Archive | March, 2013

Dogma (1999)

5 Mar

dogma_1999_1

Smith’s Verdict: ***1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

When “Dogma” was released in 1999, it was met with outrage even before it came out. Because of its subject matter—which looked like satire of religion and belief—“Dogma” caused organized protests and much controversy in many countries. It also (as I’m reading from the film’s Wikipedia page), the controversy delayed release of the film and led to at least two death threats against the film’s director/writer Kevin Smith.

Well, you know what, guys? God has a sense of humor. And that’s exactly what Kevin Smith’s disclaimer that comes before the film states, along with saying that ten minutes or so into the film might offend most people, and that the film is a work of comedic fantasy, “not to be taken seriously.” If you don’t want to see a comedic fantasy revolving around Catholic belief, then for the love of God (excuse me), don’t see it. If you can’t stand the profane language that runs throughout the movie, don’t see it. Don’t take it too seriously.

OK, so there’s basic news provided in this movie, stating that Jesus was black, there was a 13th apostle left out of the Bible, God’s a woman, She’s a skee-ball fanatic, Jesus had brothers and sisters (apparently, Mary didn’t remain a virgin), and are you still with me? I figured you’d have just stopped reading after that last piece of “news.” If you stayed, congratulations—you’re not ignorant.

Me being a born-again Christian, I’ll admit I was a bit nervous about watching this movie, but I didn’t express rage before I saw it…I had enough sense, even at the age of 16, when I first watched it. Is it offensive? Yes, I should say that right off the bat, it is offensive, though that’s mainly due to the constant use of the “F” word and sex jokes. But the movie is also strangely intriguing and, I’ll have to say, very funny. Kevin Smith has always had an ear for dialogue and uses it to mix the Bible with the modern times. The result is “Dogma,” a dialogue-heavy but weirdly entertaining movie about…(sigh) a possible loophole in God’s plans.

I’ll tread easily here to save my own soul.

The movie’s story features two fallen angels named Bartleby (Ben Affleck) and Loki (Matt Damon). The two were banished to Wisconsin after thousands of years ago, Loki was the angel of death until Bartleby talked him into quitting (and giving God “the finger”). Now in the present day, they come across a loophole that could allow them back into Heaven. But that’s a huge problem, as explained by the Metatron (or the Voice of God, to be more accurate). The Metatron (Alan Rickman) explains to a cynical Catholic woman named Bethany (Linda Fiorentino) that if the two angels succeed, it would prove God to be infallible. When that happens, existence could be nothingness.

Bethany, dubbed the “last scion,” is sent on a crusade to New Jersey in order to keep that from happening. Helping her are a group of misfits—the 13th apostle named Rufus (Chris Rock), ticked off about his exclusion from the written word because he’s black; “prophets” Jay and Silent Bob (Kevin Smith’s running characters in his movies, again played Jason Mewes and Kevin Smith himself); and a muse in the form of a beautiful woman (Salma Hayek)…who has writer’s block.

The screenplay is full of ideas surrounding Catholic beliefs and it features many memorable lines, such as when Bethany asks Rufus if he knew Jesus Christ, and Rufus responds, “He owes me 12 bucks!” There are rules for angels, who can take human form and retract their own wings (oh, and they have no genitalia—Metatron states in a deadpan matter, “I’m as atomically impaired as a Ken doll”). There are many issues of religion as to how no one’s truly wrong as long as one has faith, as well as certain misreadings of the Bible that Rufus likes to point out. There’s even a scene in which Loki goes back to his original duties to try and please God—he and Bartleby go to a family-franchise studio and state the executives are idolaters but are in fact terrible human beings themselves. Instead of a fiery sword, Loki uses a gun. And there’s the constant difference to be noticed between Jay and Silent Bob. Jay’s a loudmouth who never shuts up about wanting to sleep with Bethany (or anything else, what little there is for him to talk about); Silent Bob is more sensible, but rarely utters a word.

The script is all over the map with its ideas and even provides villains for our heroes. You’d think Bartleby and Loki would be the only conflicted characters for Bethany and company to come across. No, the Devil isn’t involved in the story, but there are a group of demons—a muse-turned-demon named Azrael (Jason Lee), three rollerblading hockey punks, and a monster made entirely out of excrement—making sure that Bartleby and Loki do achieve their goal because they’d rather not exist than go back to Hell.

Strangely enough, even with everything that goes on in this story (and with the movie’s running time of 130 minutes), I was interested and wasn’t bored for a second. I listened to the movie. I realized that Smith isn’t a blasphemer—he creates a satire here, but like most great satires, they do wind up providing morals.

Smith may not be a director in respective terms, but he’s a darn good writer.

All of the actors are game for this material. Linda Fiorentino’s deadpan cynicism—her character believes God is dead in the beginning of the film—makes for an interesting heroine. Chris Rock is solid as the comic relief character—you know, aside from Jason Mewes’ obnoxious Jay character. Alan Rickman is fantastic and shows a great deal of game, particularly when he shouts lines like, “Stop a couple of angels and thus negating all existence—I hate it when people need it spelled out for them!” Ben Affleck and Matt Damon show enthusiasm, and even George Carlin, in a small role as a Catholic priest, has some nice moments.

The disclaimer followed by the story’s beginning states that within ten minutes or so, people would probably be offended. It does start out to live up to that promise—there’s a statue of the Buddy Christ (Jesus with a smile, a wink, and a thumbs-up), Loki telling a nun why he doesn’t believe in God (he claims to be an Atheist by using “The Walrus and the Carpenter” as his source), and then there’s that loophole (which, don’t worry, is resolved—I won’t say how). But the disclaimer also states not to take it seriously because it’s all for comedic fantasy, as noticed in the discussion—that also comes in the beginning—of dogmatic law and church law is defined and compared to each other. Just relax and enjoy the show.

Stargate (1994)

5 Mar

images

Smith’s Verdict: *1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

Imagine you are one of many people who step into an ancient mystic stargate that is said to take you a million light years across the universe.

What would your reaction be? Awe? Amazement? Surprise? All of the above? My reaction would be “all of the above.” But unfortunately, the only reaction to the characters in the sci-fi action/thriller “Stargate” is “What a rush.” They step into the stargate, go through a weird trip in space and time, and find themselves inside a pyramid on a distant planet. They don’t even seem surprised that the stargate didn’t kill them on entry. They just walk about the land as if thinking, “OK, we’re here. What now?” How about taking in some of this discovery?

“Stargate” is a big-budget sci-fi romp that seems empty, despite the top-notch actors, the amazing sets and the nifty special effects. It’s the script that doesn’t take chances or even seem at all like this is going to be fun. Directed and co-written by Roland Emmerich, “Stargate” doesn’t seem to have thrills within its thrilling, mysterious storyline. This is one of those movies where the marketing is a lot more compelling than the actual film that is being marketed. The trailer for this movie showed that there is a mystical, otherworldly stargate that can send people from one world to another. It never showed where the stargate took them or what they found when they got there. This way of marketing left moviegoers wondering what was in store.

But sadly, the discovery is a disappointment. We learn that this distant planet (which looks a lot like Egypt, but the three moons indicate that it isn’t) is home to the human race that were left behind when the Sun God Ra created life on Earth, as well as the stargates. The stargates have been destroyed since and the people are slaves living in the desert. So you can probably guess by what I’m saying in this paragraph that, yes, aliens did create the Egyptian pyramids.

OK…so what?

The aliens themselves seemed too human to be interesting—that’s because they are humans who speak only Ancient Egyptian. Their ruler—the Son God Ra—is definitely not much better. Ra takes human form because it seems to suit him, but he looks more like a showgirl at a costume party and did not seem like any kind of a threat. And then when he talks (in his own language, of course, with English subtitles), his voice is distorted—it didn’t even seem like the voice fit him. Oh, and here’s a hoot—Ra is played by Jaye Davidson from “The Crying Game.”

As “Stargate” opens (in, as a caption informs us, “Egypt 1928”), Egyptologists discover the arch-like, mystic-looking stargate. We then flash to the “present day” (another caption—there are captions like that here) in which a nutty Egyptologist named Daniel Jackson (James Spader, complete with glasses and long blond hair) is brought into a top-secret government facility that has been storing the stargate all this time. He is hired to decode the hieroglyphics that could activate the stargate. Of course Jackson is able to but here’s my question—after all this time of trying to unlock this big secret, couldn’t they have found someone better than a young Egyptologist whose methods have been described as “nutty” through all these decades?

But I digress. Jackson joins the tough-as-nails Col. Jack O’Neil (Kurt Russell) and a team of soldiers armed with automatic weapons as the group steps into the stargate and arrives at this strange world. And it was, I might add, indeed a “rush.”

It’s here that many clichés are used—O’Neil shows a young alien a few modern conveniences, the aliens fear the newcomers but learn to accept them, and such. But the most overused is this—Jackson is mistaken for a god because he wears around his neck an ancient Egyptian heirloom given to him for “good luck.” Eventually, there must be a heavy-handed, special-effects filled, action-packed climax in which the humans and the aliens must fight against Ra and his henchmen. But the characters are so under-developed that I didn’t care for them when they had to fight for their lives. Plus, it’s a copout that the writers had the bright idea of having a stargate that could send people who step into it to travel one million light years away from home, but could only think of shooting everybody when they got there. Another thing I must mention about the story—Jackson claims that he knows how to get back home. Not once do any of the soldiers ask how he knows—he just knows because it’s convenient enough.

The actors do what they can with nothing roles. I like Kurt Russell and James Spader, but their characters are underwritten here. At least they tried. Jaye Davidson cannot be taken seriously as the ruler of the universe.

“Stargate” is a movie that is empty in its storytelling. The sets, cast, and special effects are there but the story needed a lot of adjustments. Why not have more interesting characters step into this intergalactic stargate and discover something wonderful and even more mysterious about the secrets of the known universe? Or even the unknown universe? The possibilities are endless. But all “Stargate” can think about is blowing stuff up. And in the way of something more interesting in the background of the plot, that’s not interesting.

Starsky & Hutch (2004)

5 Mar

The Flick Chicks Movie Reviews critics Starsky & Hutch

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

You don’t have to be a fan of a TV show that a new movie is based off of. You don’t even have to have watched it. I was completely ignorant of the 1970s TV cop show “Starsky & Hutch,” and watching the 2004 movie adaptation of the same name, I didn’t care that I didn’t see the show. I laughed. Isn’t that enough for a comedy? I did laugh. I enjoyed this film for two reasons—1) it was funny, and 2) most of the fun came from the chemistry between the two actors Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson as the title characters.

Ben Stiller is the hyperactive, worrisome, ridiculously-curly-haired Starsky (“For your information, my hair is naturally curly. Feel it.”) and Owen Wilson is the more outgoing, blond-haired bad boy Hutch. Both men are cops, but Hutch knows more about life on the streets. Pretty soon, their police chief (Fred Williamson) believes they deserve each other, and so he assigns them as partners. At first, they aren’t very fond of each other—Hutch insults Starsky’s hair right away—but they become friends and go on a case that the movie requires them to figure out.

The bad guy in this movie is a drug dealer named Reese Feldman (Vince Vaughn). He and his assistant (Jason Bateman) have just created a new kind of cocaine that police dogs can’t sniff or track down. What gets Starsky and Hutch on the case is when they discover a dead body near the river—the dead body of a man killed by Reese.

Their investigation leads them to picking up a couple of cheerleaders (Carmen Electra and Amy Smart, “B-E-A-U-tiful,” as Jim Carrey would say) and taking them to their apartment so they can share a funny moment that reminds us that the movie takes place in the 70s. I like it when Owen Wilson croons a single originally sung by David Soul, who played the original Hutch in the TV show. Starsky and Hutch’s investigation also leads them to a scene that audiences seem to love and got a big laugh, but for me, I felt a little indifferent. Maybe I didn’t find it hilarious when Starsky interrupted Reese’s daughter’s Bar Mitzvah party, shot through the garage door, opened it to reveal a pony as a gift for the daughter, and then everyone sees the pony fall down dead. (“Are you OK, little pony?”) Maybe it rubbed me the wrong way.

This is one of those comedies in which a lot depends on the chemistry from the actors. This is the sixth movie featuring Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson in a movie together and they come off as a really effective comedy duo. Separately, you get almost too much of them. But when you put them together, they create the perfect comic timing. Owen Wilson was in another film adaptation of a TV show called “I Spy.” That movie didn’t do much for me and I didn’t laugh much. I did laugh a lot during “Starsky & Hutch.”

Todd Phillips, who also did “Old School,” has a movie that is rich with ideas. Also enjoyable is Snoop Dogg as Huggy Bear, a Superfly clone whose fashion remains in the 70s. And then there’s the running joke about Starsky’s great-looking Ford Gran Torino and Starsky’s attachment to it. There’s one scene in which Starsky and Hutch try the impossible that always seems to work in action movies. They try to drive the car really fast off a pier to land it on the bad guy’s boat. Does it make it? I will not say. What I will say is this—I love it when Starsky tries to rescue the car. Some ideas that don’t really work (for me, at least) include the pony scene. And then there’s a very weird cameo by Will Ferrell, which I will not give away. “Starsky & Hutch” is a fun, satisfying comedy.

Spider-Man (2002)

4 Mar

Spiderman-Kiss

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

Every superhero must have an origin story and “Spider-Man” is an intriguing one. Spider-Man, of course, is the popular superhero from Marvel Comics. As many of his fans will know, Spider-Man is young Peter Parker when he’s not saving lives. This first film adaptation of the comics tells us how Peter Parker became Spider-Man. The result is quite entertaining.

The best thing about “Spider-Man” is the casting of Tobey Maguire as the hero. I’m not sure they could have picked a better young actor to make Peter Parker likable and convincing (except maybe Jake Gyllenhaal). Peter is a nerdy high school senior who hardly gets any respect. His best friend is Harry Osborn (James Franco), the underachieving son of rich scientist Norman Osborn (Willem Dafoe). And his crush is Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst), who lives in the house next to his Aunt May (Rosemary Harris) and Uncle Ben (Cliff Robertson). Oh yeah, and she’s currently dating Harry.

One day on a school trip to a lab at Columbia University, Peter is bitten by a spider of unknown species. That’s when things really start to change. He develops arachnid powers. He can see without his glasses, he is suddenly strong, he has spider-like reflexes, he can make webs appear out of his hands, he can climb walls, and he has amazing agility. At first, Peter wants to use his powers for personal gain (fighting a wrestling match for three thousand dollars so he can buy a car to impress Mary Jane—he wins the fight, but he gets conned). But after a serious tragedy occurs, Peter learns that “with great power comes great responsibility.” He creates a suit suitable for his powers and becomes New York’s arachnid superhero Spider-Man, fighting crime and rescuing people in need.

But it wouldn’t be a full superhero movie without a villain to develop powers coincidentally as Peter gets used to his own. Norman Osborn has been creating a new kind of energy source for superhuman strength and a jet-powered one-man glider. But something goes very wrong and Norman develops a sort of “Jekyll and Hyde” double personality. Norman is constantly controlled by something strange and sinister (I don’t know what—the movie calls for a certain suspension of disbelief). He becomes the Green Goblin, complete with that same glider and a horrific-looking metal suit. This is where the movie actually starts to falter.

The first half of the movie is better than the second. It’s so much more interesting to see Peter learn to use his powers accurately (or as accurate as can be). He stands up to the school bully and has enough confidence to have occasional conversations with Mary Jane. But more importantly, he learns that because he has these amazing powers, he has to use them responsibly. The second half is full of action and there are times when I could tell a CGI Spider-Man from a live actor, mainly because at times, Spider-Man moves almost like a cartoon character than a flesh-and-blood hero.

“Spider-Man” was directed by Sam Raimi, who also made the superhero tale “Darkman,” as well as the “Evil Dead” movies. He has fun giving the characters comic-book reactions to Peter/Spider-Man when something amazing happens. How can you not like the moment when Peter quickly rescues Mary Jane after she slips over some apple juice split on the cafeteria floor? He’s able to catch all the condiments on Mary Jane’s lunch tray before they drop to the floor so that Mary Jane can say, “Wow—great reflexes!”

I did enjoy Willem Dafoe’s “Jekyll and Hyde” persona, but as the Green Goblin, he’s not an effective villain. Take the scene where he makes himself known for the first time—in appearance, he looks like he would fit in through an episode of “Power Rangers.” And when he goes over the top, he really goes over the top, although his manic persona does cause a few good laughs.

One of the best things about “Spider-Man” is surprisingly not the action sequences, but the more quiet, simpler scenes that are touching, memorable, and great to watch. Peter’s talks with the supporting characters and the kiss between Spider-Man and Mary Jane are among those (that kiss is the most memorable—he’s upside down and she’s standing in the street, she takes half of his mask off, revealing his mouth and chin, and kisses him). Also, Peter and Mary Jane make a cute couple. But since Mary Jane is someone Peter really cares about, that puts her in more sticky situations than Lois Lane.

I want to say more about Tobey Maguire—he’s brilliant in this movie. He has never, to my knowledge, turned in a bad performance. As Peter, Maguire brings a lot of appeal and emotion depth. He never seems to be overacting. He takes the situation how any average teenager would react if he discovered he was half-spider. We are with Peter throughout this movie and we care for him. Also in times of tragedy, Maguire doesn’t hit a wrong note. I think Tobey Maguire is a part of perfect casting. Kirsten Dunst is suitably spunky as Mary Jane. James Franco, however, is a bit stiff as Harry.

“Spider-Man” is not one of the best superhero movies. But I am giving it three stars because I was intrigued by the origins of Spider-Man and the casting of Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker. You can enjoy it for what it is.

First Blood (1982)

4 Mar

sylvester-stallone-first-blood-431x300

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“First Blood” is a movie about a Vietnam vet/war hero who fights in a new war—this time, in the woods outside a small town against its police force. That premise alone sounds like it’d make an intriguing action film while also making for some legitimate drama, and for the most part, “First Blood” succeeds. Sure, there’s implausibility in many of its stunts and tactics, but they work mainly because Sylvester Stallone, acting as the hero, makes it work. Already making his mark as the physical-type title role in “Rocky,” Stallone also made his mark as one of the great physical actors. In “First Blood,” we can believe that he can escape an entire police force in their station simply because he wills it. That leads to the chase outside of town, into the woods, and into a situation he shouldn’t be able to escape. Even that, no matter how implausible it is, seems believable enough because that’s how Stallone plays it.

Stallone is easy to catch our attention in “First Blood”—he owns the screen. He plays John Rambo, a drifter who is also a returned Vietnam veteran that we learn later has experience in survival. He’s just passing through a small town, hoping to meet one of the people from his troop only to discover that he died of cancer. Realizing he’s the lone veteran in his troop, he walks sullenly through town. However, the local sheriff Teasle (Brian Dennehy) is suspicious of him. He stops Rambo and gives him a ride to the town limits, hoping he’ll go away and non-subtly hinting that “his kind” aren’t welcome in this town. But Rambo doesn’t want to leave just yet without getting something to eat, and Teasle places him under arrest.

This is where things get pretty intense. Rambo’s interrogation is not handled well and the cops’ behavior evokes painful memories from his experiences in Vietnam, so Rambo escapes and makes his way outside the town and into the forest, with the police force in pursuit. However, what they didn’t count in was Rambo’s resourcefulness. He’s able to make things miserable for these people, and he does this because they deserve what they get coming to them. He wasn’t even a threat to them before, and yet they treat him as such. Even when Rambo unintentionally kills one of them and tries to give himself up so no one else will die, they continue to open fire at him. Sheriff Teasle will not let it go, but Rambo’s skills turn out to be too much for his men. And so, the military arrives, led by Rambo’s former commanding officer in Vietnam, Colonel Trautman (Richard Crenna).

The first half of “First Blood,” in which Rambo lives off the land and uses his skills to nab the hunting police, is well-done. We feel sympathy for Rambo and anger for Teasle and his men. We want Rambo to give it to these jackasses. There are many ways Rambo is able to outsmart them—even by camouflaging himself (in a hurry, I’d guess) in the green so he can strike and then sink back into invisibility.

But the second half has its problems. For one thing, the action isn’t as intense or even as interesting as two other main elements it has to it. One of those two elements is the character of Trautman, whose loyalties are in question. He wants to help the man he trained into this fighting machine, but at the same time, he’s in charge of those looking to bring him down as Rambo starts his own war with them. This is intriguing irony and makes for some good moments. The other element that I felt was very strong was Rambo’s final speech to Trautman about how he’s haunted by his nightmares of Vietnam, but will never survive in this society because of what he was taught. He feels like he belongs in a world of war, not in a peaceful society. That’s a powerful speech, but it was followed by an action sequence that wasn’t particularly well-done as Rambo finally raises all hell on the town. It’s not that it isn’t shot right or anything, but it’s that it’s mainly just executed as a bore, especially compared to the stimulating first half.

Mostly though, “First Blood” is a good movie. It’s not merely about an action hero walking around, kicking ass. It’s about something more than you’d expect from hearing about it—how one chooses to live through one society after the nightmares conveyed by the past. It’s treated with more intelligence than you’d expect. Stallone’s great, but also, Richard Crenna is strong and Brian Dennehy plays the sheriff character as so hateful that you anticipate his comeuppance. “First Blood” is a well-acted, well-paced action film.

One on One (1977)

4 Mar

628x471

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“One on One” is a sports film that is utterly predictable, but has its heart in the right place. It’s a feel-good comedy that is quite engaging, getting past the clichés seen in most sport movies. If the story of a small-town jock making it into a big-city university and hoping to win the girl of his dreams sounds familiar, it basically is. It’s a reliable formula that audiences are interested in. Audiences can guess (and mostly guess correctly) who will the big game at the end of s sports film, but it’s the journey that leads up to it that really matters most. “One on One” is a good movie—it’s well-acted, funny, and has a good sense of its environment, particularly when the environment is a basketball court.

Robby Benson, who co-wrote the screenplay at age 21 with his father, portrays the protagonist, a small-town, high school basketball player named Henry Steele. He’s a shy, naïve teenage boy with wide eyes, certain gullibility, good nature, and, of course, great skills in basketball. He’s only 5 feet 10 inches, but the coach from a big university thinks he could use him. The coach grants him a scholarship (and a new car), which Henry accepts.

Henry is welcomed into the system and is given a tutor, an alumnus big brother, and a spot on the team. His tutor is a cute young woman named Janet, played by Annette O’Toole with great appeal. In this film, O’Toole shows a remarkable screen presence and an appealing personality so that when Henry surely falls in love with her midway through the film, we don’t doubt it. Their scenes are the best thing about “One on One.” They’re played with soft humor and genuine sweetness. At first, this naïve kid doesn’t know how to feel around this cute grad student. But the next time they meet for a tutoring session, he impresses her—she says that he’s the first jock she’s met that has read “Moby Dick.”

Then later in the film, Janet breaks up with her boyfriend—a bearded professor for whom she’s a teaching assistant—and gives Henry support off the court. As their relationship develops, she even asks him to move in with her. (I love how Henry silently mouths, “Wow!,” after being asked to move in with this gorgeous grad student,)

But there’s a problem—Henry, who started out playing well on the team, is playing lousily and it becomes revealed that that’s because he’s constantly thinking of Janet. At one point, his friend helps him by taking him to a party—this doesn’t go well and it leads to the coach’s secretary (Gail Strickland, very funny) making a pass at Henry…in a very big way, let’s just leave it that. Also, the same friend gives Henry some speed to make him play basketball with manic energy.

This leads to the coach (G.D. Spradlin) into believing he’s made a mistake in granting this kid a four-year sports scholarship. He asks Henry to give up the scholarship. Henry refuses, so the coach does many things to humiliate/hurt him. What do you call a guy like this, without typing a certain seven-letter word for “jerk?” Well, believe me—“jerk” isn’t enough to a guy as despicable as is portrayed in this film.

All I’ve mentioned is handled well. As predictable as this film can be, particularly with the final climax involving the big game, “One on One” is still sweet and funny. Robby Benson is likable in the main role, Annette O’Toole is engaging, and on top of this, the film’s message about not giving up isn’t thrown in your face. “One on One” is a nicely-done feel-good movie.

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

4 Mar

captain-america-the-first-avenger-movie-image-76

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“Captain America: The First Avenger” is the last piece of the superhero puzzle to give the general public yet another superhero to join as part of the Avengers. Knowing the Avengers from the comic book series, it was inevitable that a “Captain America” film had to be released among the two “Iron Man” movies, “The Incredible Hulk,” and “Thor.” After that, we would have to wait for “The Avengers.” So, it would seem like this would be more of a bland requirement than a real movie. But having different people work on these films works as an advantage.

“Captain America: The First Avenger” is a real movie. It has setups, payoffs, action, adventure, characters, and another superhero origin story. Yes, it has a great share of CGI action sequences and it can get pretty silly at times, but it’s far from an incomprehensible mess. It has real production value, a nice weight to the story, and a hero we care about and root for.

The reason the film is subtitled “The First Avenger,” even though it’s the last entry before “The Avengers,” is because its main story occurs during World War II. How Captain America is brought to life in the modern-day is comic-book logic (obviously not a spoiler), but as long as I don’t get to see that annoying eyepatch-sporting Samuel L. Jackson character giving yet another ominous warning of something big to come, I’m fine. (By the way, I truly hate to dis Jackson, one of my favorite actors, for this.)

The story centers around a 90-pound, five-foot-nothing weakling named Steve Rogers (Chris Evans, much more appealing here than he was as one of the Fantastic Four). He’s a stubborn kid with a can-do attitude, but a tendency to get himself beat upon by bullies because he doesn’t run away from a fight. He gets rejected by the US Army, but after trying and trying, he eventually makes it into basic training. He’s usually the one slowing down from everyone else, but he seems like the perfect choice for the testing of a scientific experiment, supervised by a scientist (Stanley Tucci with a German accent) and Col. Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones, playing the always-welcome role of…Tommy Lee Jones), that will apparently enhance a weakling’s physical strength.

Admittedly, this experiment is pretty silly, as it’s described as making it so that your nature will come through to your physicality, so that if you have a good mind, you become great. Courageous Steve goes into the machine and becomes a strong supersoldier. He’s a foot taller, is very muscular, and is faster than most men alive. The Army gives him a silly costume, though a cool-looking shield, and markets him as Captain America, the great American hero.

The first half of the movie is pretty strong, as we get the origin story of Steve Rogers becoming Captain America. It’s nicely-paced, well-developed, and with some pretty darn convincing effects—the effects that make Chris Evans into a short, wimpy dwarf are incredibly seamless. The character is quite likable and his early dilemmas are engaging. He wants to do right, even if he doesn’t have the physical strength, and has a can-do attitude with the courage to go for it. When he becomes Captain America, there’s a nice sendup to the ‘40s war-time relief in which Captain America makes public appearances, complete with a cheesy song and female dancers. Other good things about the first half—Steve has a nice relationship with the sultry Agent Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell); there’s a manufacturer character named Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper), whom we all know is Tony “Iron Man” Stark’s grandfather; and there are some pretty exciting action sequences, particularly one in which Captain America sneaks into enemy territory to break out prisoners of war.

The second half of the movie is exciting, yes. But it’s somewhat ordinary. We know the drill—more action sequences (though some good ones) and a final showdown between the hero and the villain. And that’s another problem with the movie—the villain. Honestly, I don’t remember much about him, nor did I care for what he was after. Give the over-the-top Loki in “Thor” some credit for being deliciously (and needlessly) evil. I’m not sure what Red Skull (Hugo Weaving) had in mind. I guess he had this secret society that was planning to use this McGuffin to rule the world, but nothing is as clear as we’d like it to be in our superhero movies. Also, this is where the pacing starts to become inconsistent—for a film with two hours of running time, there are many parts that felt rushed.

However, “Captain America: The First Avenger” has more pleasures than flawed faults. Comic book readers will be pleased and those who love superhero movies will find enjoyment from this. Director Joe Johnston (directing his first superhero movie since 1991’s “The Rocketeer”) creates a broad narrative that entertains and has waiting for more adventures of Captain America. And be honest—you’re even more excited when you stick around after the end credits and see another foreword about “The Avengers.”

Commando (1985)

4 Mar

commando-schwarzenegger

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“Commando” is an action flick that goes by every action cliché in the book—one-liners, explosions, chases, camouflage (that really doesn’t cover much), kidnapped children, and the Austrian muscleman himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger. This film does everything you can think of for an action picture and more. It’s silly…but it’s also a ton of fun. It’s an explosion-filled, shoot-em-up tale that is the key picture for a good time. It’s easy to laugh at all of the clichés, but I personally embraced them.

Schwarzenegger plays Col. John Matrix, a retired commando, who lives in the mountains with her eight-year-old daughter. They live a sweet life (maybe too sweet; we get an opening-credit montage of them doing things like eating ice cream, going fishing, and feeding a deer in the woods) until a group of thugs working for a deposed Latin American dictator (Dan Hedaya) kidnap the daughter. They want Matrix to kill the president of Val Verde or they’ll kill him and the girl. So Matrix escapes the thug holding him and sets out on a vengeful quest to get his daughter back.

His companion on the quest is a sexy flight attendant named Cindy (Rae Dawn Chong). She assists Matrix in a series of strange and funny action sequences. Yes, there is humor involved, particularly involving Matrix’s hunt for a thug named Sully (David Patrick Kelly) in a mall. Whether or not this was intended to be humorous, I laughed and had a good time.

OK, that’s probably a harsh statement because I’m sure a lot of the comedy is intentional. I know the wisecracks are in high class. My favorite is, “You’re a funny guy, Sully. I like you. That’s why I’m going to kill you last.” Said in deadpan by Schwarzenegger is just fabulous.

But when all is said and done, this is an action picture. Matrix does all sorts of things to get where he needs to go. He pushes a truck (with himself inside it) down a mountain even though his brakes have been cut just so he can catch up with the bad guys. He jumps from an airplane into a lake. He fights a dozen mall cops who misunderstand this giant beefcake. Even the likable Cindy has her moment with a bazooka. It all leads to a noisy, explosive climax at an island full of bad guys with guns and it features the number-one cliché in an action climax: when the bad guys shoot at the good guy, they miss while the good guy never misses. Do you even wonder if he’s even aiming? And of course, he has to take on the main villain one-on-one. And this film doesn’t have one (the Dan Hedaya character), but two—the other villain is someone who used to work in the same field as Matrix.

“Commando” is a silly action film through and through and it looks like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Rae Dawn Chong were having a great time filming it. It’s explosive, violent, silly, stupid…and just a ton of fun.

Joy Ride (2001)

3 Mar

joy-ride-original

Smith’s Verdict: ***1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

“Joy Ride” is a popcorn movie that doesn’t require a lot of intelligence—it’s just one of those thrillers that require a suspension of disbelief, has a consistent fast pace with a running time of 90 minutes, and is also a good deal of fun. To be sure, there are questions to ask about certain parts of the movie (and I’ll get to that later), the bottom line is that the makers of “Joy Ride” succeeded in making a preposterous, entertaining, adrenaline-filled thrill ride.

The movie starts out in a suitably plausibly manner. Nice-guy/college-student Lewis (Paul Walker) is going home for the summer, from California to New Jersey. His best friend Venna (Leelee Sobieski), whom he actually wants to be his girlfriend, goes to school in Boulder, Colorado. So, Lewis decides to buy a used car (a 1971 Chrysler Newport) and drive them both home. On the way, Lewis makes a stop to bail his incompetent older brother Fuller (Steve Zahn) out of jail in Salt Lake City. Fuller has a knack for getting himself into trouble, so it becomes natural that the elements that follow in the plot can be traced back to him.

Fuller rides with Lewis on the way to Boulder. When regular small-talk doesn’t work between the two brothers, Fuller buys a CB radio (“it’s like a prehistoric Internet”) for entertainment on the road. Fuller talks Lewis into imitating a woman’s voice in the hopes of suckering some poor trucker in for a joke. With the handle of Candy Cane, Lewis is able to set up a date with a certain Rusty Nail. That night, Fuller and Lewis set it up so that Rusty Nail believes that “Candy Cane” is at the motel they’re staying at, in Room 17, where an obnoxious customer stays. Fuller and Lewis are in the room next door, listening in on their prank going underway…and then they hear some weird noises, almost like thudding and choking.

It’s then that the practical joke takes a dark turn. The man in the room is murdered (with his jaw ripped off). Fuller and Lewis are thrown out of town, but they have something bigger to worry about—a stalking, taunting, psychotic trucker hot on their tail. They barely survive an encounter, thinking it’s over. But by the time they pick up Venna, the terror is far from over.

One of the elements that show “Joy Ride’s” effectiveness is the fact that the villain is never seen. We see his big-ass truck approaching; we hear his gravelly voice (which only Ted Levine can provide) on the CB; and he constantly sets up ominous trick after trick to terrorize Fuller, Lewis, and Venna. If that sounds like Steven Spielberg’s 1971 thriller “Duel,” which was also about a character being chased by a faceless truck driver, you’d be half-right. While both movies feature an ominous-looking, huge truck whose driver is never seen, they’re different in tone. “Duel” was a psychological thriller that featured the insanity that ensued as the hero became more and more frightened as he kept running from the villain. “Joy Ride” doesn’t go for that—it’s just mainly a chase picture with nothing specifically deep to be found.

But there’s not anything wrong with that if the movie is entertaining, which it is. There are some good tense moments as well, including that motel-room scene I mentioned where Lewis and Fuller start to worry about what they hear, and the realization that someone is following them the next day (Rusty Nail says on the CB, “You really oughta get your taillight fixed.”).

What also helps make the movie work are convincing characters to follow, and the three principal actors do game jobs. Steve Zahn, in particular, is quite excellent here, playing the ne’er-do-well who keeps getting into trouble, and whose “harmless little prank” gets himself, his brother, and his girlfriend into danger. While he plays the role relatively straight, Zahn displays effective comic relief here as well. He’s goofy, but credibly so. (My favorite bit is when he tries to imitate the noises he heard that night to a questioning cop.) Paul Walker is likeable as nice-guy Lewis—he’s just so clean that it’s easy to let any stupid thing he does slide. Leelee Sobieski is charming as always.

Now, as for the questions I’m sure people would ask about the logic of the movie. 1) How does Rusty Nail know everything the heroes are going to do? 2) Are there other truckers helping him out? Is that he’s able to pull off most of what he does? 3) There’s a sequence in which he chases the heroes through a cornfield; why do the heroes run straight through a row? Rusty Nail can’t turn his big semi around, so why don’t the heroes just run the opposite way? 4) By the way, if Rusty Nail has been following them all this time, how did his large truck go unnoticed?

But because of the pacing and the capable execution of the story, it’s easy to conclude that the unlikeliest situations are expected.

Everything leads to a well-crafted climactic final act that is both effective and breathlessly chilling.

Perhaps it’s not best to ask questions that “Joy Ride” raises a few times. It’s just a fun, scary thriller. It delivers what it promises—nothing more, nothing less. And I was glad to go along for the ride.

Jack the Giant Slayer (2013)

3 Mar

images

Smith’s Verdict: ***

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

Going by the marketing for “Jack the Giant Slayer,” I really wasn’t expecting much from this movie. It looked like just a throwaway CGI action flick with nothing particularly special to deliver its audience. It just looked so generic and not worth checking out. But I guess you can’t judge a book by its cover, because “Jack the Giant Slayer” quite the enjoyable entertainment. It’s fun, amusing, rousing, and surprisingly original.

“Jack the Giant Slayer” is an updated re-telling of “Jack and the Beanstalk,” and while that fairy tale was never admittedly gripping, this time there’s something to be said about the adventures and the appealing characters that endure them.

As the movie opens, a young boy named Jack is having a story read to him by his father, while at the same time, a little princess named Isabelle is coincidentally having that same story read to her by her mother. It’s the story of a world of giants in a magical place between Heaven and Earth—apparently, a long time ago, giants invaded the village below until they were vanquished and banished to stay on their own land. How? Well, it’s magic, of course!

Ten years later, Jack (Nicholas Hoult) is a farmhand, princess Isabelle (Eleanor Tomlinson) is about to marry against her will, both people are adventurous young souls, and both have lost the very parent that read them the story all those years ago. (Well, of course.)

By the way, I have to say I found this first act very well handled, in the way it establishes character for Jack and Isabelle. It shows both sides as they seem to have something similar in common—it’s even more evident when Jack and his uncle are arguing while Isabelle and her father (the king) are arguing. As the scenes play back and forth, it’s almost like they’re saying the same thing. That’s very clever.

Anyway, Jack comes into possession of a pouch of magic beans that of course grow into a gigantic beanstalk that leads all the way up to the world of the Giants. At this time, Isabelle accidentally winds up stuck as the beanstalk grows, and so a rescue party, including guards Elmont (Ewan McGregor) and Crawe (Eddie Marsan), is sent to climb up after her. Jack accompanies them, along with Roderick (Stanley Tucci), Isabelle’s would-be groom who actually has something far more on his mind than rescuing his bride-to-be.

There are Giants up there, and they are quite big and vicious. And there are a lot of them, which makes rescuing Isabelle far more difficult. Things get even worse when Roderick gains a magical legendary crown that will gain him control over all the Giants. He overpowers the vicious two-headed Giant general Fallon (Bill Nighy) and his hundred followers, and hatches a plan to take over the human kingdom below. While that’s going on, Jack continues to find and free Isabelle, and even manages to slay a couple Giants in the process, hence the title.

While some parts of “Jack the Giant Slayer” are rather predictable, there are quite a few surprises here and there. Some of these surprises have to do with the Giants, who have more personality than you might expect from a film like this. Some, like General Fallon, are suitably threatening, while others are here to display comic relief. And there’s also Fallon’s second head, who is barely able to utter words, that is both creepy and kind of funny. (Their CGI is impressive, especially when you see the Giants in close-ups.) There are some funny moments in the movie as well—sight gags (including Giants’ pigs-in-blankets that are literally pigs, in blankets) and one-liners (“Fear of heights?” “Fear of FALLING!” “Well then don’t fall!”). And it’s also self-aware of its fantasy-adventure genre, cracking jokes at the story’s expense when the time calls for it. For example, when Isabelle at the beginning tells her father that she doesn’t want to marry Roderick, she immediately turns to Roderick, and tells him “Sorry.” How does Roderick respond? He shrugs. I laughed out loud at that moment.

The inevitable action-climax featuring man versus Giant is quite entertaining as well, and it’s hard to tell exactly how everything is going to turn out, since there can never be a fair fight between a giant…er, GIANT and a puny little man. There’s a lot of tense action and some pretty terrific special effects—it really does look like these armies of different sizes are there in the same shot.

Nicholas Hoult stars as Jack, and it’s further evidence that this young actor is a genuine star. With this and “Warm Bodies,” I expect bigger things to come for him in the future. He’s quite effective and likeable here, going through Jack’s expected character arc from commoner to hero. Eleanor Tomlinson is fun and fetching as the princess Isabelle. Stanley Tucci has a lot of fun hamming it up as the human-villain, while Bill Nighy is invaluable as always, even when playing a gigantic CGI monstrosity. Also, Ewan McGregor is fun as the dashing Elmont, who could be the hero but has his weak points that slow him down.

I enjoyed the film, but some parts were a little sloppy. For example, we never see Jack’s uncle again after the first half-hour, and the movie never tells us what he’s doing or where he’s gone. And also, why would Roderick want to rule Giants and crush his fellow mankind anyway? Wouldn’t destroying humanity make things kind of boring afterwards? Dude, you’re marrying a princess and thus commanding a kingdom!

And I also found myself questioning the Giants’ lifestyle at certain points. For example, it’s established that humans are a delicacy for Giants, so what do they usually eat on their land? And also, there doesn’t seem to be one female among them. How exactly…actually, never mind. I shouldn’t read much into this.

Thanks to sharp direction by Bryan Singer, a top-notch cast, and some pretty damn good-looking special effects, “Jack the Giant Slayer” is a terrific adventure. I’m glad I took it, despite my doubts before.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →