The Conspirator

.

Title: The Conspirator

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: September 26th, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG-13

With a title like The Conspirator, it's easy to prematurely conclude that whatever the depicted events at hand are, it would be explored through hypothetical angles. Oliver Stone has practically made a career out of that very practice. Robert Redford's previous directorial project Lions for Lambs validated his own ability to do the same. But with The Conspirator, Redford opts for a more business style of filmmaking. The infinite urban legends that have ever been hypothesized about the Abraham Lincoln assassination are dismissed entirely; instead favoring a strict fact-based account of the aftermath of Lincoln's death. Alternative angles only exist within the minds of the documented individuals who weigh the possible outcomes and consequences of their important actions. A virtually impossible task given the unique nature of the country's time period.

The suspected conspirator is Mary Surratt portrayed by Robin Wright. Her Confederate soldier son John (Johnny Simmons) is the top-ranking suspect of collaborators to John Wilkes Booth's fateful move. Now under national imprisonment and interrogation, her only hope of defense against the angry mob of the North is Civil War hero turned aspiring lawyer Frederick Aiken (James McAvoy). The normal courtroom dramas are bridged with Aiken's closed door conversations with Surratt and overseers of the justice department.

Like most situations of extreme despair, there needs be a lightning rod of blame. The prosecutors believe Surratt to be that very thing. The events lead us to question whether they are on the correct track or if the restless thirst for justice is clouding the judgment of legitimacy. Aiken grows skeptical as the case unfolds. The supporting dialogue is complemented by McAvoy's eyes and voice projection growing progressively louder and more desperate. It's natural enough but sometimes noticeably veers into "we're using this for the trailer" territory.

The Conspirator deserves credit for data authenticity but falls short of the optimal grade for mise-en-scene. I'm no historian, but the accuracy is sound as far as I've been able to tell. This is sure to please educators who prefer to add entertainment media into their curriculum's study material. But Redford's straightforward approach compromises the experience for style oriented viewers. Style is by no means everything. But it's fair to wish for more breakaways from a limited number of ideas. A common lighting motif is recognizable early. Interior settings are favored with only a single window allowing the minimum amount of illumination necessary for events to take place. It's an impressive setup that makes room for empathy. The prisoner is shut out from the world literally. The defense is left out of the truth loop. But it's way overdone and becomes irritating far ahead of the climax. The darkness itself isn't the problem. This is the nineteenth century after all. It's the result of lackluster set design.

Costume design is a hit-and-miss endeavour with the misses borderline laughable. Robin Wright has a natural look for the job and probably had a hard-working staff that maintained continuity with the haggard appearance. Justin Long on the other hand needed tweaks. He's a fine actor who I sense has yet to show his full range. But whoever gave him that outrageous mustache should consider submitting a resume to Studio 8H.

Every person decent at heart wants justice to prevail all times. We're inherently brought up to believe that any conviction is a sign of justice taking place. Unpopular acquittals are met with public outcries that shout over any reason-filled counterarguments even if the latter have stronger ground to stand on. The Conspirator is the latest in a long-standing tradition of films that serve to reinforce that unpleasant truth. Setting the conflict during a landmark period in American history keeps it somewhat immune from stale narratives. The technical faults and lack of artistic bravery bring the film down to a level that can be respected if not fully appreciated.

Rating: 5         

The King's Speech

.

Title: The King's Speech

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: August 13th, 2011

MPAA Rating: R

My name and presence is announced to everyone in the room. All eyes are now looking in my direction. I swallow and take a deep breath before walking to the designated standing area. Everything is silent. My professor and fellow students wait patiently to hear the speech's content. The act of breathing is for once a conscious action. The heart is pounding. I clear my throat and take a quick glance at the note card that has handwritten cues on the topics to be covered. It's no use. I've already forgotten how to begin the speech and there is nothing else except my nervous brain to depend on. All those hours of practicing didn't prepare me for being placed on the spot for the most crucial time for a crucial graded assignment for a crucial semester. That was a typical week in my college speech communication course. Nothing else is needed to explain why I had to re-take it twice to receive a passing grade.

Most polls on phobias report that public speaking is a person's strongest fear. Death usually comes in second place. As comedian Jerry Seinfeld put it, most people would rather be in the coffin than delivering the eulogy. So does that mean speeches are a fate worse than death? All those "kill me now" moments in class sure made it seem that way. Yet as agonizing as that experience was, I had it easy compared to King George VI (played here by Colin Firth), who lived with a speaking disorder all his life while his career depended on communication with an entire country he represented. The opening scene in The King's Speech captures all the fear and general overwhelm one feels when forced to be center of attention to a large crowd. Twenty classmates is bad enough. How about trying a filled Wembley Stadium?

The future King's public address at the 1925 British Empire Exhibition is a disaster. Stammering all around and long pauses between simple words. It sounds like a child attempting to read a book for the first time. This wont do for anyone, much less a public figure. So the King's advisers and especially his devoted wife Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) persuade him to seek treatment in a recluse setting under the tutoring of speech therapist Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush). Some of the seminars include unorthodox exercises and Logue's personality keeps things erratic. But it's only right for an exceptional situation to be given a novel answer. After all, it's the stuff movies are made of.

The King's Speech follows the deadline structure but doesn't share the traits typically found in this type of narrative. Great Britain is on the verge of declaring war against Germany and the rising Axis Powers. For the sake of national rally and to defy the enemy, its leader needed to act like one. And speak like one. And learn to do it fast. It's not a race against time so much as it's a race against loss of momentum, both politically and militaristic. History will have to wait to learn about Lionel Logue's role in serving his country. King George has bouts of resistance from his teachings but the country can't afford to wait for results much longer.

I like to think of myself as a fairly open-minded reviewer. But there were a few pre-conceived issues about this movie that were tough for me to shake off even after completion. And that also explains why I was late to the party in watching this award-winning film. The story is basic enough to be summarized in three sentences and the plot doesn't have enough layers for a drama to draw upon. And the idea that leaders and politicians will inevitably suffer a loss of support because of poor public speaking is something I have misgivings with; both in moral and factual analysis. I'll admit that there's probably an underlying reason why George H.W. Bush was the U.S. President while Dan Quayle was the understudy. As I'm typing this, President Obama is revealing his new jobs plan to Congress in a national broadcast. The confidence in his words is so emotionally stimulating that I almost overlooked how all of his speeches are basically the same. But anyway, it always makes more sense to judge someone by actions over talk. It's especially true in period pieces such as this where public figures were not as easily accessible as they are today.

Although the movie's construction process is pretty much flawless and the result is smooth enough to win respect from film scholars, the end result feels too reserved for something that won so many prestigious awards. One might think I'm holding it to an unfair higher standard but I swear this isn't the case. It might have actually been that "safe" feeling that swung the votes to its favor. Beyond that, the film has a lot of fine technical achievements to be proud of. Every set design has as much given care and attention as that crucial opening scene. The characters are very likable even through their most incompetent moments. (The classic belief that those who don't want help won't get help is the secondary theme.) And the movie is smart in understanding how timing is more important to comic relief than abundance. As we watch poor King George angrily pace around Logue's office and shout obscenities to calm the frustration, it's hard not to laugh and remember that familiar piece of therapy that soothed our souls since an early age. If at first you don't succeed, try try again. Then take Logue's advice and shout your favorite curse word. Then try again.

Rating: 6 

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

.

Title: The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: July 21st, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG

According to a 2010 CBS News poll, an estimated forty-five percent of Americans are unhappy with their jobs. That probably means the vast majority are not living the dreams they had set out for themselves when they were young. Chances are many fantasized of glamorous realistic careers like stockbrokers, business owners or doctors. And some went for unrealistic ones like hockey players, astronauts, or magicians (real ones, not fake ones like Copperfield). Dave Stutler (Jay Baruchel) is the title character of The Sorcerer's Apprentice, a story inspired by a classic short film featured in Disney's Fantasia. His written destiny is to become a real magician. A pretty cool job, wouldn't you think? Having extraordinary powers is probably the most common wish among daydreaming school kids. For any of them who watch this movie, Dave's resistance will boggle their minds. He wants no magic in his life. No thrills. No danger. His only wish is to be left alone as a ordinary insignificant person.

The fear originated from Dave's first experience with magic as a young child. A sorcerer named Balthazar Blake (Nicolas Cage) has been assigned to seek out the Prime Merlinian; the prophesied successor to the fabled wizard Merlin. Thirteen hundred years later, the diamond in the rough walks into Balthazar's Manhattan antique shop hideout by accident or perhaps by fate. Before the orientation gets underway, Balthazar's former friend and current rival Maxim Horvath (Alfred Molina) interferes by initiating the first of many wizard duels over the course of the film. The first one imprisons them both in an urn for ten years. By the time their souls are released, Dave has grown into a young college student so emotionally scarred by the experience to the point that it turns into a distant suppressed memory. 

Of course there's a reason why the movie is called The Sorcerer's Apprentice and not The Kid Who Refused to Become The Sorcerer's Apprentice. Dave eventually warms up to the idea much like how I warmed up to the movie's strengths that are not clearly apparent from the onset. To tell a story about magic, it only makes sense to show off a little of your own. Backed by producer Jerry Bruckheimer's high ceiling budget, Disney's CGI team more than lives up to that mission statement.


Favoring style over substance always has a cost. Trevor Rabin's music score is exciting ear candy but way overdramatic in context. A sequence where a kid chases a love note from his girlfriend on a recreational bike should not sound like a highway car chase is going on. But what's sorely missing here is a credible backstory. Even though the movie opens with a flashback sequence of Balthazar's past, it fails to properly explain how the Prime Merlinian came to be and why only the Merlinian can counterbalance the dark magic. I guess they figured that if Star Wars can get away with such vague prophecies, so can they. But while Star Wars has the advantage of having its own religion to sustain all myths, The Sorcerer's Apprentice is forced to make up the rules as it goes along. The limits of magic are never made clear, but we are led to believe that sorcery is more about transforming what already exists rather than creating things out of empty space. Sadly though, none of the duels are as fun to watch as the one between Merlin and Madam Mim in The Sword and the Stone.


Differing from its Harry Potter-esque peers, The Sorcerer's Apprentice takes pride with its comedic tone. With Jon Turteltaub in the director's chair, that's no surprise. The Fantasia homage is a delight to watch. Mickey Mouse's hat even makes a cameo after the end credits. Nicolas Cage's brave and sarcastic screen personality carries over from the National Treasure series and fits in surprisingly well here. Cage seems to win the most crowd favoritism when playing the sadistic archetype. But I think I prefer him in movies like this where he doesn't have to try so hard. Jay Baruchel's character is a socially awkward and somewhat speech-challenged nerd. I was prepared to write him off as the most annoying person since Sam Witwicky. But then I realized that I knew several real-life people with very similar personalities and it's a little refreshing to see a realistic protagonist that doesn't come across as a parody.


The number of avoided cliches is actually pretty incredible for a film with the names Bruckheimer and Turteltaub attached. Balthazar had been living in Manhattan for a long time before meeting Dave. He is well adapted to modern culture. This spares us from any lame gags involving an ancient man acting like a fish out of water. Dave's romance angle is lame except for one saving grace. The girl gives him a second chance despite the first date getting completely botched. Just because she likes him. That's affection right there, folks. Not this fall on one knee and beg for forgiveness crap that we've been trained to accept since the days of watching soap operas on sick days.


Despite some distracting plot problems, I'm giving The Sorcerer's Apprentice a passing grade for the fun factor alone. The occasional touches of cleverness and reality make it better than okay. But with five writers attached to the project (and most likely a struggle for creative direction), the film feels like a compromise, falling just a little short of the epic spectacle that a Fantasia spinoff deserves.

Rating: 7

Devil

.

Title: Devil

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: July 13th, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG-13

According to most pediatricians, the first few years of childhood are the most influential on a person's life. Sometimes I feel that way about the first few minutes of a movie. They can be really cheesy sometimes but I absolutely love an epic opening title sequence with the main credits flashing onto the screen. It's the perfect mood setter. Most of my favorites come from the filmography of Tim Burton. That candy bar assembly line at the beginning of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? Amazing. Those aliens causing all sorts of destruction in the Mars Attacks opening? Awesome. And of course who can forget all those vague glimpses of the Batman logo before finally panning out to reveal the full image with Danny Elfman's famous theme playing in the foreground?

Devil has an opening title sequence from that very tradition. The movie begins with a Philadelphia fly-through with the image flipped upside-down. It felt like swinging around with your feet attached to the bottom of an airplane. The dark shadows and haunting music are a good indication of what's in store. It's an attention grabber, an idea I hadn't seen done before and very interesting. But I can't decide if it was a good or bad decision. That same type of dilemma came back several times while watching the rest of the film. There are a lot of interesting ideas here but not all are necessarily good ones.

This movie marks the first of a series of original stories imagined by M. Night Shyalaman that are later scripted and directed by other less prominent filmmakers. Shyalaman's vision of the devil is that of a being that lives and walks among us; often disguised as a mortal. Most of these details are spelled out to us through narration from supporting character Ramirez (Jacob Vargas). All the information came from bedtime stories that his mother used to recite. The building that Ramirez works security for is under a suicide investigation led by Detective Bowden (Chris Messina). While this is happening, five strangers find themselves trapped inside a stalled elevator while it's hanging approximately thirty stories up. 

The situation at hand is stressful enough. But things grow out of control when the already paranoid captives encounter deal with random power outages that bring physical harm to one or more of them at a time. Scares evolve into scars. And then comes gruesome murders. As the death toll piles up, Bowden and Ramirez struggle to preserve the remaining victims' sanity; complicated further by Ramirez's own panic. With his mother's stories still impressed in his mind, he is convinced one of the elevator passengers is the devil in disguise and that nobody's presence is part of a coincidence. Everything plays a role in the legendary custom known as the Devil's Meeting where targets are rounded up for psychological torture before the inevitable violent death sentence.

Devil plays safe instead of reaching for the stars. Setting the entire story inside the confines of the elevator would have been the necessary path for becoming a strong psychological thriller. It comes with higher risk but higher reward. The script that came to be splits the story into two points of view. There are the trapped elevator occupants with limited knowledge of the situation and there are the rescuers who are forced to stand by and watch helplessly as the murderer within that limited space kills everyone else off. With a running time of only eighty minutes, it's a burdening challenge on the storytellers. There is a grand idea behind all of the events. It does not receive strong enough support because of the limited time to elaborate on its featured players. Some disappear before anything can be learned about them.

But even if the right time was available, I sense the story's climax would still have a difficult time finding the perfect connection. It's frustrating trying to explain this in spoiler-free context. Devil has a clear idea of what it wants to be but doesn't have enough stepping stones to reach that mountaintop. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that when M. Night Shyamalan envisioned the main concept and presented his rough draft to potential colleagues, the conversation went something like this.

"I have an interesting idea. It could be something special but I can't figure out where it goes from here. Perhaps if the project was handed over to a promising director, he/she can find the missing piece."

A promising director was found. A strong effort was put forth. But the piece is still missing. It's too bad because Devil is ripe for Shyamalan's unorthodox niche. Ramirez's final quote says that if the devil is real, God must be real too. Hey, there's a sequel idea. Maybe there's still time to tie everything into a complete package after all.

Rating: 5 

Tangled

.

Title: Tangled

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: July 8th, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG

(Special thanks to Ellen for loaning this disc to me.)

The history of the Walt Disney company has more ups and downs than Space Mountain. Their best known projects have come from their famed animation studio; home to some of the most talented artists in the world. The story behind the success is very much like a fable. A person dreams of having a special power. The dream comes true. Then the dream corrupts the person into selling out their values to satisfy greed. The person eventually reaches an epiphany, returns to their true self and everyone lives happily ever after. The last part hasn't quite happened yet. I think it's an overstatement to say that Tangled is Disney's long-awaited return to form. But they're definitely getting there. The one thing that can probably be universally agreed upon is that the movie successfully avoided becoming its own punchline.

Continuing with the fairy tale tradition, Tangled's story is set in a storybook world full of magic. The most sought-after magic is a yellow flower which has the ability to heal wounds and prevent aging. The first person to claim custody of this special power was an elderly woman named Mother Gothel (voice of Donna Murphy). Her story circulated as a legend before coming to the attention of the royal family. They are expecting their first child but the Queen is deathly ill and needs a miracle cure. Her soldiers locate and steal the magic flower for it to be distilled into an elixir. The queen's life is saved and the magic is somehow transferred into their child's enormously long hair. Princess Rapunzel (voice of Mandy Moore) is born.

But Mother Gothel soon returns to reclaim her prized possession. She kidnaps Rapunzel and raises her as her own inside a tower far away from the civilized world. The presence of the magic hair keeps Mother Gothel safe from death by natural causes. Now a teenager, Rapunzel has yet to see the world beyond her towering prison. An opportunity to change that comes when a scoundrel named Flynn Rider (voice of Zachary Levi) enters the tower to escape from the authorities who want him executed for theft. In return for reacquiring the stolen loot, he agrees to escort Rapunzel to the city where glowing lanterns illuminate the skies. The lights have mesmerized the young girl since early childhood and will bridge the path to her destiny.

Tangled is full of surprises not just in its well conceived storyline but its style and presentation. I watched this movie using a dusty eight year-old Xbox DVD player with a below average screen size and the resolution was so impressive that I was fooled into thinking that I had accidentally switched on a hidden upconversion button that I didn't know about. And this happened after being exposed to the high definition version as it was being demonstrated at the department store I work at. No matter what your home theater is comprised of, the video glows as strong as Rapunzel's hair. The animation is top notch as well. Somehow the bar of lifelike realism continues to rise higher even when not required.

Minus the use of pop culture references, the Dreamworks influence has clearly seeped its way into modern Disney-employed storytellers. That's actually not a criticism because there is a lot to be learned from that studio despite how hit-and-miss its track record can be. The slapstick humor is some of the most pleasing of its kind since the birth of the Shrek franchise. Some of the funniest moments involve a supporting character who has now joined the ranks of Percival McLeach and Captain Hook as some of Disney's best comical villains. Flynn's recurring rival is Maximus; one of the horses belonging to a palace guard sent out to capture Flynn. Even after the guard permanently leaves the story map, the horse carries on the mission and gets into some rather amusing scuffles including a sword fight that even makes the characters question the validity of the situation. Some of the other great moments are a result of simply clever animation. There's a great scene where Rapunzel has a devil of a time trying to hide Flynn's unconscious body into her closet. Somewhere the spirit of Curly Howard is sitting by watching proudly.

To bring the character of Rapunzel to life, the underrated Mandy Moore stepped up to the plate and smacked a home run. Voice work is simple in theory but can also be the most complex of all film jobs. Moore brought the right amount of charisma for giving credibility to Rapunzel's joy, fear and naivety. The animators even gave her a subtle nod by matching up their hairstyles at one point. Veteran Disney composer Alan Menken returns to familiar ground to score the primary music and the song numbers. And although Moore and her fellow castmates stay true to the loud boisterous singing tradition seen since the early days, the lyrics and melodies do not live up to the legacy. A Disney animated feature without a memorable show-stopping number is like eating pancakes without syrup. It's still appetizing but the absence of flavor makes it forgettable. It's too bad that a Howard Ashman only arrives once in a blue moon. I miss him now more than ever. 

The story is far from the most original of Disney offerings. It's basically The Hunchback of Notre Dame combined with the typical "lost princess" scenario. But it's the right dish to serve for the occasion. The Princess and the Frog was considered a return to Disney's roots. Tangled is that plus a glimpse of the future. It hasn't looked this bright for a long time.

Rating: 8

Country Strong

.

Title: Country Strong

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: May 15th, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG-13

The critic quote printed on Country Strong's DVD cover reads "You don't have to be a country fan to love this movie." I always get a kick out of seeing studios do this. It's a sign of desperation. In this case, they're trying to talk the consumer into reading the plot synopsis before skipping over it because of the title. The surest way to avoid a problem like this is to polish the product well enough for its word-of-mouth to reach beyond the core demographic. That isn't to say Country Strong doesn't have anything to offer. I know some people that really enjoyed the film. But if I had enough time to point out all the commonalities in this and other "rise and fall of a superstar" stories, I think even they would concede that it's not by any means special.

Prolific actress and now singing sensation Gwyneth Paltrow plays troubled country musician Kelly Canter. As it's often seen with real music superstars, partying too hard on the road can break a life and/or career. Kelly's image had taken a massive downfall since a tragic incident where her intoxicated body fell off the stage, causing a miscarriage of her unborn child. At her husband James' (Tim McGraw, who doesn't sing in this at all believe it or not) and her loyal fans' encouragement, a three-city comeback tour is planned. Along for the tour is Beau Hutton (Garrett Hedlund); Kelly's new adulterous boyfriend, and Chiles Stanton (Leighton Meester), the new opening act. The crew experiences ups, downs and at one point a complete derailment during the journey. Within this intention to repair a damaged life lies a cruel fate to destroy one.

Gwyneth Paltrow has done a nice job of revitalizing her own career in recent years. Her singing performances in Glee and various award shows were timed perfectly for this movie's promotion. It may be wise choice however to scale back a little from this point to avoid risk of overexposure. Country Strong's musical numbers are as dynamic as those seen at hot ticket concerts but are somewhat soured by unoriginal titles like "Shake That Thing" and "Give in to Me." Her supporting co-stars do some fine work of their own; arguably enough to be proclaimed as the show stealers.

Sadly, the song titles are not the only unoriginal things about this film. Drug and alcohol addiction was a more intriguing silver screen topic back when filmmakers took it upon themselves to push the envelope of controversial art. By now, it has become a bit redundant especially when the main character is fictional. Infidelity is hardly a fresh concept either, but this subplot never even had a chance to become interesting because of how inconsistently it was written. When a movie has no heroes or villains, it should be the result of well-written complex character identities for it to be done right. In this case, the characters abruptly change personalities by the chapter. Just when everyone seems to be on the same page and focused on bringing Kelly back to the limelight, there out to backstab each other just minutes later. Is this supposed to be about capitalistic fame or friendship and loyalty? The movie cannot make up its mind.

There is another underlying theme that I would have liked to see more of. Celebrities like Kelly Canter have legions of fans around the world. Although every one is valuable to the career, the ones that truly define them still believe in their hero unconditionally much like how a good parent treats their child. Not the blind slaves or bandwagon jumpers but the ones that are capable of recognizing faults yet still support them for the reason they became fans in the first place. Before each of Kelly's tour stops, we see some simulated press interviews with this archetype and each one is touching. The climatic moment where Kelly finally breaks out of the shadows and shines onstage could have been a lot more powerful had the build been more consciously developed. The strongest glimpse of this theme is seen when Kelly volunteers her time to a "Make-A-Wish" type charity by visiting and performing for a terminally ill child. (I wonder how many real life requests Paltrow gets for these sort of things.)

I cannot recommend Country Strong because of its weak novelty factor and limited appeal. But I don't consider this to be a bad career move by anyone involved. Shana Feste gets to direct like a concert manager. Paltrow, Hedlund and Meester become the stars of their own show-stopping numbers. And McGraw gets to.....um.....be someone other than himself for a while. See? Not a total loss.

Rating: 4 

 

Dinner for Schmucks

.

Title: Dinner for Schmucks

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: March 27th, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG-13

Today's pre-review joke: Paul Rudd's picture on the DVD cover is exactly how I looked while watching this movie.

A reworking of a French picture titled The Dinner Game, Dinner for Schmucks is about an executive named Tim (Paul Rudd) who will do just about anything to climb the corporate ladder and earn the coveted seventh floor office. After pitching a new business strategy, Tim gets the attention he is looking for but still has a rite of passage to complete before receiving the big promotion. The company's bigwigs like to organize dinner parties for their entertainment. But it's actually a game. To win, you have to bring along the biggest idiot you can find. Against his girlfriend's wishes, Tim decides to sell out his morals in order to win his first dinner game and impress the boss. It doesn't take long for the perfect schmuck to literally walk into his life.

Barry (Steve Carell) is an eccentric artist who has no friends except for the stuffed mice he uses for his dioramas. On his way to the neighborhood taxidermist, he nearly gets killed by crossing into the path of Tim's car. Seeing dollar signs, Tim invites Barry to the corporate dinner and offers to let him stay at his apartment for a while. Unfortunately for everyone, Barry has virtually no inhibitions and immediately tries to repair all of his new friend's personal issues including one involving an ex-girlfriend. All efforts turn Tim's life into an even bigger mess than before. With the party just days away, Tim's only hope in avoiding total life destruction is to keep his cool long enough for the big break to arrive.

Dinner for Schmucks had so much potential for some great comedic scenarios. Not a single one is realized. I once dubbed Steve Carell as the hardest working comedian in show business. I guess this proves even the best cannot save the worst written material. His character is supposed to be a lovable sidekick or at least I think he's meant to be this way. If that is the case, the writers failed. If not, they made a huge mistake. Barry's antics are worse than the kid we all remember from elementary school who thought he was the funniest guy on Earth but was actually the most annoying one. The reason that characters such as Steve Urkel or Alan from The Hangover work so well is that they are written to be annoying to everyone except the audience. Director Jay Roach has shown with Meet The Fockers that he understands why this is important. Unless I have different ideas on what constitutes as irritating, Roach missed an opportunity to get that point across.

And speaking of The Hangover, Zach Galifianakis shows up for a little while because he's a big Hollywood name right now. If he keeps getting roles like this, those days will be numbered. Galifianakis's I.R.S. agent character temporarily controls Barry's mind through psychic powers in one of many potentially funny scenes with no payoff. But none of them compare to when Tim's obnoxious ex-girlfriend tries to win him back with a lowbrow and painfully long striptease. I always watch a movie the entire way through to give it a fair chance. But when I realized there was still an hour left to watch after this point, the stop button looked mighty tempting.

One of the few moments that got a chuckle out of me was when Barry confuses Nelson Mandela with Morgan Freeman. Sadly, this joke appears in the trailer, is repeated and it only works if you remember that Freeman played Mandela in another movie. For this movie's sake, let's hope Invictus doesn't become too dated in the near future or there will be nothing left.

In my review for Let Me In, I noted that a big reason for why foreign films do not always get the remake treatment they deserve is because the studio misinterprets what made the original popular in the first place. Dinner for Schmucks is the perfect example. I haven't seen the original French film. But from what I've read, the script was filled with social satire and clever dialogue; neither of which are found here. Judging from the DVD outtakes, a moderate to large percentage of this movie was probably improvised. I am not against that practice, but it's shameful to throw away a perfectly good premise just to compete with your co-star for the biggest laugh. The aforementioned "dinner" doesn't even begin until the final twenty minutes. By then it's too late for us to fully appreciate the motley crew of idiots that deserved to be in a better movie.

With so much credible talent involved in the project, Dinner for Schmucks is amazingly disappointing. The only real schmuck was me for watching it. Don't be the next one.

Rating: 2

The American

.

Title: The American

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: March 20th, 2011

MPAA Rating: R

One day while browsing the IMDB home page for entertainment news headlines, I came across a link to a story concerning a screening of George Clooney's latest film The American. This was just a few weeks before its nationwide release. The provocative headline reported that the vast majority of the test audience professed strong negative reactions to the film. The author speculated that the early feedback could hurt the ongoing marketing. The article sparked my curiosity as they usually do when the content is filled with that kind of sensationalism. I eventually rented this movie with moderate reservations because the article had never left my memory. It was easy to understand and sympathize with that preview crowd. But I would not have joined their rally.

In the attention-gripping prologue, aging assassin Jack and his girlfriend are enjoying a peaceful morning in an isolated region of Sweden. Everything swiftly changes when the pair is ambushed by someone wanting them dead. Jack saves themselves from the shooter and then intentionally kills his girlfriend before leaving the scene. The action is fueled by no visible motivation so it can only be assumed that he did it under suspicion of a double cross.

After jumping around a few European towns, Jack eventually settles again somewhere in Italy. His mysterious employer assigns a new job. A fellow assassin (Thekla Reuten) wishes to acquire a top of the line sniper rifle for use on a local target and asks Jack to construct it for her. While this is being done, Jack woos a local prostitute (Violante Placido) to help fill the void of loneliness left behind from his former girlfriend's presence. It's implied that the incident in Sweden weighs heavily on his mind, possibly with a lot of guilt. It does not however affect his lingering sense of paranoia, because no matter where the American runs and hides, he will never find complete sanctuary from sudden death.

As stated earlier, it's easy to understand why some viewers will feel let down. This is not the movie that was promised by the studio promotional trailers. This is not George Clooney running and shooting through elaborate set pieces accompanied by pulsating music. It's actually an arthouse character study in the tradition of serious foreign cinema and was assembled by a foreign crew. There are few events to speak of and even less "action". Clooney and his limited supporting cast barely have any dialogue to recite. Director Anton Corbijn relies on the visuals to tell the story, set the mood and hint at character emotions. Everything from the establishing shots to the erotic moments take more than enough time to let its effect seep in. It's not a "less is more" approach because there is actually a lot to find here if you're observant enough.

I don't know why the Italian countryside was chosen for the setting but I do know that it works perfectly. The backdrop is ideally served for Jack's life of exile. It's small enough to avoid drawing attention and just active enough to blend into. The edge-of-your-seat moment for me was a late night foot chase through the streets. The area is walled in but the intersections have up to around eight branching paths which lead to seemingly infinite ways for the predator to surprise ambush his foe. It's so different than how an American studio would have handled the same scenario.

Clooney performs with masterful ambiguity. It's never perfectly clear what his current emotion is but there are always enough clues for an educated guess. Violante Placido's role as the new love interest is played much the same way where her allegiance remains questionable throughout her entire chapter. As lust-filled as their relationship can be at times, the mutual distrust prevents it from reaching the desired level.

As is the case with most foreign films, the ending is open-ended enough for the viewer to decide the characters' future. Those who have grown overly comfortable with mainstream American movies will undoubtedly groan at this practice. As a reasonably well-rounded film fan, I appreciated the screenwriter's trust in my ability to piece everything together as I saw fit. Sometimes the best stories don't need a definitive conclusion. Or as The American sets out to prove, sometimes nothing about a story needs to be that way.

Rating: 7

Unstoppable

.

Title: Unstoppable

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: March 19th, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG-13

There is something about a big powerful locomotive that produces a heedful aura. As a young child, a train crossing through the road and blocking the car's path was seen as an event. My first college dorm room was located near a busy railway. The loud horns often kept me awake at night with goosebumps. Even now if I was caught exercising my inner child and playing around with toy cars, it would be hard to resist simulating a big train crash that leaves behind a pile of mayhem in its path.

Unstoppable operates very much like a train itself. Slow to get going but becomes a fast and exciting ride after ample time. The premise is always an interesting one. When a worst-case workplace scenario occurs, a minor mistake escalates into a potential disaster.

On a fateful morning, veteran train engineer Frank Barnes (Denzel Washington) is paired with young conductor Will Colson (Chris Pine) for a routine shift at a Pennsylvania rail station. It's their first time working together and it gets off to a somewhat bad start when Will feels some resentment directed his way from Frank's similarly aged colleagues. Apparently some of the seasoned workers feel that Will's presence is threatening their job security. The pair begin their duties but limit their conversations which hints that both men are distracted by bigger personal issues.

Meanwhile at a related rail yard, a conductor makes a careless mistake when he disembarks from the cabin while his train is in motion to adjust the track path. Thanks to faulty brakes, the train unexpectedly picks up in acceleration and no one is able to catch up to it before it leaves the yard. Other rail workers are called in to reclaim control of the unmanned train but each attempt proves to be more difficult than the last because of the ever-increasing speed factor. If a solution is not soon reached, the runaway transport could be fatal especially with its hazardous cargo onboard. Frank and Will narrowly avoid their own demise when the two trains slightingly collide. With the rail traffic monitors running out of options, Frank takes matters into his own hands, utilizing all the collected technical knowledge to invent a plan for saving the day.

When I read the cast listing, I was anticipating something that resembled a buddy action flick complete with quips and the cliche pattern of two mismatched counterparts that discover they have more in common than initially thought. What I got instead was a working-class drama with heart. Although it's obvious from the start that Frank and Will are the heroes, the movie doesn't really treat them that way until they voluntarily make their move to quell the chaos. Up to that point, they exist as afterthoughts much like the way they're viewed by their superiors. Neither character anticipates their life having any greater significance than the duties of supporting the family and future family. That's why most of their conversations are about people other than themselves. The characters' believability helps in the suspension of disbelief during the less realistic moments.

The "ordinary guy turned hero" has become a trademark role for Denzel Washington in the past decade. While sometimes his tirades can put the performance into borderline self-parody, Washington wisely scales back into a more subdued state. The character is supposed to be past the point of anger, thus any thoughts of rebelliousness come with fatigue. Chris Pine has less to work with but puts forth a strong effort to separate himself from his peers of pretty-boy actors.

As for the action presentation, Unstoppable offers three different points of view in fast-paced transition. At one moment, we're onboard the train with Frank and Will to listen in on their thoughts and see things close-up. The next moment, there's an establishing shot of the runaway train showing no signs of slowing down. And then we see the vantage point of the television audience watching all the events unfold with narration from television anchors and the "breaking news" graphic running along the bottom of the screen. No unique emotion is left out.

What prevents Unstoppable from reaching classic status is Hollywood's typical unwillingness to stray too far from the blockbuster formula. The train is enough of a ferocious presence but that doesn't stop the producers from adding an unnecessary human antagonist. Harry Gregson-Williams' music score is appropriate but far too typical of the modern "assembly line" era of synthesized tunes.

If this movie had been released in the previous century, it could have easily ended up as a sequel to 1994's Speed. But since it's allowed to stand on its own, the thrills are more often genuine than cheap. I certainly recommend grabbing some popcorn and hopping aboard for the ride.

Rating: 8

Red

.

Title: Red

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: March 13th, 2011

MPAA Rating: PG-13

One of my favorite professional wrestlers to watch is Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat. He wasn't the biggest or loudest guy to perform in the squared circle, but the technical skills and all-around professionalism more than made up for it. He was so good that nearly every man that stepped in the ring with him for a match ended up looking like a million bucks by the time it ended; win, lose or draw. Sadly, an unexpected neck injury ended his career prematurely. Although it was theoretically possible to press on, Steamboat decided to hang up the boots instead of push his luck. Looking back, it was probably the best possible decision. He had a great legacy and to this day lives in better health than a good portion of his fellow war-torn ring veterans. As years passed however, I often wondered if we would ever get to see The Dragon wrestle one last match for old times' sake. I couldn't shake off the hunch that there was still some fire burning within that heart. Then came Wrestlemania 25. Fifteen years after calling it quits, The Dragon returned from exile to participate in a special attraction tag team match and proved that he could still kick some butt as if the 1980s never ended.

Ricky Steamboat's legacy is a lot like the team of Central Intelligence Agency retirees featured in Red; an adaptation of the Homage Comics series. They are over the hill but remain extremely dangerous and ready to raise hell all over again when the time calls for it. The agents are awaiting the right moment for their epic comeback; to show the world that they've still got it. As you can see, I get enthused by crowd pleasing movies like this. That's why it's still somewhat of a struggle to understand the reasons why I didn't like this one.

Bruce Willis plays former black-op Frank Moses, living in quiet yet restless retirement. The peace abruptly ends when a squad of assassins raid his home. After narrowly escaping termination, Frank retrieves his over-the-phone girlfriend Sarah (Mary-Louise Parker) from danger before making contact with his former CIA colleagues in the hopes of learning why they had been targeted. A few interviews later and it becomes clear that everyone in the group is connected to a political cover-up. If they don't act quickly enough, corruption will win and the resistance team will find themselves six feet under faster than their wills expect. But if they succeed, it's a last hurrah for all.

Comic book films like this often fall in one of two different categories. The realistic type with its own themes and ideas while borrowing the source material for guidelines on story advancement. (i.e. Batman Begins) And there's the stylish type that wants to visually imitate what the original artists envisioned (i.e. Watchmen). I've never read the original comic series but it's obvious that the latter option was chosen. The blocking and camera sight selection match up how a typical comic illustrates a scene. Since it's a globe-trotting tale, city welcoming signs are used to introduce story chapters which is a nice touch. I don't have many gripes over the choice in presentation. It's the failure of blending it well with the more complex production aspects that brings the enjoyment down.

Red wants to be humorous the whole way through and tries too hard to get there. Instead of the dialogue flying right off the pages, it sounds more like it's being read directly from the page. Improvisation seemed to be kept to a minimal. That strategy should be left for projects that require a more serious tone.

The casting is great when examined through individual cases. It's all for nothing when certain actors are forced to work scenes together without having any natural chemistry. Not to imply they are bad actresses, but Helen Mirren and Mary-Louise Parker contribute to some of the most awkward scenes for some odd reason. And speaking of Mirren, I find it amusing how a good portion of Red's promotional campaign involved showing off her character amounting massive destruction with a big machine gun. It is funny, don't get me wrong. Seeing a former Queen of England stand-in involved in that kind of scenario definitely helped bring some attention to my radar. What would have been wiser is saving that moment for a big payoff because now the movie cannot live up to the bar it set for itself.

Despite life and death hanging in the balance through every minute, the characters are having a blast revisiting the prime of their lives. For me, it felt like tagging along for the type of nostalgia trip that is fun while it lasts but the desire to do it over comes when the realization of unexplored potential sets in.

Rating: 5 

Due Date

.

Title: Due Date

Year of Release: 2010

Date Viewed: March 10th, 2011

MPAA Rating: R

If you're in the mood for a fun road trip comedy with likable characters, memorable dialogue and big laughs at every minute....rent Planes, Trains and Automobiles. Due Date wants to be that next classic but encounters too many holes in the road to travel very far.

The new odd couple is the always dependable Robert Downey Jr. as Peter Highman and rising star Zach Galifianakis as Ethan Trembley. A misunderstanding at the Atlanta airport causes the pair to be placed on the TSA's "no-fly" list. This and the loss of his wallet dampers Peter's plans for travelling home to Los Angeles to witness the birth of his first child; due to be born in just a few days. Always looking for a new friend (especially one that doesn't come from Facebook), Ethan offers him a ride. An apathetic Peter agrees but soon finds the trip to be unbearable because of his tactless personality clashing with Ethan's immaturity.

Since this is a road trip comedy, it comes as no surprise to see their journey get jeopardized by more than a few obstacles. Ethan's stash of "medical marijuana" gets them in trouble with the border police. Peter fights sleep deprivation which nearly kills him. But nothing causes more mayhem than when one of the characters says or does the wrong thing that drives the other one insane. And this is where the biggest problem lies. To make this sort of comedy work, the conflict needs to feel natural. Too often it feels forced here. It's not a case of bad chemistry. I'm still convinced both actors could work together on a really good comedy someday. It's the poor character development coming from the script that hurts more than anything. It's possible to get away with it when an actor like Downey Jr., who can be entertaining just by reading the phone book, is involved. But the same cannot be said yet for Galifianakis who seems to be a condition performer; that is, entertaining when the material is right for him. He played a great loser in The Hangover because his character was written in a cute and clever way. And Galifianakis' style of comedic timing complimented it perfectly. In Due Date, he's the same annoying loser minus the written inspiration. One scene held a glimmer of hope. Upon learning that Ethan dreams of becoming an actor, Peter challenges him to demonstrate his skills with an improvised monologue. Ethan's vulnerable side comes through when he breaks down emotionally in front of his comrade. This opens the door for the characters to find some connection, but the scene is quickly forgotten about and the opportunity is wasted.

Downey Jr. is intended to be the square Steve Martin-type to Galifiankis' John Candy imitation. But his character is so bitter and his choice of words so mean-spirited that I dreaded to watch him have conversations with anyone much less his lonely soul of a travel mate. Not to mention the exchanges are often wooden so it hurts the movie's ability to earn laughs through dialogue, which leaves dependence on gimmicks and plot turns to pick up the slack. Some of them like the great escape from the border police are entertaining enough. Others like Ethan's dog imitating his master's method of sexually pleasuring himself seem like they came from the bottom of the barrel of filler ideas.

A few other notable actors appear in what I like to call pit-stop subplots. Most of these scenarios are here to enhance the backstory of the main characters and they work suitably enough. One glaring exception is Danny McBride's scene; an outrageous side show that will probably please most of his slapstick-happy fans but left me impatiently waiting to see the plot move forward.

Movies like these make me miss John Hughes during his prime. The presence could have elevated Due Date's mediocre material into something more memorable thanks to his knack for making audiences laugh at people's misfortune yet caring for their destiny all the same. This movie is stuck between following in his footsteps while trying to avoid stumbling over its own flimsy shoes.

Rating: 4