits it off with. But when push comes to shove, Micky is going to have to make a decision, go for what's best for him or what's best for his family?
As a warning going in, I feel like I should warn people about this movie. As a sports fan, I got the impression this was a heavy boxing story which it isn't. Yes, there is boxing, but it's more a part of the story than actually being the story. Just so there's no confusion, I'm not comparing it to Raging Bull, but in terms of storytelling it is similar. The boxing is a way to get somewhere, but it isn't a "boxing movie." The Fighter is more about family and the struggles you go through at times putting up with them, loving them, fighting and arguing with them. They may be bad for you and your life, but they're your family. How do you get away or turn away from your family? As Micky finds out, it is no easy task.
Just a few months ago at the Academy Awards, Bale and Leo made news as they won Oscars for the best supporting actor and actress awards, respectively. Of the two, I think Bale was more deserving for the win, but they both deserved it. If anything, I would have given Supporting Actress to Amy Adams, but that's just me. Ever since his ridiculous outburst on the set of Terminator Salvation, I've been an iffy fan of Bale's, but all personal feelings aside, the guy can act. This is one of those performances where you watch it and just know this is what acting is all about. His Dicky Eklund is a mess of a person, all of it to blame on himself, who had all sorts of potential but instead derailed his life. Leo as Alice is the same way, a hypocrite on so many levels who can't even see what she's doing to her son, Micky. These are the flashier performances, not quite Oscar bait, but close.
The heart of the movie though is Wahlberg as Micky Ward, a boxer teetering on the brink of a has-been and a never will be. There's that underdog element to the character and the man, the fighter from the lower middle class family rising above his surroundings to amount to something...hopefully. He wants to make it on the big time, wants to be the best fighter he can be. At the same time, he feels an obligation to his family even as they drag him down, holding him back from achieving all the things he wants. His relationship with Adams' Charlene -- similarly troubled, similarly wanting something more out of life -- is key as these two individuals find some sort of happiness together through each other. They have a great chemistry together even though going in I thought Adams was an odd, somewhat interesting choice to play the character. My bad, I was wrong. Other supporting parts include Jack McGee as Micky's father, George, and Mickey O'Keefe playing himself as Micky's trainer/mentor as he rises through the boxing ranks.
Watching clips of the movie, reading reviews, watching the trailer repeatedly, I wasn't sure what to expect going into the movie. It's by no means a flashy sports movie, and I debate even calling it a sports movie. It is about the people, their relationships and interactions, the day to day struggles to get along and survive with yourself and your family. This is an acting movie from Wahlberg to Bale to Leo to Adams. Director David O. Russell knows what he's doing and presents a real, moving story that feels like a throwback to movies of old, something right out of the 1970s (and I mean that in a good way).
Labels:
2010s,
Amy Adams,
Christian Bale,
David O. Russell,
Mark Wahlberg,
Melissa Leo,
Sports
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)