Unstoppable Review
Tony Scott and Denzel Washington have worked together on several films now including the great “Man on Fire” their first collaboration. Since then they have worked together on “Deja Vu”, “The Taking of Pelham 123” and now “Unstoppable”. After “Man on Fire” each of Scott’s successive films have seemed to degrade in quality, but “Unstoppable” marks a slight step up in quality.
The film is based on a real runaway train in Northwest Ohio in 2001. The real life conductor Terry Forson and engineer Jess Knowlton were credited with saving thousands of lives that day. In the film, Frank (Denzel Washington) and Will (Chris Pine) must race against time stop the runaway train and save lives.
The structure of the film is really simple two guys who don’t like each other must work together to stop the train and in the process become buddies. The film tries to make this simple storyline as interesting as possible, but the simplicity of the story also works against it. Nothing in the film hasn’t been done better in other films like “Speed”.
The problems with “Unstoppable” outshine what the film does right. First, the actors do as much as they can with the terrible script. Almost every line spoken in the film is cliche or drenched in cheese. A line in the trailer, “We’re not just talking about a train...we’re talking about a missile the size of the Chrysler Building!”, is but one of the lines oozing cheese that you will hear the characters say in complete seriousness.
A major problem with the film is the ending. Since “Unstoppable” was based on true events the ending of the film doesn’t change what happens, but that isn’t a problem plenty of films have been able to be captivating even though everyone knows the outcome like the recent “127 Hours”. No, the problem with the ending is that all of the events of the film are worthless after the arrival of someone that helps to stop the train. That person could have shown up at the beginning of the film and the train would have been stopped before anyone was put into danger.
A scene that really shows the stupidity of the film is when a line of police officers literally shoot at the train to try and stop it. They stop only when they realize that they have been shooting near the fuel tanks. No one could have let them know ahead of time where the fuel tanks are? No one realized that shooting at the train is a bad idea? No one realized how stupid this movie is?
How the film is shot is also a problem. Scott’s style of shooting has worked in some of his other films like “Enemy of the State”, but here he feels the need to gussy up every dialogue scene with the most dynamic shots possible. The camera never just sits still and lets the actors work. The shots become annoying and Scott seems to run out of ideas halfway through. He then uses the same rapid spinning shots and helicopter shots over and over.
“Unstoppable” is better than Scott’s other recent train centered film, “The Taking of Pelham 123”, but fails to really capture what made his earlier works great. Let’s just hope that Scott doesn’t feel the need to center another movie on trains, at least for awhile.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
127 Hours Review
"There is no force on earth more powerful than the will to live." (From the trailer)
A director can only do so much with a film like “127 Hours” in which the main character is trapped for most of its runtime. Danny Boyle has pulled all of the tricks out his bag to make one of the most interesting, intense and emotional films of the year.
The film tells the story of real life climber Aron Ralston (James Franco) trying to survive after he gets his arm pinned under a boulder while hiking in Moab, Utah. The premise for this film may seem similar to another film, “Buried”, from earlier this year, but they are radically different. Where “Buried” opted to never leave the coffin in which the main character was trapped, “127 Hours” frequently employs flashbacks and hallucinations to give a better backstory of Ralston before the accident. As a result of not being confined to one location “127 Hours” feels like a much more fuller film.
A film like this is hinged completely on the main actor’s/actress’ ability and James Franco doesn’t disappoint. He plays Ralston as a geek, and like all geeks he has an obsession. His obsession is the outdoors where he hopes to one day make a living as a guide, but all of his knowledge and hopes can’t prepare him for everything.
By now most people will have heard of Aron Ralston’s story, but knowing the ending to this story will not effect how powerful the journey to that ending is. By the end when he is forced to make a choice, it has almost not even become a choice, but desperate act to survive despite the costs.
In the hands of Danny Boyle, the film finds meaning in Ralston’s predicament. In a lesser director’s hands the film may have fetishized the grieving family or the team preparing a daring rescue. In “Cast Away” Tom Hanks at least has an island to explore while Franco stay in one spot. Like the volleyball in “Cast Away”, “127 Hours” uses a video camera to keep him company.
The most powerful scenes of the film are spent in silence, but the scene that everyone will remember from the film is the escape. In this scene Ralston finally makes the choice to live and leave a part of himself behind. Everything that Ralston does is shown without a cut to more pleasant sights. With each stab you feel his pain, but he must keep going to survive. When he gets to the nerve you feel every time the knife touches it with a blaring sound filling the theater. The scene that follows has Ralston, finally free, for a moment crack a smile. A smile of someone who never thought he would leave that spot, a smile that means that he has already won.
If there was one problem with the film it is the computer generated weather effects, but that is a small detail in a nearly flawless film.
Due Date Review I did for the Corsair
Here is the review of Due Date that I did for the Corsair:
http://www.thecorsaironline.com/arts-and-entertainment/due-date-provides-adequate-amount-of-laughs-1.1766923
http://www.thecorsaironline.com/arts-and-entertainment/due-date-provides-adequate-amount-of-laughs-1.1766923
The reviews are out of order
I did these reviews for the Corsair newspaper, but they didn't get published so I just put them here. I just went in almost alphabetical order and posted them here. Some of the movies have been in and out of theaters for a while, but anyway they're here. Also Hello anyone that stumbles onto my blog.
Wild Target Review
“Wild Target” Misses its Mark
How often do contract killers fall in love with their last victim? If the number of films that focus on this idea are to be taken as fact then the answer is pretty often. “Wild Target” tries to look at the lighter, comedic side of this idea, but manages to miss every target that it aims for.
In Jonathan Lynn’s “Wild Target” an extremely professional hitman, Victor Maynard (Bill Nighy), tries to retire after a last job of assassinating a art thief, Rose (Emily Blunt). He falls in love with her while following her every move and finds himself protecting her instead from other hired gunmen. Also along for the journey is Tony (Rupert Grint) a young man that is drifting through life and becomes Maynard’s assistant after helping Maynard save Rose’s life. After them is Hector Dixon (Martin Freeman) the second best hitman after Maynard with a fake tan and teeth too white to be natural.
The cast of the film is a major draw for fans of recent British films such as the “Harry Potter” series, “Hot Fuzz” and “Shaun of the Dead”. The cast may be interesting, but the mundane script by Lucinda Coxon fails to be as interesting as the cast promises. Every action or comedy beat has been done to death or done better in other films resulting in a boring experience.
The direction by Jonathan Lynn doesn’t stand out as mediocre or great, but surely as the characters were spouting cliché ridden lines and performing logic challenging actions Lynn could have said something. At one point Rose decides that she must steal from a gas station while they are on the run from hitmen and she has millions in the trunk. The whole movie feels like an exercise in how not to make a movie stand out of the crowd.
There is one thing that the film does right: Martin Freeman. Martin Freeman is always a treat to see in British comedies like “The Office”. His character, in the film, is always trying to get out of the shadow that Maynard projects as the number one hitman. He just isn’t given much time to shine in the film and that is a disappointment.
“Wild Target” fails at so much that even though films like “The Professional” or the recent “The American” aren’t comedies they are far funnier than “Wild Target”.
Wall Street 2: Money Never Sleeps Review
Looking over Oliver Stone’s recent filmography shows a man that is trying to remain topical. With “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” Stone is trying to capitalize on the 2008 financial collapse by returning to his 1987 film “Wall Street”. Like his recent film “W.”, this film is so centered on being socially relevant that it misses the chance to offer insight into the financial collapse or create some controversy. “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” does contain strong performances from the actors involved, but its convoluted plot and cheap ending makes the film less interesting than the trailer made it out to be.
The film focuses mostly on Jacob Moore, played by Shia LaBeouf, a player on Wall Street in 2007. After the financial company that Bretton James, played by Josh Brolin, tanks the stock of the company Jacob works for, Jacob tries to bring down James’ company and ends up working for James. Dropped into this is Gordon Gekko, played again by Michael Douglas, out of jail and on a tour for his new book. Jacob is marrying Gekko’s estranged daughter Winnie, played by Carey Mulligan, and Jacob is trying to get them to reconcile and for a father figure in Gekko.
The first “Wall Street” is remembered for Michael Douglas’ role as Gordon Gekko, which he won an Academy Award for, but in the sequel Oliver Stone has no idea what to do with him. The first movie’s best moment is Gekko’s famous “Greed is good” speech, but in the sequel the Gekko’s big speech is a clumsy montage of several little pieces of wisdom. Not until the third act of the film do we truly meet Gekko again like we fondly remembered him. For most of the film Gordon Gekko seems to be just looking for redemption. LeBeouf does his best acting here, and Mulligan has some good moments as well, as a couple onscreen they have good chemistry. Brolin is the villain; we know that because he looks sinister throughout the movie and isn’t given much to do otherwise.
Stone’s direction sometimes feels gimmicky, with the use of silly editing tricks with little need for them. The use of the financial collapse doesn’t feel like he is trying to feed off of it, but it feels like a missed chance to do something meaningful. With this film Oliver Stone has put himself in the spotlight of current events, but he has nothing that needs to be said. If anyone deserves an award for this, it is for whoever made the trailer because it made this film look interesting.
The Town Review
Ben Affleck comes back to “Town” with a great heist film.
In 2007, Ben Affleck wowed everyone with his directorial debut “Gone Baby Gone” and now has followed up that success with “The Town”. The film is directed by Affleck and he also stars in it with Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker), Rebecca Hall (Vicky Cristina Barcelona), and Jon Hamm (Mad Men). The film takes place in Charlestown, a neighborhood in Boston, the world’s capital for carjacking, kidnappings, and armed robberies. The film follows Doug MacRay (Affleck) as he plans his next heist and tries to balance his feelings for a bank manager (Hall) connected to one of his earlier heists, as well as being pursued by an FBI agent (Hamm) trying to take him and his crew down.
Affleck’s directing is spot-on as he creates exciting bank heist scenes and his direction also has the restraint to let the actors in the scenes carry the film. The script is exciting and fast paced, but relies a bit too much on characters stating their wants or other characters wants in dialogue. The cast’s performances turn strong work in these situations and manage to hold our attention. The film is tight, but almost too tight to give breathing room for supporting characters to have some screen time. Hamm’s FBI agent isn’t given much except to be the raging good guy and fill us in with why he hates bank robbers with a passion. Blake Lively, playing Renner’s sister and Affleck’s spurned love, is mostly absent from the film until the last act where she gives a good performance with that little time.
The actors who do appear throughout most of the film give strong performances and coupled with Affleck’s really good directing means for a good film. “Gone Baby Gone” may have been a stronger film overall and a demonstration that Affleck is better behind the camera than in front of, but “The Town” is no slouch of a film. The three action scenes in “The Town” are packed with excitement, drama and comedy that makes up for its few short comings. This is a film that shows that “Gone Baby Gone” wasn’t a fluke and that Affleck’s acting skills shouldn’t be disregarded.
If you haven’t seen Affleck’s “Gone Baby Gone”, go out and do it now. That film shows what Affleck can do when he is directing and sports a great performance by his brother Casey Affleck. This film shows that Affleck has a promising career ahead of him in directing if he wants to stop acting. The film is like Michael Mann’s “Heat”, but set in Boston and is definitely worth a look in this dull year for film. You’re only hurting yourself if you skip this solid crime-drama because Affleck is involved in the film.
Red Review
Bruce Willis used to be a name synonymous with action. When one thinks about some of the best action movies of all times chances are Bruce Willis has starred in some of them and was even the inspiration for others. For those hoping for a return of the Bruce Willis of yesteryear, you won’t find his come back in “Red”.
“Red” is very loosely based on the DC comic of the same name written by Warren Ellis. The film follows Frank Moses(Bruce Willis) as a retired CIA agent that is put in danger when what he saw on the job comes back to kill him. He is forced to get his team, Joe (Morgan Freeman), Marvin (John Malkovich) and Victoria (Helen Mirren), back together to help him stay alive. Along for the adventure is Sarah Ross (Mary-Louise Parker) as a woman that Moses fell in love with on the phone. And on their tail is William Cooper (Karl Urban) as a up and coming CIA agent hoping to make a name for himself.
“Red” may sound like a fun action-comedy, but really it is bland, boring , and badly paced. It suffers from bringing nothing entirely new to the already full action genre. Most of the best parts of the film are spoiled by the ads that constantly run on TV, so if you haven’t seen much of the film you may enjoy it more. The film also suffers from trying too hard to be funny and as a result most of the jokes fall flat. The film suffers the most from the poor writing in both dialogue and action onscreen. The saving grace in the film is Malkovich’s character who provides some laughs from being forever paranoid, but his scenes don’t provide enough to hang the rest of the movie on and most of the TV ads spoil his best scenes.
If you are looking for a fun action-comedy look somewhere else as “Red” fails in being a worthy entry in both action and comedy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)