Thursday Movie Picks: Science Fiction Movies (No Space/Aliens)

Jobs

Directed by Joshua Michael Stern.

2013. Rated PG-13, 122 minutes.

Cast:

Ashton Kutcher

Dermot Mulroney

Josh Gad

Matthew Modine

Lukas Haas

Ron Eldard

J.K. Simmons

James Woods

Lesley Ann Warren

John Getz

It's fairly well known that way back in the 1970s, Steve Jobs (Kutcher) and a few of his buddies started Apple Computers in his parents' garage. They basically invented the home computer and became filthy rich. He was ousted in the mid 80s as the projects he was working on kept burning through money. Years later, he's brought back when the company is on the verge of going under. He then conquers all of Earth beginning with the introduction of the iPod in 2001 and rules until his death in 2011. This movie starts during Jobs' college years. Well, he is on campus and sits in on some classes, but it's never clear if he's actually an enrolled student. This is a couple years before starting the company. We wrap things up as he is brought back to rescue the floundering in Apple in the mid 90s.

The easiest thing to do is start with the elephant in the room, lead actor Ashton Kutcher. Plenty of people, myself included, rolled their eyes when it was announced he would play the iconic Jobs. After all, it can be argued that his best "work" was either on ABC's That 70's Show, MTV's Punk'd, or whatever he did to get Demi Moore to marry him. His movies range from "don't ever show me that again" up to a solid "meh." His performances in those movies are on the same scale. But hey, he's famous and bears a decent resemblance to our subject once you slap a beard on him, so here we are. The truth of the matter is that he's not that bad. He might actually be the best part of this film. He's never been an actor of any credible depth. Fortunately for him, but unfortunately for the rest of the movie, none is actually required. He is only asked to come off as mean, self-centered, and vindictive. Mission accomplished.

The relative shallowness of the iPod/Pad/Phone man is the movie's biggest detriment. At every stop along the way, he simply shouts down anyone who disagrees with him and either bullies them into doing things his way or sends them packing regardless of how integral they were to his success. Judging from this picture, Steve Jobs never actually made a friend. He just had people around who could realize his visions and treated them like interchangeable parts. Even when co-founder Steve Wozniak aka Woz (Gad) calls him on his boorish behavior, there isn't really an attempt at rectifying it. The scene is emotional in the moment because of who is saying it to him. However, that all dissipates rapidly because we see it has no real effect on him other than trying a slightly diplomatic approach to saving his own ass. This renders Jobs not a film about the man, but about giving life to his reputation around the office.

That Steve spends so much time in the office makes the omission, or more accurately the butchering of, his personal life a glaring error. Anything that happens outside of Apple just builds our hatred of him. Early on, he beds a co-ed then hops out of bed while telling her he's got to get back to his girlfriend. While Jobs is working at Atari Woz, who doesn't even work for the company, practically does an entire project for him, saving Steve's job (see that?) in the process. For said project, Steve is paid a $5,000 bonus. He tells Woz he only got $700 and gives him $350. Later, when the aforementioned girlfriend informs him she's pregnant, he just more or less says "Ain't mine," and tells her to kick rocks. We see him then refuse to see his daughter even though she sends cute little letters begging to be allowed to come visit him. We also see him arguing with his lawyer in an effort to find any way possible for him not to pay child support. The movie has a chance to make him look like a hero, here. I mean, the whole time we're thinking their tearful reunion scene with him accepting the full responsibility of fatherhood has gotta be coming, right? Wrong. Maybe it happens off screen. All we get is a shot of the girl lying on his couch like ten years after the lawyer scene. That's not to mention that he's suddenly married with another child by then. How any of this came to be is a complete mystery unless you're well-versed in the life and times of Steve Jobs. I am not. Admittedly, a trip to his Wikipedia page might clear some things up, but I shouldn't need to do that. Oh, and just in case you need more proof he was a dick, he ends the film by exacting some petty revenge.

What all of this adds up to is us being more apt to laugh at our hero when things don't go his way rather than showing even the least bit of sympathy. To us, he's just a bad person getting his comeuppance. The overwhelming feeling I got watching Jobs was the same one I got when I first hard they were making the movie. It's too soon. The whole thing feels rushed and half-baked. We're given a caricature of the man instead of a portrait. It's a shame because he's one of the most influential people of his generation, if not the entire twentieth century, and the still young twenty-first century, as well. It doesn't have to be a glowing fluff piece that bestows sainthood on the man, but he deserves more than a one-note portrayal of a rampaging monster who happens to have great ideas. We need the perspective of time. The people who know the stories that can round him out as a character need that perspective, too. In the interim, we were given "How an Asshole Made a Whole Lot of Money."

MY SCORE: 4/10

White House Down

Directed by Roland Emmerich.

2013. Rated R, 131 minutes.

Cast:

Channing Tatum

Jamie Foxx

Maggie Gyllenhaal

Richard Jenkins

James Woods

Jason Clarke

Joey King

Nicolas Wright

Michael Murphy

Rachelle Lefevre

Agent John Cale (Tatum) works on the security detail for Speaker of the House Eli Raphelson (Jenkins). Through some favors, he got that job and finagles his way into an interview for a position in the Secret Service at the White House, because that's really how you get a job guarding the most powerful men in the free world. It so happens that the person interviewing him, Agent Finnerty (Gyllenhaal), is an ex-girlfriend from college. Given that, and a spotty work history, he doesn't get hired. Since his daughter is a political buff and absolutely adores Pres. James W. Sawyer (Foxx), he brought her along and she gets separated from him because she has to make a trip to the restroom. Wouldn't ya know it? This is precisely when all hell breaks loose as terrorists storm the property, guns blazing. Pretty soon, Cale realizes he's the only one who can save both his daughter and the Chief Executive.

To my surprise, White House Down takes a little longer to kick into high gear than expected. This is actually a good thing. These early scenes establish our characters nicely and are fairly funny. The mood is kept light and wee see the bad guys moving into position. During this time, star Channing Tatum exudes the easy charm, and yes ladies, the movie star looks that have made him famous. Co-star Jamie Foxx isn't bad, but seems to be caught in a bit of a conundrum. It appears he is unsure how much Pres. Obama should be in his character. He vacillates between impersonation and doing his own thing. Like Tatum, though, he has a natural charm that pulls him through without being too big a detriment.

Once the fireworks start, this is solid turn-your-brain-off fare that never threatens to get too heavy. It doesn't attempt to brow-beat you into a flag waving frenzy, either. That last thing is a huge problem with this movie's barely older twin sister, Olympus Has Fallen. I am an American, proud to be one. Still, movies that are relentlessly heavy-handed tend to leave me cold, regardless of how great its message. Thankfully, that isn't the case with WHD. Sure, there is some overt patriotism going on, but it feels organic to the plot, not the product of overbearing propagandists. It just follows two guys, one of whom happens to be the President of the United States, as they try to maneuver their way out of the White House even though bad guys control the premises. They have a nice chemistry which certainly helps. And yup, not only does everything go boom all around them, they make plenty of things go boom themselves.

The villain does the usual ranting and raving, plus their is plenty of in-fighting with his team. Meanwhile, the secondary characters on the good side do the prerequisite hand wringing. It's all pretty much par for the course. The only standout being the overall quality of the cast. Even though it is just a big, dumb action flick, they bring the goods.

Where the movie strains just a bit is when it over-twists itself. It spends lots of time building up one character as our bad guy, giving him a detailed backstory and the whatnot. Eventually, as must always be the case, we switch gears and find out there's someone else involved. Normally, this would be fine. Here, it occurs so late in the proceedings we get almost nothing about him that matters. It's not quite a deal breaker, but it does take some air out of the balloon.

Plot malfunctions aside, we still have a fun ride on our hands. It's got loads of action, it's goofy at times, and genuinely humorous at others. Our two leads work together very easily. I wouldn't mind seem them together again. Maybe they can do a buddy-cop movie or something, not a sequel. We don't need a part two. However, I did have a good t ime watching this. Without the Kong-like chest-thumping of Olympus Has Fallen, I felt free to just enjoy it, not be brow-beaten by it. I understand lots of people didn't like WHD. After all, it is loud and stupid. You know what, though? It works for me.

MY SCORE: 6.5/10

Videodrome

Directed by David Cronenberg.
1983. Rated R, 89 minutes.
Cast:
James Woods
Deborah Harry
Sonja Smits
Peter Dvorsky
Leslie Carlson
Jack Creley
Lally Cadeau
Lynne Gorman

About 25 years ago, one of my best friends and I were up late. Finally tired of countless hours playing Atari 2600, when most video game characters looked like a collection of rectangles with eyes, we flipped on HBO. We happened upon a movie called Videodrome. The early scenes included nudity, always helpful in capturing a boy’s attention. However, what kept us there were the strange and exciting visuals. This included things coming out of TV sets and VHS tapes that seemed to be alive. We had a vague understanding of the story: watching this particular videotape would seriously screw up your whole world.

Over the next year or so, I watched Videodrome several more times and gave it a warm spot in my heart. I kept it there and remembered it fondly, thereafter. Time causes memories to fade and warp to your liking. When I saw it on the shelf at my local library, I naturally became curious to see if it is the masterpiece I’d come to think of it as, or if it is something I loved as a boy but had no use for in adulthood. I had to investigate.

The plot follows Max (Woods). He runs Channel 83. The station’s niche is perverse programming. In the words of a woman interviewing him, they show “everything from soft-core porn to hardcore violence.” This has made Max something of a pariah in the industry, a focal point in the debate over what should and shouldn’t be on television.

Max comes into possession of a series called “Videodrome.” All of the “episodes” are on grainy pirated tapes and depict hooded figures mercilessly beating some poor soul. Of course, Max is not only intrigued but sets out to find out where this show is coming from and if it is indeed real. The short answer is yes, it is real. Don’t worry, that’s hardly a spoiler. In fact, that’s merely the very tip of a deeply submerged iceberg. What follows is a twisting and twisted tale of betrayal, paranoia and conspiracy all revolving around a fear that’s been around since televisions invaded our homes so many moons ago.

I remember being blown away by the visuals when I first saw them as a youngster. I was most curious to see how these stood up to the test of time. Surprisingly, they are still remarkable. There are a few instances when you can see the seams in the production. However, this is no different than many of the big blockbuster movies of today in which you can easily spot what is cgi and what is not. It’s actually a little better because these effects are all organically created. Even though many of them look a bit more crude than today’s stuff, they feel more real, more unsettling. In this case, prosthetics and tubing work better than a collection of pixels.

Given the current state of television and all forms of media, for that matter, Videodrome is a piece of dark, satirical social commentary that doesn’t feel as dated as its age indicates it should. Sure, it uses the VHS and VCR as impetuses for its action instead of Blu-Rays or downloads but the principle is the same. What appears on the screen is still wildly imaginative and the story still taps into our own fear of what we find entertaining.