Minute with Abe: Transsiberian

Home Video: 21

21
Directed by Robert Luketic
Released March 28, 2008

This movie fits the prototype of a story with a protagonist who starts off leading a relatively slow normal life with his fair share of problems and then eventually gets entranced by and embroiled in a fantasy lifestyle. There’s little more to this film than that one-line description. Jim Sturgess, who hit it big last year with “Across the Universe,” has immense trouble masking his British accent and mustering up enough enthusiasm to play his role effectively. Kate Bosworth manages to be the biggest waste of space since Patrick Dempsey in “Enchanted” last year. Kevin Spacey tries his very best and gives an impressive performance given the material. The remainder of their card-counting team is well-cast, but it’s not like any of them have much to do. Laurence Fishburne should be glad that he should soon be joining the cast of “CSI” since great roles seem to be eluding him lately. The casting decision I take issue with most is Josh Gad as our protagonist’s best friend. Gad is hardly a good actor, and if he must be in something, I’d hope he’s relegated to his unfunny role on the even unfunnier sitcom “Back to You” and the sure-to-be-awful upcoming comedy “The Rocker.” He certainly doesn’t belong in this film. The fact that I stress Gad’s miscasting so much is that there is little to say about the film. It’s entirely predictable and none too rewarding.

F

Minute with Abe: Quadruple Feature Part Four

Read the full review.

Minute with Abe: Quadruple Feature Part Three

Read the full review.

Minute with Abe: Quadruple Feature Part Two

Read the full review.

Minute with Abe: Quadruple Feature Part One

Read the full review.

Film Review: The X-Files 2

The X-Files: I Want to Believe
Directed by Chris Carter
Released July 25, 2008
Seen July 27, 2008

Talk about the disappointment of the century. I watched the entire television series in preparation for this sequel no one was clamoring for. Having been intensely dissatisfied with the conclusion of the show, I was hoping this could be the second chance to get it right for the “X-Files” legacy. Sadly, this doesn’t even come close. The first tragic mistake is the title: the tagline “I want to believe” refers to a poster David Duchovny’s Agent Mulder had up on his wall in his office which shows a blurry photograph of a UFO, referring of course to a belief in extraterrestrial life. You’d think the movie would have something to do with aliens. Not in the slightest. The film is akin to a lackluster normal episode of the show. None of the show’s legacy is at all preserved. The token theme music plays only for a second at the beginning, and then when a picture of President Bush is shown, a cheesy gimmick which makes the whole show and movie seem trivial. Trailers touted that “only a case this big could bring Scully and Mulder back together”. That sets the film to be immensely unfulfilling, as the case is rather boring and nowhere near “big”. The casting of the psychic as a pedophile seems altogether weird and serves little purpose. Scully and Mulder seem to have lost much of their token chemistry. Casting rapper Xzibit as one of the FBI agents is an explicable decision, and I’d be hard-pressed to come up with as wooden an actor to fill his shoes. Amanda Peet also turns in a horribly forgettable performance, which is especially depressing given her recent great work on NBC’s failed drama “Studio 60 and the Sunset Strip”. Throw on top on that a wasted Callum Keith Rennie (one of the Cylons from “Battlestar Galactica”) with a despicable accent and the most ludicrously inane plotline in recent history and the result is a failure of a film which left me feeling absolutely disgusted.

F

Film Review: Tropic Thunder

Tropic Thunder
Directed by Ben Stiller
Released August 13, 2008

Parodies are a tough business. Humor is the ultimate goal, but if you’re a true master of mockery like Mel Brooks, it’s important not to go too far off the deep end and lose the story in attempts to be funny. There are a number of laughs throughout “Tropic Thunder”, however, the movie descends into lunacy far too quickly. Rather than focusing on parodying war movies, the film turns its attention to making fun of the mentally challenged and putting Jack Black to comic use. Ben Stiller has always been fairly overrated in my mind, and if anything I suppose I prefer him as his idiotic Zoolander t-character instead of the uninteresting lead he’s playing here. Jay Baruchel does his very best to portray his thinly-written character, and Steve Coogan, so brilliant in “Happy Endings” a few years ago, is criminally underused. A supporting role by Tom Cruise is absolutely ridiculous, but he’s good for a few laughs. I just wonder whether he knows he’s also making fun of himself. Now Robert Downey Jr. is the only real reason to see this film. It’s as if he’s in a completely different movie, a far better one, entirely immersing himself in a character styled in the vein of super-committed actors like Daniel Day-Lewis. Downey is outright hilarious, and impresses far more than the rest of the cast. The good news is that the movie is preceded by several fake trailers, which are, sad to say, far funnier than the movie ever is.

F

Film Review: The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Released July 18, 2008
Seen July 27, 2008

I’d like to preface my review by stating that I did in fact like the movie. I read that a critic wrote that he didn’t like the movie and received monstrous amounts of hate mail due to his validly expressed opinion. With this review, I aim to do the same. That said, I didn’t love the movie quite as much as the general public. I wasn’t a fan of the last Batman movie, “Batman Begins”, whereas nearly everyone else in the world loved it. The same seems to be even truer for this newer installment, which already ranks #3 on IMDB’s top 250 list. I did enjoy “The Dark Knight”, but I wasn’t entirely satisfied. To begin with, Batman is hardly in the movie. I understand that this is supposed to be all about the Joker, and that’s all good and well, but for a movie that attempts to stress Batman’s dual role in the city of Gotham, I would have thought he’d be more front and center. Heath Ledger does turn in a tremendous final performance as the twisted Joker, and he truly carries the film. His character is a carefully-crafted villain who really shines throughout the whole movie. I wish I could say the same for the rest of the cast. Maggie Gyllenhaal, usually a fantastic actress, is hardly better than her predecessor in the previous film, Katie Holmes. Aaron Eckhart isn’t used nearly as well as he could be, especially given his excellent fast-talking performance in “Thank You For Smoking”, which might have led into a perfect portrayal of Harvey Dent, a.k.a. Two-Face. The movie, which clocks in at about two and a half hours, packages its action and plot sequences into several meaty sections. A lot happens at once but all in all little actually occurs throughout the film, a problem the first film had. Without ruining the movie’s finish, I’ll simply say that while I can appreciate the desire to craft an ending similar to that of the comic book storyline, I don’t feel that the film appropriately set itself up to end up in that position. The film does boast some terrific music, impressive effects, and that fantastic turn from Heath Ledger. Anyone else will tell you they loved it, and I’ll tell you that I liked it. I have heard the IMAX experience is the way to go, so if by some crazy chance you haven’t seen it yet, you may want to consider upgrading.

B

Triple-Feature Part III: Get Smart

Get Smart
Directed by Peter Segal
Released June 20, 2008
Seen June 29, 2008

I’ll first note that I’ve never seen the original television series which spawned this remake. I will also note that I don’t consider an extensive homage to be meritorious just for being a throwback (see my recent review of the new Indiana Jones movie). A movie should be able to stand on its own two feet without relying on support from constant references to source material. I don’t know whether this movie does that; all I know is that it certainly doesn’t succeed on its own merit. There’s not nearly enough action or comedy here to make up a movie, and thus the experience is rather unfulfilling. I’m using the first two “Rush Hour” movies as my template of effective action-comedies, where the entire cast is funny but there is drama occasionally and the characters make it work. While this movie shouldn’t necessarily be compared to those, it’s clear just how little everything works. The plot is a joke, and the action scenes, instead of being clever, are cheesy and stupid. Steve
Carrell is given far too little to do, and the comic relief is left to a giant brawny sub-villain and geeks played by Masi Oka (Heroes) and Nate Torrence (Studio 60). Terry Crews (Everybody Hates Chris) and David Koechner (The Office) are hardly funny, and The Rock, who I’ve seen give decent performances in bad movies like “Walking Tall” and “Southland Tales”, is also given poor material. I’m beginning to suspect that Anne Hathaway was very actually a good actress. I think it was the youth factor that made her role in “The Princess Diaries” work, and I had my doubts about her considerable talents when she appeared in a small role in “Brokeback Mountain” just a few years ago. She displays absolutely no chemistry with Carrell, and while I can see what she was going for with the role (Eva Green in “Casino Royale”), she fails miserably. The movie is additionally saddled with three actors way past their prime, who for the most part seem to be scrounging for roles just as poor as
these the past few years (with a few notable exceptions, such as “Little Miss Sunshine”) – Alan Arkin, James Caan, and Terence Stamp. This may be a throwback to the old days, but from what I’ve seen here, I don’t think I want to go back.

C-

Triple-Feature Part II: Wall-E

Wall-E
Directed by Andrew Stanton
Released June 27, 2008
Seen June 29, 2008

It’s a wonder that seeing this movie ten minutes after walking out of the ultraviolent “Wanted” didn’t make me fall asleep in this one as it did my brother. “Wall-E” is one of those movies that opens to universal hype and you have to think that it couldn’t possibly be that good. The good news is that it is a fantastic film. Like many Disney and Pixar movies before it, it straddles many lines in terms of its applicable and target audiences. “Wall-E” is a movie anyone can easily enjoy. Much like “There Will Be Blood”, the first stretch is dialogue-free, but it’s the marvelous nature of the imagery and the music that makes it work so well. It’s a simple movie with a strong message, yet the message doesn’t eclipse the film so much that it dilutes it, which is fortunate. Wall-E himself is easily the most adorable protagonist in recent memory, and Eve makes for a great costar. Anyone who thinks that animated movies are just for kids should think again and go see this heartwarming film. See it for yourself.

B+

Triple-Feature Part I: Wanted

Wanted
Directed by Timur Bekmambetov
Released June 27, 2008
Seen June 29, 2008

From its very beginning, “Wanted” is a heavily stylized movie which relies heavily on its many wonderfully-executed action sequences, which are not for the squeamish. Fortunately, the plot is even decent and the movie works better than it perhaps should. James McAvoy, putting on a flawless American accent, sounds oddly like Shia LaBoeuf, but it’s not a problem, and it’s cool to see him in this kind of performance after his recent forays into dramatic acting with “The Last King of Scotland” and “Atonement” as well as his comedy success “Starter for 10”. Angelina Jolie and Morgan Freeman are cast perfectly for their parts as well. The movie has a great sardonic wit that carries through its runtime and really adds to its overall effect. Set to a great soundtrack, the movie proceeds along at an energetic pace. It doesn’t care about adhering to strict conventions or pretending to be believable, and that’s where it truly succeeds. The movie is perfectly summed up by one of Freeman’s line: “If no one told you that bullets flew straight, and I gave you a gun and told you to hit the target, what would you do?” The answer, of course, is to have someone stand right in front of the target and watch the bullet weave around them. It requires a lot of suspension of disbelief, but the incredible action scenes and fantastic ending make this popcorn flick more than worth it.

B+

Film Review: My Blueberry Nights

Note: This is the last in my series of backtracking through the movies I have seen in the past two months and haven’t had time to review. I'll be posting reviews from my triple-feature from a weeks ago soon, and it'll be fresh stuff from then on.

My Blueberry Nights
Directed by Wong Kar Wai
Released April 4, 2008
Seen May 5, 2008

For those who don’t know, Wong Kar Wai is a Chinese director whose films are always extremely artistic and colorful, and more than often purposely sparse on plot. I have only seen “In the Mood for Love” out of his work, which is an interesting film in which surprisingly little actually happens, but I appreciate it as a quality film. His latest effort, his first American film, is a different kind of experience. He casts some terrific actors in various colorful locales and follows (I use this word lightly) their journeys. The movie is definitely intoxicating, and it’s quite easy to get sucked in. Once there, however, the movie doesn’t go very far. While lengthy shots that look like a car advertisement are fascinating for a moment, the film feels truly disjointed and aimless. If that’s supposed to be the point, and I believe it is, the elements of the movie aren’t fulfilling enough left as disorganized as they are. It’s definitely a beautiful film, and one which might be just as effective with the sound off, save of course for a fascinating performance from Natalie Portman which almost makes the whole thing worth it. Norah Jones takes on her first acting job here, and the result is intriguing – she’s terrific in all her scenes with Jude Law, but otherwise, she fizzles and it’s not that pretty. If you want to get lost in thought for an hour and a half, this film is a good way to go, but overall it needs just a bit more spark to make it worthwhile.

C+

Film Review: Iron Man

Note: This continues my series of backtracking through the movies I have seen in the past two months and haven’t had time to review. I’ll be catching up with one more review coming up soon.

Iron Man
Directed by Jon Favreau
Released May 2, 2008
Seen May 6, 2008

It’s hard to make a good comic book movie. Recent attempts have produced rather dim results, like the final installments of the “X-Men” and “Spider-Man” trilogies and both “Hulk” movies. I am thrilled to report that “Iron Man” actually does it right. In fact, it’s even better than the good ones, like the first two “X-Men”. Robert Downey Jr. is perfect as billionaire Tony Stark, and even though he’s essentially playing himself, he creates a likeable yet cocky character who really is the ultimate superhero. The story, from what I can remember and what I’ve heard, is pretty much faithful to the comics, save for some appropriate modernization of the situation in which Tony Stark creates the Iron Man armor. The film is thoroughly entertaining and action-packed. It’s a dramatic film but it’s infused with so much comedy seamlessly blended in, which works so well partially due to the particular talents of Downey Jr. The movie also includes small shout-outs to fans of the comic (or rather the animated TV show, which I used to make), which make the experience all the more enjoyable. The ensemble cast does its part, and the movie balances out its weaker elements by giving Gwyneth Paltrow a gloriously small amount of lines and by tailoring Jeff Bridges’ character to his penchant for shouting a lot. The effects are superb. And this movie contains probably the best ending I’ve seen in a long time (additionally, be aware that there’s a scene after the credits). In short, go see it! It’s fantastic! I’m already excited about “Iron Man 2”!

A-

Film Review: The Visitor

Note: This continues my series of backtracking through the movies I have seen in the past two months and haven’t had time to review. I’ll be catching up on several more reviews over the next few weeks

The Visitor
Directed by Thomas McCarthy
Released April 18, 2008
Seen May 6, 2008

At this point in the 2008 calendar year, I would have to say that “The Visitor” is probably the most critically-beloved film to make a big enough splash to be widely known (Metacritic ranks it #12 on their list of best-reviewed movies of the year). I’d love to be able to jump on the bandwagon and wholeheartedly agree with the praise heaped upon it, but I wasn’t as impressed as many others. To start off, I’m a huge fan of Richard Jenkins from his stellar work on “Six Feet Under” and in 2005’s “North Country”. He plays his solemn, quiet role here well, though I do enjoy when he has a bit more of a sardonic wit about him. The premise of the film – a college professor visits his New York City apartment to find two illegal immigrants living there – sounds intriguing enough, but I think that the movie allows the premise to speak for itself too much. The script skips the real interesting parts of the developing relationship between Walter and his new friends to focus on the problems that follow instead. For a movie so seemingly uninterested in adhering to standard conventions (especially from Thomas McCarthy, whose previous film was the wonderful “The Station Agent”), it would have been nice if it had spent some time just watching the relationships evolve rather than forcing action and twists and turns on the story. I understand why that’s all relevant, but the movie would have been a far more powerful and moving experience for me had that been emphasized. I didn’t connect or truly sympathize with the characters, but I desperately wanted to. The music in the film is great, however, and it’s cool to see both NYU and Connecticut College take center stage as the locales for this film. It aims to fulfill the true independent film experience, but I’ve been much more impressed with other fare. This is by no means bad, but I would recommend seeing “The Station Agent” instead.

B-

Minute with Abe: New Episode!

Film Review: Sex and the City

Note: This continues my series of backtracking through the movies I have seen in the past two months and haven’t had time to review. I’ll be catching up on several more reviews over the next few weeks.

Sex and the City
Directed by Michael Patrick King
Released May 30, 2008
Seen June 1, 2008

This movie isn’t for me. I’m sure that I’m not a member of the target audience, and I doubt that anyone expected me to like this movie. I didn’t even expect to like it. I tried to go in with as open a mind as possible. Reflecting on it afterwards, which I have been doing since I saw it a few weeks ago, I can’t seem to pinpoint what it is I didn’t like about it. I’m not even sure there’s much I didn’t like. I just really could not get into it at all. That doesn’t surprise me. Much like “Serenity”, which I recently reviewed, this film requires a certain knowledge of the show for it to be fully enjoyable. I suspect, however, that isn’t nearly as true for “Sex and the City” as it is for “Firefly” and “Serenity”. I can’t understand what’s so great about Mr. Big, and I presume that I would have a fuller understanding of why he’s so darn amazing if I watched the show. Putting the show aside, this film is a comedy with more than a hint of romance and an occasional venture into drama, but mostly it’s a movie for anyone who likes fashion and watching these women go around and spend money on meaningless things just because they can. That’s not to say that the audiences who go see this movie are shallow people who just want to be rich. It’s an experience that allows a glimpse into a fantasy world where there really is little to be concerned about other than, well, sex and the city (and probably clothes too). The women play their roles well. It’s just not my cup of tea.

C

Midnight Screening: Serenity

Preface: start at the beginning with my review of the TV show “Firefly”. The review below contains minor spoilers about the movie.

This past Saturday night marked my second ever midnight screening (the first was “Indiana Jones” only a few weeks ago), and my first ever cult movie screening. People were dressed up in costumes like the garb worn by Captain Malcolm Reynolds and the other crew of Serenity. Those who sported home-made replicas of the classic Jayne hat were rewarded with special prizes by the event runners who walked up and down the line repeatedly during the hour and a half or so before the screening began. Those same people shouted trivia questions and asked everyone to sing happy birthday to series creator and film director Joss Whedon on camera. Everyone in line sang along to the song “The Hero of Canton”, save for me, of course, and only because I don’t know all the words. The gentlemen behind me was there for the second night in a row, since they hold this screening Friday and Saturday night. We entered the theatre and they polled the audience about having a screening in Providence next year in addition to Boston. They gave away raffle prizes, one of which was a costume worn by the most minor of minor characters who barely even appears on screen for a split second in the film. That’s the amount of excitement these people had for this movie. And I was the person who got to see a cult movie for the first time with diehard fans who had seen it millions of times. As the saying goes, it’s a nice place to visit but I don’t think I’d want to live there. All this before the movie – a worthwhile experience already, I’d say. Right before the Universal logo appeared on screen, an attendee dressed as Mal ran up the aisle shouting “No power in the verse can stop us!” Indeed.

The film doesn’t lend itself to mass screenings as much as others in the sense that there are few applause-appropriate moments, but this audience did an impressive job and was much tamer than I had expected. Their reactions were spot-on, and I think I only missed a brief back-and-forth between characters due to loud laughing from the whole crowd. The movie had a nice action-packed start to it, even if some minor readjusting of the plot was necessary to make it readable for viewers who hadn’t seen the show. I enjoy flashbacks to childhood, especially when they’re linked with the recovery of memory. The device was very well used in this film. The film’s villain is quickly and efficiently introduced, and the movie’s start feels in media res, which is perfect when it serves as a continuation to the series.

The movie plays out just like a special two-part episode might. It is akin to the first “X-Files” movie, which takes what might be a season-long storyline and compresses it into two hours, fueling the film with action and resolving plotlines within its timeframe. I thoroughly enjoyed it, but I wasn’t expecting such a serious movie. It’s not that the film lost any of the amusing, comical elements of the show; rather the film takes on a much more serious central plot. The Reavers are freaky creatures, and I was far more scared than I had expected. I had to put my popcorn down when it started to border on the kind of undead/zombie horror fare that I avidly try to avoid. Luckily, I’ve learned not to immediately equate something I don’t find altogether pleasing with bad quality. The movie was an intense thrill ride, and while I might have nightmares at some point soon, it was probably worth it.

As far as fulfilling the hopes of diehard “Firefly” fans goes, I think the movie does a pretty impressive job. The film provides a nice reunion chapter for the gang. Without giving too much away, it was not nearly as happy-ending-oriented as I had expected. It was a nice reunion for the gang, and however unlikely they may be, future chapters could easily be made chronicling the adventures of the Serenity crew in between the show and the movie or even after the events of the film. I’m pretty sure that any “Firefly” fan would always love to see more from this ’verse, but I think the problem is that it’s hard for new people to get into the movie. It strikes me as near impossible that the film could have been successful because any new viewers hadn’t seen the show and therefore might be confused or uninterested, or both. In order to get into it, you have to sit down and watch the whole thing like I did last week. A co-worker of mine saw the film without having even heard of the show and unsurprisingly turned it off before it ended. It’s certainly a worthwhile film all by itself, but you can’t have an experience which satisfies fans and serves as a continuation/conclusion without continually referencing the source material. You just can’t have it both ways. I’ll be happy to take the references, though, and concur that this was a great movie. I’d still recommend to anyone eager to see it that they take a stab at watching “Firefly” first. It will be a much more fulfilling experience.

B+

Film Review: The Incredible Hulk

Note: Because I haven’t posted in a LONG time, I’m going to put up reviews of movies starting with the most recent and working my way back. Check back soon for more.

The Incredible Hulk
Directed by Louis Leterrier
Released June 13, 2008

Ang Lee’s 2003 film “Hulk” (no “the”) was a disaster. I’m not quite sure why it was so bad, but there was just nothing about it that was good. Eric Bana, Jennifer Connelly, even Nick Nolte – not a bad cast by any stretch of the imagination. Ang Lee – a terrific, innovative director with a real creative vision (see any one of his other films). Regardless, it was terrible. And it wasn’t just me bashing it – the critics generally agreed. This new installment has to better – there’s no way it could be worse. While I was watching the movie, that’s what I kept thinking. But then the movie ended, and I realized that this was in fact just as bad as the first one. The main problem was that there was really no substance to it. Very little actually happened, which is especially regrettable given that this is not an “origin” story and therefore requires little exposition, which of course the movie does away with by the end of the opening credits. Worse still, the characters seem altogether unprepared for the things they come up against: William Hurt leads a platoon of soldiers to capture Bruce Banner and then is somewhat surprised and entirely unprepared when he turns into the Hulk. Shouldn’t he have seen that coming? I know I did.

Perhaps I got my expectations up too high after the remarkable “Iron Man” (review coming soon, I promise), but casting good actors in a superhero movie sometimes pays off. In fact, it’s usually the best thing about sub-par superhero flicks, like Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst in all three “Spider-Man” movies. I cite Edward Norton as my favorite actor on every occasion, and while I wasn’t expecting this to be his best performance, I had hoped he might at least have more screen time. He’s barely in the movie, which is really too bad. What he is given to work with is rather sloppy and mostly involves running, panting, and getting ready to “hulk out”. No consideration is taken to try to play to his great talent for really molding characters (“Primal Fear”, “American History X”, “The Score”, and many more). I know that’s not what a Hulk movie is supposed to be about – great acting – but if you’re going to use such an excellent actor, try to use him well (“Terminator” people take note – Christian Bale should be given excellent material in the upcoming film!). Liv Tyler is more of a waste of space than usual, and I’m continually unimpressed with William Hurt, whose career is taking the same route as that of Jon Voight, though somehow he manages not to get penalized by critics and is even rewarded with an Oscar nomination for a pathetic cameo (“A History of Violence”). To be fair, Nick Nolte wasn’t much better in 2003.

The story here is pretty lame and lacking. There’s a lot of evil grinning by Tim Roth and dorky snickering by Tim Blake Nelson, and quite honestly, there’s little more memorable. The effects aren’t terrific but they’re not bad either. This rendering of “Hulk smash!” really doesn’t work, and further proves the point that nostalgia isn’t always a good reason to do something (how about that recent Harrison Ford film?). I brought my camera to the theatre with plans to record a second “Minute with Abe” immediately following the film, but realized that I hardly had anything to say. I’ve managed to drag out my thoughts into a few paragraphs here, but really there’s not much to say about the movie, other than, to put it crudely, it sucks. There’s really no reason to see it. I wish I had more to say, positive or negative, but it just doesn’t leave a good impression. In fact, it doesn’t really leave any impression at all. At least I got to see the trailer for “Clone Wars”. That I can get excited about.

F

Sparse Summer

I don't really see as many movies during the summer as the rest of the year, especially the fall. I plan on posting reviews on the next few weeks for "My Blueberry Nights", "The Visitor", "Iron Man", and "Sex and the City", so check back for those soon. Come fall, I'll be posting several times a week with reviews of the latest popular and independent films. Also - Emmy predictions over at TV with Abe soon.