American Hustle A review

American Hustle

A review

December 22, 2013

Viewed December 21, 2013

***** out of *****

“A girl comes around at a time when your ground
Is as shaky as leaves on a tree
Creating for you a persona or two
Or an out and out mythology
Now there's too many cooks
But you like how it looks
When they're bowing and calling you "boss "
But the powers that were were invested in her
And now winning means taking a loss”

                                                Aimee Mann

            The greatest trick that anyone ever plays lies in the task of self-deception.   To acknowledge who we truly are underneath the masks of our most basic projections is a goal that alludes even the most emotionally mature.   We project not only what we think will obtain the most perfect life we can lead.  The lies, the endless struggle to overcome the malaise and lost dreams that are scattered along the path of fake fulfillments.  We are counterbalanced in our goals by the fact that we encounter others in life’s journey on the same quest.    The quest to be something new, to reinvent from the shadow of the real self, and to find out in the end the only game in town is the one we are playing.   The rest is nothing more than another illusion. 

            Great films often seem to arise from the most unlikely of subjects and ideas, and thus it is true with the sensational and timeless truths that are found in American Hustle.    This powerful, funny, dynamic film represents the conclusion of a strong trilogy of films by director, David O. Russell who has fastened together a collection of sharply written characters against a canvas of our recent American history and delivered the crown jewel of the three films.   This loose collections of films about the American experience began with 2010’s, The Fighter, and extended into 2012, Silver Linings Playbook.   Here Mr. Russell has blended together the elements of comedy, drama, political expose, and our struggle for the elusive American dream and crafted a tale of people trying to skirt around the rules of society to form their own brand of truth. 

            The real life ABSCAM scandal of the late 70’s and early 80’s in the United States, an FBI led investigation that led to disgrace for many political leaders has provided Russell and co-screenwriter Eric Singer a backdrop to explore the truths of what happened for real in the scandal, but to also attempt to explore deeper ideas about corruption and the grey area between right and wrong.      Mr.  Russell greatest strength as a director is that he is able to write fully realized characterizations that sparkle and then let his fantastic cast shine.   

            The film centers around Irving Rosenfield, a business man who arose from a middle class New Jersey life to have reputable businesses, and then make a better living swindling in phony investments deals.   Married and with a step-son Irving’s life is altered when he meets two people.  One, Sydney, who becomes his partner and his mistress, and an FBI agent, Richie DiMaso, who wants to use Irving’s and Sydney’s talents for schemes to bring down bigger fish and expose corruption while making a name for himself in FBI.   

            In the hands of a lessor talents American Hustle would not work, however Mr. Russell breathes life into the story with a series of distinct choices.   This is a film that works like a perfect engine of ideas that radiate an energy and confidence in the difficult subject matter.  In its more than two hour running time there is not a wasted scene, and the film crackles at a breakneck pace suggesting and framing its principles against without moral judgments.    It is a film that will cause you to change allegiances constantly and shifts perspective between each character.    It is a unique film in that regard and it could in many ways be told from the perspective of any of its five main characters.  

            The sharp editing and period detail only add to the film’s ability to hook the viewer in, and it is likely to reward viewers that return to it for repeat viewings.   This is another film that perfectly captures the mood of each scene with a great soundtrack to accompany certain scenes.    Like most films that cover shaky moral ground this one is sure to have its detractors, but the film is entertaining from beginning to end.   

            The casting of this film was critical to its success.   The entire main cast save Jeremy Renner has worked with Russell before.    Although essentially a narrative which requires the viewer follow Christian Bale’s Irving as its guide into this world of deceit each star is given a chance to shine.   Bale in particular as he has proven time over completely inhabits Rosenfeld with another acting performance to add to his already long resume of successes.    Jennifer Lawrence, in all her post Oscar glow initially seems the wrong choice for Irving’s complicated wife Rosayln, who supplies many of the films few laughs.  Then the audience meets Rosayn, and Ms. Lawrence again brings to her role is this knowing confidence and the charm of a woman whose star is not likely to fade anytime soon.   Bradley Cooper in another change of pace for this ever changing actor is wonderful here, and the aforementioned Jeremy Renner’s turn as the one of the politicians targeted, Carmine Polito offers another detailed portrayal laced with the right amount of pathos.   Once again audiences are to be captivated by the force that is Amy Adams.     In a role that requires her to be serious, sexy, and deceptive she is nothing short of brilliant.    The cast is supported by interesting supporting turns by Louis C.K, Michael Pena. and an uncredited role by Robert DeNiro in one stunning scene in the later part of the film. 

            American Hustle represents for Russell at this point in this seven major film career a milestone in writing and directing.    This marvelous take on lost souls offers a peak ahead into our modern culture of today and foreshadows the world of seemingly endless scandals that filter the American landscape.    Rich with characterizations, and a sharp sense of time and place, this film rates as easily on of the best of this year and is an early candidate for one of the best of this fledging decade.    It is not to be missed.    

                                                                        Tommy Key

Rated R(pervasive language, sexual content, brief violence) 

Hunger Games: Catching Fire

The Hunger Games:  Catching Fire

A review

November 24, 2013

Viewed November 21, 2013

****.5 out of *****

Occasionally the tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants.” 
― Thomas Jefferson

            The battle rages on.   It is a part of her now whether she accepts it or not.   She carries the scars and the memories, and now she has to endure an even deeper burden.   She is a winner.   She has survived to live and breathe, but not to have any lasting freedom.   She is both victim and victor of something she has started in words and deeds.   She is still so young, and her future is yet to be written.  

            In real time the sequel to 2012’s sensational, The Hunger Games comes eighteen months later an eternity perhaps for audiences anxious to take another trip inside the nightmare world of Suzanne Collins’ dystopian landscape, and encounter one of literature’s most fascinating recent creations, Katniss Everdeen. 

            Ms. Collins books with its first person narration and its vivid and heartbreaking glimpse into a future world gone horribly wrong inhabit a unique place in popular culture, and offer an interesting commentary on our need to see every aspect of one another’s life played out for enjoyment.

            This latest film finds Katniss and Peeta at home and ready to take a victory tour following the first film through the districts of Panem.    Prior to leaving, she is warned that in order to save the life of her friends and family she must make a convincing show of allegiance to the Capital, and prove that she truly loves Peeta, and it is not an act derived for survival in the first Hunger Games.    What they find on tour instead is a country on the verge of a revolution, and Peeta and Katniss are sent back to the arena along with winners of past games to show a country ready to revolt who is really in charge. 

            In many ways this film is a landmark improvement on the first film.    First off the stakes are deeper, and for much of its two and half hour running time the sweep and power of the film is overwhelming in its intensity.    New director, Francis Lawrence who will return for the two part conclusion of the series due the next two years infuses the characterizations and action sequences with an incredible sense of control over the proceedings.     The result is an epic powerhouse of ideas, from its quiet opening where we see Katniss in quiet pose to the stunning end sequence as the camera stares straight down at her eyes wide open and afraid.  

            Jennifer Lawrence who owns this part is this film’s most valuable resource.    One simply cannot take their eyes off this actress as she attacks the role with a fervor and passion that is simply wonderful.     The rest of the returning cast is great with stronger work in this film by Josh Hutcherson as Peeta, Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, and Liam Hemsworth as Gale.    Elizabeth Banks and Lenny Kravitz add depth and layers to their performances that add to the richness of the characters.   

            The returnees are backed up by the excellent character choices and casting for the new roles.   Jeffrey Wright, Amanda Plummer and a terrific Jena Malone as competitors and former victors in the arena make the most of their parts.     The two larger new roles are played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, as the new game maker.  Mr. Hoffman as is generally the case with this fine actor adds a sense of menace and mystery to his multi-leveled performance.    Sam Clafin gives a sharp turn to the role of Finnick.    

            As the middle film in a four film series, Catching Fire is one of the stronger entries in recent years for a public perhaps tired of endless retreads of familiar stories.  One of the appeals of The Hunger Games stories is the freshness of the ideas.     If the film has a flaw it is in the repetition of the flow of the first film.     What is refreshing is the power of its female heroine.     Even as a symbol of the upcoming revolution for the books and films, she is truly a remarkable character and champion of both freedom and individual expression.    In its breathless cliffhanger ending Lawrence captures the rage and frustration of her character’s journey both literal and metaphorically.     Director Lawrence may have represented a change in tone for the franchise, but he knew the Lawrence on everyone’s lips was the twenty-three old who has become a heroine for the ages.     

                                                                        Tommy Key

Rated PG-13(intense sequences of violence and action, frightening images, thematic elements, suggestive situation, language) 

12 Years a Slave

12 Years a Slave

A review

November 11, 2013

Viewed November 11, 2013

***** out of *****

“You can't hold a man down without staying down with him.” 
― Booker T. Washington

            It has been stated for centuries that history is written by the winners.     The lens of history offers so much in retrospect that all the analysis in the world cannot change the uglier parts of a country’s past and its makeup.    The United States for all its glory and its power has a brutal history to comprehend and acknowledge.     As an institution slavery lasted in the United States from pre-Revolutionary War to Civil War, and at its peak time there may have been as many as four million slaves in the United States.   This painful and wrenching period in our history was the first in a chapter of loss and pain that generations have struggled to make sense of with no discernable answer.   In slavery’s bleak pill to swallow, history shows no winners, for the legacy remains and understanding it means telling its story.

            The backdrop of this remarkable film, 12 years a Slave, provides audiences with a stunning and powerful narrative that is such a distinct and unique experience that it transcends the boundaries of film.   Based on the memories of a man named Solomon Northup, the film tales the story of a free man tricked into slavery by two con artists who draw him from his New York home and his family, where he wakes up from a drunken night in chains and being sold.   The film follows Northup given the slave name of Platt, and he eventually finds his new home, and his path directly in the line of a brutal and terrible plantation owner named Epps.

            Films that have dealt with slavery in the past have done so with broad strokes, however this  film is an intimate piece with a flawless screenplay that allows the viewer to experience the thoughts and feelings of Northup even as it exposes the horrors of the slave condition.   As brutal as some of the segments are, and make no mistake this is a film that is painful to watch, but who could look away?   The screenplay by renowned American writer John Ridley is an exploration of the human soul at its weakest and most powerful.   By fleshing out such strong characterization especially of Northup, Epps, and the film’s other central character, Patsey,  Ridley is able to extend beyond the restrictions of memoir and tap directly into the psyche of this astonishing triangle that lies at the center of this film. 

            British director Steve McQueen, in only his third major feature film weaves all of the elements together in a cohesive flow, and his choices seem perfectly pitched to capture the moment.   He focuses largely on the faces of his principals, and captures the look alternating the camera to provide a counter perspective to the internal conflict. 

            The central paradox of Northup’s journey from free and quiet citizen to slave and back to free man again lies in the horror that he was a lucky one.    The end film notes that his story was reflected in many men and women who had similar narratives, but never escaped.    An educated and thoughtful man Northup stands out due to his demeanor.   The viewer is filled with fear for him for exposure, for his safety and life depends on him not standing out.

            There are so many indelible sequences in the film that burn into the memory with an urgency that is profoundly moving.    This is a film that will be discussed and talked about for years to come.

            The performers of this remarkable film are standouts one and all.   As Northup, thirty-six year old actor Chiwetel Ejiofor is amazing.  Mr. Ejiofor, who has been around for a decade now steps into this seemingly impossible role to play and do justice, and triumphs in every frame.   Without his towering presence the film would not soar to the heights it does.   Playing the loathsome Epps, Michael Fassbender brings his trademark intensity and the full measure of his considerable prowess to this character.    Newcomer Lupita Nyong’o is a revelation capturing the agony of Patsey, who is targeted by Epps for unwanted attention.    I would not be surprised to see all of these performers win award after award this following year for these portrayals.   The rest of the cast including Brad Pitt, Alfre Woodard, Benedict Cumberbatch, Paul Giamatti, and Adepero Oduye provide memorable moments as they drift in and out of the story.  

            There is a tendency with historical films to squander too much of the facts in favor of narrative.    Here is a historical film about a time in our nation’s history that volumes have been written about it, and yet with this film it is brought front and center with stunning detail.    One cannot view the events of this film without gaining a broader understanding of the tragic story as it unfolds.  Northup’s journey is not one of triumph of simply surviving the horror, but a moving testament to the heroes whose names were never known, and filled unmarked graves in history’s sad parable for us all.    

                                                            Tommy Key

Rated R(violence, cruelty, nudity, some sexuality) 

Gravity review

Gravity

A review

October 9, 2013

Viewed October 8, 2013

***** out of *****

“And my heart bled within me; for you can only be free when even the desire of seeking freedom becomes a harness to you”      Gibran

            In life our bonds of hope are tethers to the fabric of our existence.   From the time we take our first breaths to the day we breathe our last, we are linked by the processes of our mind and the journeys of our hearts.   We are thinking beings capable of creating ideas, developing concepts, and yet dreaming bigger dreams, and we long to escape from our world and understand the vast universe around us.   Wherever those dreams find us and the journeys they take us on we are forever linked to the memories we have made prior.   These little links are the moment to moment miracle that our lives truly become, and the reason we will fight with every last hope to stay alive. 

            There may yet be a better movie this year than this searing, heartfelt, and stirring wonder that is Gravity, but if so please count me first in line to see it.    This film although it runs only an hour and half is one of the most terrifically executed films to come in some time.     Great films are not accidents, and the work here to create this film is evident in every signal frame, every small detail.   This is a work that instantly invited you not to watch, but to experience.   The experience is what sets this apart from many other films set in space and the endless fantasy brigade that computer generated technology has allowed filmmakers to expand our horizons, and make the fantastic come alive.   Gravity works because we feel a gripping sense of familiarity with the proceedings by making the film about characters and ideas.     The film invites the viewer to explore the most nightmare of what if scenarios, but instead of sitting back comfortable in our seats we are engaged in our own struggle to survive.

            The auteur of this experience is the talented director, Alfonso Cuarón who as film producer, co-screenwriter, and co-editor of this film has provided audiences with something that will appeal to nearly everyone.    This is heady ambitious filmmaking that stirs the soul.    It is rare for any film to capture and push all of the human emotions of fear, hope, and sadness, but that is exactly what Mr. Cuarón has been able to achieve.    On a technical level alone Gravity is likely to achieve award after award.    It is one of the most realistic looking films for its visual effects ever created, and those involved in the challenge of making this film whether they were involved in visual effects or production design should think about investing in a great deal of formal wear. 

            Gravity’s story is simple.   Miles above space a satellite has exploded sending debris directly in path of a space crew.  Their ship destroyed and adrift in space with mere minutes of oxygen left two people must find a way to survive in the vacuum of space, and the options are limited. 

            It is here the true weight of the story of Gravity begins and as an audience we are asked again to explore the human character in the form of one indelible creation, engineer Ryan Stone, as played by Sandra Bullock.    Ms.  Bullock who has formed the greater part of her career as an actress that audiences trust.   This ability to be an audience surrogate is part of the gift of Ms. Bullock.    She is actually likely underrated as an actress, and here with this role her gifts for establishing first and foremost her ability to tackle such a complex role.    Ms.  Bullock anchors the film by our trust in her as a performer.   In the film’s two emotional centerpieces she is nothing short of amazing.    As her counterpart in the film George Clooney is his charming self, and like Ms. Bullock he grounds the movie in a place both familiar and terrifying.   

            One of the many strengths of Gravity is its ability to understand that less is more.    The film provides little exposition or background for the events.   In this way it will prove timeless.   It asks simple questions of its audience, but deeper questions of its characters.   What does it mean to survive versus live?    A lesser movie would have been satisfied with just the spectacle and presentation.   Make no mistake this is a film of ideas, and is one of this early decades true masterpieces.    Miles above space, Dr. Stone confronts her humanity and her deepest fears,  tethered as it were holding on tight, but finally letting go.   

                                                                        Tommy Key

Rated PG-13( intense perilous sequences, disturbing images, brief strong language )

            

Prisoners - A review

Prisoners

A review 

September 22, 2013

Viewed September 21, 2013

****.5 out of *****

Evil is sweet in the beginning but bitter in the end.
Talmud

          We are madmen underneath our façade of self-control.   We are connected by the driving urge of justice in a world where darkness threatens our sanity, our state of mind.   Evil comes to us when we least expect it, when it invades our homes, and our hearts.   What then are we capable of doing when we are threatened?    Will we forsake our own mortal souls searching endlessly to the question of evil, and the answers to the same questions that have plagued mankind since his existence?    

          The nature of evil and faith are heady subjects for any filmmaker to take on in any capacity, but that is exactly what one will encounter with the mind-blowing and searing thriller that is Prisoners.   This sharply drawn, and densely plotted story follows only a week in a life of two families torn apart by the most unspeakable horrors, but it has the look and feel of an instant classic in the genre.   This is a film that will leave even the most prepared viewer shaken to their foundation as the film presents its characters and events without assistance of moral certainty to assess their actions.      The film packs enough emotion into its two hour twenty minute running time that most audiences may need to erase its images from the mind at film’s end to escape the nightmare.   This to better erase the psychological warfare that is needed to endure the intricate screenwriting, directing, cinematography, editing, sounds, and an ensemble cast that is nothing short of spectacular. 

          Prisoners is the creation of writer, Aaron Guzikowski and director, Denis Villeneuve, both men announcing their presence as major talents who by given structure and form to this world draw the audience in almost from the opening second.    Villeneuve’s sharp direction creates a claustrophobic feel to the film.  His work is extraordinary.   Adding to his already sterling resume, cinematographer Roger Deakins’ work here is nothing short of amazing.  

          On Thanksgiving Day, two families, the Dovers and the Birchs are plunged into a nightmare.   Their two youngest, both girls go missing in the span of minutes.   The police arrest a suspect shortly after, a deeply withdrawn young man whose low IQ, and lack of evidence allows his hasty release.   Convinced of his guilt and seeking answers, Keller Dover takes the law into his own hand kidnapping the young man to make him talk.    This culminates in a chain of events that spiral out of control for everyone involved. 

          The film makes good use of its small town locales to embed this nightmare landscapes with something familiar.    The film utilizes even its quieter moments to establish a sense of dread.   Nowhere is this more readily seen than in the candlelight sequence for the girls at midpoint of the drama, where the sequence moves from deeply moving to terrifying.    The film asks a simple question of its viewer, what would you do?   

          Seven of our most talented actors and actresses today populate the cast and they all give noteworthy performances.     As the accused young man, Paul Dano proves once again that as an actor he needs only the character as written.   As his aunt and protector Melissa Leo offers another in a line of performances for this actress to disappear completely into.   Viola Davis and Mario Bello give us two different viewpoints on the mothers given to their grief.  This may be the only flaw in this story that both their characters, and the work by Terrence Howard as Franklin Birch is given less development. 

          The film belongs to two actors who have shown time and again their versatility as performers.  In performances that establish both as potential award nominees, Jake Gyllenhall and Hugh Jackman offer two variations of men driven by the need for answers.   Gyllenhall’s police detective Loki is the finest work this thirty-three year old actor has provided yet.    As a lover of film and acting I would be hard pressed to name any actor who could have brought the talent, execution, and anger into the role that Mr. Jackman has provided here.    The two men driven to extremes are the differing sides of one another and their brief scenes together sparkle with an intensity that is keenly felt.

          From its opening moments with the Lord’s Prayer spoken softly off camera without opening credits to its stunning and powerful conclusion, Prisoners grabs the viewer fully with its dark vision of human behavior.  The twist and turns the film takes are a journey that despite the disturbing subject matter is worth taking.  This is one of the year’s finest films so far.    It should not be missed. 

                                                              Tommy Key

Rated R( violent content including torture, language, thematic material)

         

Lee Daniel's The Butler

Lee Daniel’s The Butler

A review

August 20, 2013

Viewed August 20 2013

***.5 out of *****

“I, too, sing America.

I am the darker brother.
They send me to eat in the kitchen
When company comes,
But I laugh,
And eat well,
And grow strong.

Langston Hughes

            The canvas of US history is laden with events that resonate with a certain age citizen.   These generations that stretched from the end of World War II to the era of the internet and technology survived and grew in a turbulent passage of painful challenges, and for many that long ago world exists in memory, or in the filtered images that television covered, and for today’s youth it is only history.    History asks questions of both the ones who survived it and can relay their role within its foundations, but it asks a larger question of those who follow in its footsteps.   What have we learned, and how can we take that knowledge into our own uncertain future?

            The Butler writer/director Lee Daniels fourth film.     The acclaimed director who garnered huge praise four years ago for Precious, is back with a film that seeks to cover sixty years of American history filtered through the eyes of a White House butler, Cecil Gaines.    The film, sharply performed is both touching and honest in its portrayal using the life of Gaines to reflect the decades fight for civil rights.  

            The story which uses a magazine article, “A Butler well served by This Election” by Will Hagood to form the story of Gaines which follows his early life on a cotton farm in a tense opening scene to his career in the White House where he encounters President after President while his family life takes a back seat, and a lifelong rift develops with his son. 

            The screenplay by Danny Strong works best when we are allowed to see behind the man that Gaines is in the scenes with his family, and especially the people he encounters behind the world of working at the White House.   It is only in the scenes with the men who play the Presidents that the film falters, as the audience is asked to spot the star casting.   The film peaks in its middle section that covers the turbulent Civil Right Movement that Gaines son, Louis is on the front lines fighting his personal battle to not be his father. 

            Like most films that deal with this length of time in history certain eras get passed over, for better or for worse and the film chunks out large gaps in time.  I imagine that a longer film may exist, even though the film runs well over two hours it seems to fly by.   

            The film offers three excellent performances of note.   First off Oprah Winfrey, who for an iconic personality she has become does a wonderful job vanishing into the role of Gloria, Gaines’ wife through the times.   Ms.  Winfrey brings a tenderness to the role that is needed.     As Gaines, the multi-faceted actor, Forest Whitaker is at the top of his game.    As an actor there is something complex, strong, and sensitive in Whitaker’s portrayal that recalls why he has flourished in nearly every role he has taken in his career.    Young English actor, David Oyelowo is mesmerizing as Louis, Gaines oldest son.   It is his career best work to date.

            Terrence Howard shows up at the midpoint in the film to provide a counterbalance to the steady Cecil.  Other actors like Cuba Gooding Jr, and music stars, Mariah Carey, and Lenny Kravitz play characters who needed more fleshing out.    Robin Williams, John Cusack, James Marsden, Live Schreiber, and Alan Rickman briefly play Eisenhower, Nikon, Kennedy, Johnson, and Reagan.

            One of the strengths of The Butler is that it could be told using multiple perspectives.   There have been many good films made about these eras in history.   Very few have tackled all of these times with the ambitious scope that this film wants to encompass.   Despite losing steam in its last third, The Butler represents a vivid glance into our recent history.    

Tommy Key

Rated PG-13( violence, disturbing images,  language, sexual material, thematic elements

The Way Way Back

The Way Way Back

A review

July 29, 2013

Viewed July 28, 2013

**** out of *****

There is something deep within us that sobs at endings. Why, God, does everything have to end? Why does all nature grow old? Why do spring and summer have to go?” 
                                                                                                            Wheeler

Of all the seasons it is summer that offers in promise the most growth, and the most healing.   The days seem longer.   The heat lends itself to reflection after all, and as children we often wish summer would last forever.   Trapped as it were in time, searching for that one magic moment as adults when we are jolted back into memories that we have placed on a back space in our hearts.   It is summer after all when we often make that turn toward adulthood.    It is there we find ourselves changed.

          Even though it is set in a modern setting,  a great deal of the charm of this tender and funny coming of age story, The Way Way Back lies in its ability to not be about any particular time and its broad themes and characters seem to belong to every place and time.    This becomes critical in understanding what makes the film work.    It really does not work as a true classic of the genre, but it has enough heart to glide over its bumpier spots.

          The movie concerns Duncan, a quiet, introverted young man on summer vacation with his mother, and her new jerk boyfriend and his older daughter.   For most young men a summer at the beach would be ideal, but for Duncan he is miserably treated by his mother’s boyfriend and feels lost.   His escape comes in the most unlikely of places, a local water park where he finds friends and a job, and himself. 

          A great deal of the humor of The Way Way Back comes from the funny exchanges of dialogue, and the way Duncan views this strange new environment.   Beneath the humor is a great deal of emotional pathos.   After all a great deal of the film deals head on with the pain of absent parents, and a world that is rocked by divorce.   Like most coming of age films the adults are the clueless ones, lost in a maze of booze and infidelity, and the youth are the ones who are self-aware and capable of growth.   The only adults who seem really mature are the fun loving employees of the water park, notably a great turn by Sam Rockwell who plays Duncan’s mentor and friend, Owen. 

          The film, the brainchild of writer/directors Nat Faxon and Jim Rush, who have small but funny roles in it, is both an ode to growing up and I think a not so subtle heavy handed attempt to draw attention to the pain of modern families and their fractured nature. 

          The film is superbly cast.   The aforementioned Rockwell is a standout.   I wish the writers had fleshed the character out a little deeper.   It would have been interesting to see the shading behind the wisecracks.    Keep an eye on young Liam James who plays Duncan.    The rest of the cast is filled by veteran performers, Amanda Peet, Maya Rudolph, a hilarious Allison Janney, and a grown up Anna Sophia Robb who Duncan encounters.    Toni Collette is excellent as Duncan’s mother.    She gives the character great shading, and it is easy to fill in her back story.    Steve Carell’s Trent is an interesting turn for the well-liked actor.  It is a change of pace seeing this actor playing a character that is meant to draw audience disdain.

          Like most coming of age stories this one is not dependent of its big moments, but there are a few moments that may make one want to cheer.   Summers all come to a close, and maybe those small moments are what we all remember, the one true friend, the first kiss, the far off glance into an uncertain future that we dream about when the days turn cool.  

                                                              Tommy Key

Rated PG-13( thematic elements, language,  drug references, sexual content)

World War Z

World War Z

A review

June 22, 2013

Viewed June 22, 2013

**** out of *****

I pulled into Nazareth, was feeling 'bout half past dead 
I just need some place where I can lay my head 
Hey, mister, can you tell me, where a man might find a bed? 
He just grinned and shook my hand, "No" was all he said. 

                                                     The Band

          There is nowhere to hide that is safe.    The world you woke up to this morning is gone.  What is left in its place is a nightmare.    The end of civilization has come, not with bombs, or guns, or disasters, just people destroying each other in a mindless frenzy.   This is the end, unless you can stop it. 

          The advance word six months ago nearly pronounced this thrill ride of a movie dead on arrival if you will pardon the pun.   World War Z, based on the very popular novel by Max Brooks of the same name, survived its bad press and rumored outrageous budget and reshot ending to survive and arrive in theatres with a loud triumph.    This is certainly a film that merits attention whether the current zombie obsession is one’s cup of tea or not.  It certainly is not mine, however I was riveted for nearly all of the much too short running time for this shocker.  

          In fact, its too hasty conclusion and rushed characterizations are really all that is wrong with the film, and even those can be forgiven partly.    What is on screen is a non-stop and sometimes out of breath race against time to save the world.   We find out pretty early on that most of the world is spinning mildly to the brink of extinction or at least of the extinction of the human kind that is not obsessed and running wildly after any life. 

          All that stands between this destruction may be a former UN investigator, who along with his family is saved in one of the many narrow escapes from the zombie hoards, only to be ordered to investigate and try to locate the source of the epidemic.  

          The screenplay by Matthew Carnahan, Drew Goodard, and Damon Lindelof condenses the novel events into a short and direct film with little room to ponder the darker questions the book probes.    The director, Marc Forster continues to build upon an impressive body of work with tense and absorbing sequences.    The result is a film that is likely to have one looking over their shoulder or shielding their eyes during its two most impressive set pieces. 

          Brad Pitt in a role that is a change of pace for the actor underplays in the role of Gerry Lane.   This decision serves the film well as an overly bravado laden performer would have made the movie silly.    Unfortunately Pitt has to carry the film on his shoulders as the large cast barely registers save a noteworthy turn by Daniella Kertesz as an Israeli soldier that gives the story a lift midway through.   

          A longer film may have existed prior to the reshoots, and it would have been interesting to see what a more character driven piece would have looked like, but this is a worthy addition to the world- ending films.    Surprisingly and maybe thankfully the film is mostly free of using gore and blood to add to the terror and relies mostly on suspense.  It is the fear of what is behind the corner that is most effective, and makes World War Z worth a night at the movies.   It may just leave you wanting to leave the lights on just a little longer, and be very quiet and still.     

                                                              Tommy Key

Rated PG-13(intense frightening zombie sequences, violence, disturbing images, language)                                                 

Man of Steel

Man of Steel

A review

June 15, 2013

Viewed June 15, 2013

“It is not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves.” 
― William Shakespeare

          The young boy cowers away from his peers.   He is afraid of the noises in his head.  He cannot shut them out.   He is different, so different in fact that he cannot make sense of how or why.  His mother arrives to comfort and plead with him, and he says simply to her “the world’s too big”, and she says “then make it small.”    Society does two things with loners and misfits, they become outcasts, or they become icons.   Identity after all is about the essence of the central duality we all share, and the beliefs we ascribe to as we accept our destiny.

          Superman first appeared during the Golden Age of comics in the late 1930’s and the enduring figure of the muscular, powerful and benevolent protector of mankind has endured and changed with the times.    Each generation seems destined to get the Superman we most desperately need. Even though we had a reboot of sorts just eight years ago, 2005’s Superman Returns,  the timing seems right for this latest version which is engaging throughout and is spectacular often enough to rate it a smashing success.  

          Man of Steel is a surprising entry in the comic book canon because as conceived and executed it seeks to humanize a character that is most often viewed in the most fantastic light.  Here in this film we get a glimpse of a Superman most in the form of a Clark Kent who seeks to hide from the world instead of help it.    This change in tone and mythology of the character open the door for the strong screenplay by David Goyer to explore the character in depth, and also and decisively challenge the audience’s perceptions about what to expect.    Taking a cue from the successful Dark Knight series, its creator Christopher Nolan serves has producer and story credit, Man of Steel is not just a cerebral experience but an attack on the senses with blistering action set pieces delivered with panache by young director, Zach Snyder.

          Mr. Snyder may have been a surprising choice to guide the film, but it zips along despite a long running time, and contains enough strong moments that it offsets most of its flaws, most notably a major plot development critical to the film which needs more explanation.

          The film rehashes the origin story of Kal-El, who is sent to Earth from his dying planet of Krypton in the film’s powerful opening scenes.   Here on Krypton we are given longer and more detailed explanation and introduction to the planet, including meeting the renegade warrior General Zod, who in the film’s second half will make it to Earth chasing Kal-El to help rebuild the destroyed planet using and wiping out Earth’s population to achieve his goal. 

          The filmmakers have made so wise and very brave decisions in regards to the film’s narrative t with the use of flashbacks to the past, which in this rare instance do not detract but enhance the film’s structure.    Only a few times in the film is the narrative flowed rushed in favor of getting to the next sequence.    Thankfully the payoff is that one is likely to stay glued to their seat once the second half of the film starts.   

          The film is reverent to a degree and unlike many of the recent comic book blockbusters does not seek easy laughs.   In fact this is wide departure in tone that the few laughs that come are much more effective.   Even the General Zod character, wonderfully played by Michael Shannon is given character shading and a powerful motive in his actions.     The name Superman is only uttered once in the film, and even that comes as a bit of a surprise that it seems to fit the moment perfectly. 

          The most common denominator with previous incarnations of the films is rah-rah stance with gung ho celebrations of what are commonly noted American values, hard work, sacrifice, individuality, the Military, and a not too subtle religious reverence for the character.    These do not detract in any way from the film’s power to entertain, but they add an air of depth and seriousness.   Only very briefly toward the end is the audience given sustained reasons to smile, and by the end it has been well earned. 

          Impeccably cast this film features a number of excellent performances.    In the title role, British actor Henry Cavill looks the part and gives a quiet performance.   Whether as Clark or Superman this is a different take than previously seen and fits the new version of the character.   Russell Crowe plays Jor-El, his father and sticks around long enough to make a lasting impression.   As Clark’s earthly parents Diane Lane makes a worthwhile Martha Kent, while Kevin Costner is superb as Jonathan Kent.   German actress Antje Traue makes a formidable second villain and companion to Shannon’s General Zod.   In a role that seems like it was cut drastically, Laurence Fishburne portrays Daily Planet editor, Perry White.    The always excellent Amy Adams take Lois Lane in new directions and her character this time around is so central to the action that the film misses her when she is sidelined.  

          The new score by Hans Zimmer is both bombastic and moody and heightens the energy of the film.   The film for better or worse has more of a foundation with sci-fi than the most recent comic blockbusters, however do we dare estimate the death toll that film’s destruction might suggest.

          This latest version, a mix of the new and old takes Superman out of the air to ground him as a human, and reflect the need for a hero that audiences can invest in again and again.  This latest film delivers the real deal, even if the suit and the man has changed through the years.   Man of Steel is not to be missed.

                                                              Tommy Key

Rated PG-13 (sci-fi violence, action and destruction, language,

          

Now You See Me A review

Now You See Me

A review

June 3, 2013

Viewed June 2, 2013

*** out of *****

“ Nothing is more sad than the death of an illusion”

                                                                        Koestler

              The old phrase goes simply “seeing is believing.”    Are we born skeptics or are we born believers?   We go to the magic shows hoping to suspend belief for just a moment in time.   Houdini escaped time and time again cheating death.  We know that, but he was just a man.  We know the elephant cannot really disappear, don’t we?   There is a trick, some mechanism that is hidden from the audience that makes the magic.    Yet we go to be fooled, to be amazed to see with our own eyes what we want to see.

              The new film, Now You See Me covers very little ground in the realm of unveiling any hidden magic about the world of magic.   Uneven, frenetic but watchable and entertaining for most of its running time the film is likely to leave you guessing to its final reveal(Hint, I did not guess it)   Most of the charms of the film and there are several occur during its middle section, but the film is maligned largely by one too many subplots that the screenwriters leave juggling for the audience to fill in the gaps.   

              The film concerns the hunt for four elusive magicians who after pulling off an elaborate trick in a Las Vegas act appear to steal a ton of money from a bank in Paris and give the money to the assembled audience.   This runs them afoul of the FBI who are pursuit of the group as they begin to plan and execute something bigger while being pursued.

              The less said about the rest of the labyrinth plot is wise, not that I could explain the twists along the way, some of which under analysis make no sense.    This is modern moviemaking after all, with its unusual shot camera angles and its frenetic editing that suggests other stronger films including a late hour car chase better suited to a Bond film than this thriller. 

              This hodgepodge of both a good and bad film is the work of screenwriters Ed Solomon and Boaz Yakin who seek to confuse the viewer with its rapid fire dialogue where all the characters speak as if they were Doctoral candidates in one-liners from a university producing comedians.    Its director, Louis Letterier who has good work in his future as an action director is best when the film slows down and works on character development, which is very little.     I would have loved to see some back story for the characters.    The deepest confusion a viewer may have is wondering who as the audience are we supposed to be following.    Are we meant to be engaged by the leader of the greatly named, Four Horseman group of magicians led by Jesse Eisenberg’s Daniel Atlas, who is still channeling his Mark Zuckerberg in this performance, or are does our allegiance lie with the FBI agent, Dylan Rhodes, played by Mark Ruffalo, who seems to be in a different movie at time from everyone else, so serious does he play his role?

              The rest of the strong cast, Isla Fisher, Woody Harrelson, and Dave Franco as the fellow magicians have nice moments.  Harrelson has played this role before in some form or fashion so it is no great stretch for him.      Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine try to infuse their characters with a little life, but both are miscast in their roles.    However they are fantastic all compared to poor Melanie Laurent, miscast as a French Interpol agent who sole purpose in the script seems to be to give more exposition.

              Despite my reservations I found myself enjoying the film.    The magic sequences are a great deal of fun to watch, and more scenes hit the mark than miss.    In magic terms the whole film is more apt to appeal to those who are apt not to question where the film is taking you, just sit back and believe.    If you peak behind the façade backstage, you might spot the holes in the act.   

                                                                                      Tommy Key

Rated PG-13( language, action, sexual content)

Star Trek: Into Darkness Review

Star Trek:   Into Darkness

A review

May 17, 2013

Viewed May 16, 2013

****.5 out of *****

“What's past is prologue.” 
― William Shakespeare,

              Rhetoric, the kind that moves mountains and people is made up of many factors, but it is most often effective when it is backed up in the words with solid actions often emotion based.   Emotions that based on more than random if not rational thoughts that make up the land of ideas and ideals, but something of deeper substance.   To trust one another in a time of crisis to make the intelligent decisions is the goal of the family and the family unit.    It is in in these times of crisis when one becomes aware of the vulnerable balance between the intellect and the heart.  

          Early on in the marvelous new film, Star Trek: Into Darkness the statement is made to a young, brash officer named James Kirk, by his mentor and commander that he believes in him.   He believes in the young man even though he by his own admission does not play by the rules that govern their federation.   He flaunts them recklessly, and uses emotion based thought to guide his courage. His courage is one of blustery confidence on the outside with the fears well hidden.  His first officer, a man of another race, half human, half Vulcan believes in the rules.   His world is one of logic based ideas, but nevertheless as courageous as his captain.   He hides his emotions behind a veil of reason, but they exist.

          As a television series, Star Trek only lasted three years, but those three years of television launched a new futuristic world of man’s journey into the reaches of the galaxy.    It promoted among other things a half Utopian, half nightmare version of the future with galaxies and alien races that could be explored and learned from, and also beings who would have to be confronted and defeated to maintain the balance of peace.   Standing at the center of this universe are these two opposing forces of reason and emotion, united in the same timeless struggle. 

          The popularity of the multiple television series, the feature films and the endless variations and stories have used a narrative that alters between these factors to make science fiction a story of people and characters and less a story of coming fantastic future. 

          This newest version, directed with style and verve to the max is instantly one of the best in the series.  It is a stunning visual treat, an exciting thrill ride that delivers a new take on the familiar, and yet rings true for all that has come before.  

          In the capable and talented hands of its director, J.J Abrams the film returns us to the origins of the original Star Trek crew, now in charge of their own starship, Enterprise.   The familiar characters return, Kirk, Spock, Dr. McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, and Chekov.     Rather than simply pay homage to the previous characterizations the seven actors filling these roles have managed to make the parts their own.     This is a Star Trek for a new generation(without pun), and this film is likely to create thousands of new fans with a spectacle so rich that it demands to be seen at the highest possible format. 

          It must be noted that the Star Trek reboot could have been a failure.   It could have failed either financially or artistically and it has not been either, but with Abram’s shepherding it is likely to survive for many more generations.     

          Although hugely popular Abrams’ first stab at this sacred property in 2009 suffered as many films do from a classic reset to the story and an introduction to the characters that have been so beloved for so long.   Reverential and heartfelt, although epic in scope, the film was new and exciting.   By resetting the universe as it were with the events in Star Trek, it opened a door for the filmmakers to both embrace the mythology of the show and films and run from it with warp speed. 

          This latest epic is more testosterone based entertainment than the series or previous films in the series dared to be.   The Enterprise crew is faced with a threat against as one officer puts it “an all out war against Starfleet.”     The crew sent to eliminate a former Starfleet officer, John Harrison who has brutally attacked Starfleet commanders leaving many of them dead.   As they uncover more information the true nature of the characters and their mission will be illuminated. 

          Star Trek: Into Darkness is largely built around three incredible and powerful sequences that are stunning mini-films.    The sequences including a breathtaking and powerful sequence over a third of the way in that knocks the viewer for a loop.    Finding the surprises hidden in the strong screenplay by Robert Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof is only one of the pleasures of the film.   The film’s somber tone is offset by the marvelous touches of humor and warmth that the characters show in their interplay, and in the way the actors seem to be rebuilding the characters anew. 

          Visually this certainly is the top film in the series with its vibrant colors and incredible effects it stands alone.     Only a few minor quibbles here and there prevent the film from masterwork level.   They include perhaps a need to flesh out further some of the relationships in the story, and in my opinion a too-rushed over ending.          

          A unusual name, an accomplished performance is put in by British actor, Benedict Cumberbatch.  Mr. Cumberbatch cut his teeth in television’s Sherlock Holmes and here gives a performance that is honestly one of the strongest recent heavies in film.    His performance is not showy, but sets a convincing and powerful tone for the proceedings.     The returning stars to the series are excellent with a more flushed out performance notable this time for Zachary Quinto who plays Spock, and Zoe Saldana who plays Uhura.    Chris Pine, without apparent effort has overtaken the role of Kirk.   The burden of expectation lies with the audience and Mr. Pine has the chops to make the audience believe he is becoming a leader.  The rest in the cast, Karl Urban as McCoy, Simon Pegg as Scotty, John Cho as Sulu, and Anton Yelchin as Chekov are each given great moments to shine.    Bruce Greenwood and Alice Eve take stabs at former iconic Star Trek characters to nice effect.   The only weak performance is by Peter Weller who plays his critical role with too much bombast.

          Certain to be one of the strongest entries to 2013’s summer movies Star Trek: Into Darkness meet the expectations of the long time Trekkies, as well as those who want to spend two hours with an exciting fast paced tale that leaves you ready to continue further journeys into space.    I imagine there will be more than a few hearts excited as the final credits roll.   

                                                              Tommy Key

Rated PG-13(Intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence, language)