The Great Buck Howard

Directed by Sean McGinly.

2009. Rated PG, 90 minutes.
Cast:
John Malkovich
Colin Hanks
Emily Blunt
Ricky Jay
Steve Zahn
Adam Scott
Debra Monk
Tom Hanks
Matthew Gray Gubler

Mentalist Buck Howard (Malkovich) makes his living performing effects in small, dingy, rundown, half empty theaters all across the nation. He seems to think he’s a bigger star than he actually is. Once upon a time, he really was a big deal. As he’s quick to tell you, he appeared 61 times on “The Tonight Show” with Johnny Carson. He stresses the fact that it was with Carson and not Leno, whom he despises. He also stresses he’s a mentalist, not a magician. He despises them, also. If you couldn’t tell, Buck is rather insufferable. He’s arrogant, bossy and quick-tempered. Because he is “The Great” Buck Howard, we are somehow beneath him.

Young Troy Gable (Colin Hanks) has just dropped out of law school. He only went because it was his father’s dream for him. His father is played in a small role by Colin’s real life and more famous dad Tom Hanks. Law school made Troy miserable, so he’s trying to find his own way in life.

Troy gets hired to be Buck’s new road manager. The guy he’s replacing is supposed to train him but refuses after a big blowup with Buck. Along with Troy, we learn that big blowups are an almost daily occurrence in Buck’s world.

John Malkovich plays the role perfectly. We can see the patience for us mere mortals leaving his face when things aren’t going exactly according to plan. This, combined with the near constant ravings of a disillusioned man creates tension and comedy. Perhaps the best example of this is when one of his adoring fans (he does, in fact, have a loyal following) who happens to run one of the theaters he plays decides to do an impromptu introduction of him instead of using his pre-taped one. His reaction is priceless. He makes the movie fun to watch.

Despite all this, The Great Buck Howard is hardly about Buck Howard. It’s more about Troy and the lesson Buck teaches him. Thankfully, it does a good job of making us wait for that lesson. It also manages to transform the unlikeable Buck into a sympathetic figure. By the way, for fans of magicians…er…mentalists, Buck is loosely based on The Amazing Kreskin (google is your friend, here).

It’s not a comedy for most of the Hot Tub Time Machine crowd, but it is funny. The story is told well and provides us with plenty of ups and downs. Every time it seems he’s set things up perfectly to get his next big break, something goes wrong. Almost everytime, but I’ll say no more. Best of all and perhaps key to Buck as a character, try as we might, we never find out just how Buck Howard manages to be so great.

MY SCORE: 7.5/10

Invictus

Directed by Clint Eastwood.

2009. Rated PG-13, 133 minutes.
Cast:
Morgan Freeman
Matt Damon
Tony Kgoroge
Patrick Mofokeng
Matt Stern
Julian Lewis Jones
Marguerite Wheatley
Patrick Lyster
McNeil Hendricks

Newly elected South African president Nelson Mandela (Freeman) attempts to use the country’s rugby team to forge national unity in the days shortly after apartheid has ended; based on a true story.

Once again, Clint Eastwood proves you don’t need extensive fireworks to keep the audience engaged. He gives us his normal patient storytelling. Though nothing much happens in the way of action until the big game at the end, we don’t get bored. Instead, we’re fascinated by the picture being painted before us. It helps that Morgan Freeman turns in a splendid performance as Mandela. In him, we see a leader doing what he thinks is best for his country despite the fact he’s alone in his thinking.

There is no shortage of sports movie clichés. Long story short, and I don’t think I’m really spoiling anything here: an underdog team gets their act together. Think of all the movies you’ve already seen with that theme and you get the idea. It also gets to be repetitive. The typical cycle goes something like this: we see some dissention or doubt cast on what Mandela’s doing. Somehow word gets back to him and he pops up wherever the problem is and says a few magic words and everyone falls in line.

It’s a movie that manages to be good in spite of itself. Genre clichés and Mandela’s almost mystical presence threatens to overwhelm, but they never quite ruin things. It just becomes precisely what it wants to be, a feel good movie. This means that while there are reasons to knock it, it eventually wins you over.

MY SCORE: 7/10

Crazy, Stupid, Love

Directed by Glenn Ficarra and John Requa.

2011. Rated PG-13, 118 minutes.
Cast:
Steve Carell
Julianne Moore
Ryan Gosling
Emma Stone
Analeigh Tipton
Jonah Bobo
Marisa Tomei
John Carroll Lynch
Kevin Bacon
Liza Lapira
Josh Groban

Cal’s (Carell) life is sent spiraling out of control practically the moment we met him. Emily (Moore), his wife of 25 years abruptly informs him over dinner that she wants a divorce. With that, he packs up, moves into an apartment and tries to get on with his life. By get on, I mean spend nights at the local bar griping about his failed marriage. While there, he meets Jacob (Gosling), the local ladies man. Jacob takes pity on our hero and wants to help out by imparting his carnal knowledge upon Cal. Meanwhile, Cal’s 13 year old son Robbie (Bobo) is having his own love problems. Robbie is in love with Jessica (Tipton), his 17 year old baby-sitter. Aside from the obvious age difference there is another issue. Unbeknownst to either guy, Jessica has a crush on Cal. Finally, there’s Hannah (Stone) who’s studying for the bar exam. She’s in a serious relationship with Richard (Groban), but appears to be settling, much to the chagrin of her pal Liz (Lapira). A bunch of people pursuing love, or sex, while simultaneously wondering if it’s even worth the effort ensues.

Our plot moves along nicely, but in a fairly straight forward manner, for most of its runtime. However, things pick up towards the end with a fabulous twist. It’s the type of thing you don’t see coming, at least I didn’t, but once it happens you’ll wonder how you didn’t. Best of all, it absolutely works. It’s not some M. Night Shamalamadingdong idiotic turn of events flying in from very deep left field. The movie doesn’t end with this occurrence, either. Instead, it crystallizes things for the people involved.

The common theme running through Crazy, Stupid, Love is people romanticizing the person they desire so much as to deify them. With that in mind, it’s easy to see why it’s so painful for the jilted parties. However, this is no mopey affair. Like most of us, these people do ridiculous things while dealing with their emotions. It’s a ridiculousness we can relate to. We’ve been there. Maybe, we’re there now. At the very least, we’ve known a few people who are, or have been there. We laugh because we see our own silliness in the people on the screen.

At the end of the day, CSL is a romantic comedy. It actually does go through many of the machinations of other rom-coms. However, the numbers aren’t quite as visible here as they are in many of it’s kind. It’s well crafted, all the way around. We get wonderful performances across the board. The scene-stealers here are Bobo as Robbie and Marisa Tomei in a very interesting and hilarious role. It also helps that the ending is a bit ambiguous. When the credits roll nothing has definitively happened to say for sure whether it’s a happy ending or not. We can guess either way we like. Still, we cannot say for certain how things will turn out, much like our own lives.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Big Momma's: Like Father, Like Son

Directed by John Whitesell.

2011. Rated PG-13, 107 minutes.
Cast:
Martin Lawrence
Brandon T. Jackson
Jessica Lucas
Michelle Ang
Tony Curran
Ana Ortiz
Marc John Jeffries
Portia Doubleday
Henri Lubatti
Ken Jeong

Certain people are lucky I’ve not yet been named Supreme Ruler of the Universe. Cataclysmic events may have erupted the very moment it came to my attention that the ever-invisible and unquestionably guilty “they” were going to make another Big Momma’s House. Without doubt “they” would be immediately banished to the farthest reaches of my jurisdiction. By “they” I mean anyone involved with any movie in the series. Being a benevolent monarch I would save two souls who had the misfortune of appearing in the original. One would be Paul Giamatti who’s done all sorts of good since that time. The other is Nia Long, who was actually in the first two BM movies. She gets a pass because I’ve been in love with her ever since that fateful night in 1991 when she introduced herself to me as Brandi in Boyz N the Hood. Thankfully, neither of them are here. And “here” is where I am: watching a movie that not only violates this king’s first rule of sequels, but one which by its mere existence is evidence of an actively waged war against original thought.

If you were wondering, this king’s first rule of sequels is this: If a movie sucks, there should not be a sequel. Of course, this assumes the first BM did indeed suck. Whether you like it matters not. In my kingdom, I am the sole judge of good and suckiness. As such I have deemed it terrible. Armed with this knowledge you should be amazed at the audacity it took to make a third movie in the franchise. The nerve! To the guillotine with them! Off with their heads!

Wait. I’ve not told you what this atrocity is about. To refresh your memory of the basic franchise construct, Malcolm (Lawrence) is an FBI agent who occasionally dresses up like an old lady to solve crimes. This time he’s working a highly dangerous case completely by himself. Strike one. His stepson Trent (Jackson) has just been accepted to Duke University. However, he would rather pursue his rap career than go to college. Strike two. Oh no, no, no. Don’t go jumping to conclusions. The strike is not for him wanting to follow his dreams, especially since anyone who knows me understands I am a rap fan. The strike is because we’re supposed to believe that this guy is intelligent enough to gain acceptance into a school known for high academic standards yet he does nothing smart in the entire movie. As a result of the first of Trent’s not-so-smart moves, he winds up witnessing the bad guy murder an informant over an incriminating flash drive we’ve already learned is hidden at an all-girls school for the arts. Yup, you guessed it: the only way our heroes can get their hands on the drive is to dress up like women and go undercover at the school. Absolutely nothing funny ensues. Strike three. Sigh.

I know what you’re thinking: ‘Sire, if in this fantasy you truly are Supreme Ruler of the Universe why would you bother to watch this?’ It’s really rather simple. A good king wants to keep his subjects as happy as possible. Executions and other scare tactics used to keep them in line are messy and best reserved for the most heinous crimes. Diplomacy is often the better choice for the morale of the kingdom. With this in mind, I’ve noticed that the peasants often take their cues from the Queen. You know the old saying: if mama ain’t happy…yada yada. Logically, she must be appeased from time to time. In other words, the Queen decided upon the evening’s entertainment.

MY SCORE: 0/10

Hanna

Directed by Joe Wright.

2011. Rated PG-13, 111 minutes.
Cast:
Saoirse Ronan
Eric Bana
Cate Blanchett
Tom Hollander
Jessica Barden
Vicky Krieps
Tim Beckmann
Jason Flemyng
Olivia Williams

Hanna (Ronan) is not your typical teenage girl. Being raised in the forest by only your father in complete isolation tends to have that effect. We very soon learn there’s a lot more to it than that. Dad, Erik Heller (Bana) seems to be training her for a very dangerous mission. She fluently speaks numerous languages, has cat-like reflexes even in her sleep, fights viciously and is scarily proficient with firearms. We’re not the least bit surprised when she tells dad that she thinks she’s ready. With that, he digs up something that looks like he’s about to call Batman, shaves, cuts his hair, throws on a suit, gives Hanna a few last minute instructions and bails out. Apparently, the simple fact he’s alive is a threat to national security. Naturally, shortly after Hanna’s flipped the switch on the makeshift batphone a small army of government agents are making their way inside the cabin where she lives with guns drawn looking for pop. They only find her and she disposes of a few of them before letting herself be corralled and hauled off to a very sanitized facility for questioning.

At this point, we still don’t know what it is she’s ready for and why dad took off ahead of the action. Marissa (Blanchett) is wondering the same thing. She pretty much runs things in this particular government operation. The Heller’s plan slowly comes into focus for us while the action occurs rapidly enough. Our young heroine winds up on the run after some death-defying feats, death inducing to a number of those in her way, while dad is on an excursion of his own. Hanna’s introduction to the modern world and lack of social skill serves as comic relief. What exactly her father is doing and Hanna’s quest to reunite with him gives us both the action and the drama. It’s all woven into an intriguing and exciting tale. It's also full of wonderful visuals that keep our eyes dazzled.

Detractors will note that Hanna engages in lots of hand-to-hand combat with grown men. Rest assured, all is explained. I might add that what we’re shown is well depicted. It never feels anywhere near as ridiculous as it might sound. It helps that Ronan handles the lead role superbly. She is a perfect mix of naivete and ruthlessness. The plot does its part by being mysterious enough to keep us interested, but not so much that it feels cryptic. There are some spots where it drags a bit, but the pace feels solid overall. It wisely borrows from another recent action movie with a female lead. If Salt is basically The Bourne Identity starring Angelina Jolie then Hanna is Salt with a teenager. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

The Dilemma

Directed by Ron Howard.

2011. Rated PG-13, 111 minutes.
Cast:
Vince Vaughn
Kevin James
Winona Ryder
Jennifer Connelly
Channing Tatum
Queen Latifah
Chelcie Ross
Amy Morton
Eduardo N. Martinez

What should you do if you find out your best friend’s wife is cheating on him? That question is at the heart of The Dilemma. The conflicted guy is Ronny (Vaughn). He’s not really conflicted, though. He has a pretty brief period of doubt then decides he’s definitely going to tell his pal Nick (James) about his wife’s indiscretions. It’s a matter of timing. Not only are Ronny and Nick best friends they are also business partners in the midst of trying to secure the biggest deal of their lives. The stress of this has already caused Nick’s ulcer to flare up again. Understandably, Ronny fears that news like this would completely break his friend. When he confronts Geneva (Ryder), the guilty party, with his knowledge and plans she offers up some interesting justifications. What ensues is Nick following around both of them while ignoring Beth (Connelly), his own girlfriend. He’s also sort of torn about whether or not to pop the big question to her.

Vince Vaughn gives the same performance we’ve come to expect from him. You can decide for yourself it that’s a positive or a negative. He’s ably assisted by Ryder, Connelly and even a refreshingly subdued Kevin James. There are also interesting turns by Channing Tatum and Queen Latifah. Overall, it shapes up to be a nice little drama with a few funny moments sprinkled in. It’s not mind-blowing or anything, but a decent time-passer.

Expectations is what dooms The Dilemma. If you’ve paid any attention to the marketing campaign for the film and are even slightly familiar with the two male leads you should reasonably expect a screwball comedy. It is not anything of the sort. That people would be severely disappointed only makes sense. It’s like ordering a thick, juicy steak and being given a salad with a few strips of beef within. Sure, that can be good on most days, but today you had your heart set on that steak.

The question that arises is this: Is The Dilemma not really that funny because it’s not trying or are the jokes falling flat? I’ll own up to having trouble discerning. There are some jokes that definitely fail. There are plenty of other spots where I didn’t think they were going for laughs at all, but attempting to make Ronny (and occasionally the others) both a pathetic and sympathetic figure. I thought it worked. However, for audiences craving steak, this salad just won’t do.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Directed by Michael Bay.

2011. Rated PG-13, 157 minutes.
Cast:
Shia LaBeouf
Rosie Huntington-Whiteley
Josh Duhamel
John Turturro
Frances McDormand
Patrick Dempsey
Tyrese Gibson
John Malkovich
Ken Jeong
Kevin Dunn
Julie White

The Decepticons take a third crack at conquering Earth. Of course, Sam Witwicky (LaBeouf), the Autobots and the guy from Sector 7 (Turturro) stand in their way. Megan Fox does not. There is another pretty face in place of hers. More on that later. Moving on, this tale actually begins with man’s first landing on the moon back in 1969. Unbeknownst to us for over forty years, during that initial lunar expedition Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldridge discovered Sentinel, who appears to have crashed landed on the dark side of the moon. He’s an old Autobot who evidently taught Optimus Prime everything he knows. The astronauts bring what they can back to Earth which includes five thingamajigs. Fast forward to the present when Megatron and company have a bunch more of these things. They plan on getting the five that somehow wound up in the Middle East, but are now possessed by the US government. Once they do that they’ll be able to reconstruct their home planet Cybertron in a place that appears to be extremely close ot Earth. Never you mind the science of any of this just know that this is the bad guys’ plan. Oh, once Cybertron is operational they’re going to use mankind as its own slave-labor force.

Essentially, we get a remake of Revenge of the Fallen. That said, there are some revisions. As you can probably tell, the main change is switching out the whatchamacallit for the thingamajigs. Next, instead of destroying the Egyptian pyramids we tear up Chicago pretty darn good. And don’t forget we trade in The Fallen for Sentinel. These changes are neither here nor there. Some others actually do improve upon its predecessor, thankfully. For starters, the two jive-talking bots are nowhere to be found. Ma and Pa Witwicky’s annoying antics are also scaled back. Don’t worry, there’s still plenty of lame humor to go around. Much of it comes from the go-for-broke performance of John Turturro.

The most easily recognizable difference is we have a new damsel in distress, Carly Spencer played by model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. She buys collector items for some uber-rich dude. Yes, this turns out to be a very large part of the reason she comes to be in distress. Sadly, she can’t give Ms. Fox a run for her money in the acting department. By the way, it’s not like I think Megan Fox is ever in danger of winning an Oscar. For Ms. Huntington-Whiteley, her looks are all she brings to the table. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn she won this part in a raffle where only models were allowed to buy tickets. Any one of them would’ve been just as good.

The bottom line is that Dark of the Moon is a Transformers movie. If you enjoyed the last one, you’ll enjoy this one. Robots transform, fight, knock over skyscrapers and blow stuff up. Once again, this goes on for a way too long two and a half hours. I will say that this is a step up, though. The Fallen made me want to gouge out my own eyes with a spoon and puncture both eardrums with an icepick. This one merely made me want to bang my head on a hard surface. Heres to progress!

Salt

Directed by Phillip Noyce.
2010. Rated PG-13, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Angelina Jolie
Liev Schreiber
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Daniel Olbrychski
August Dehl
Hunt Block
Daniel Pearce
Olek Krupa
Andre Braugher

Evelyn Salt (Jolie) works for the CIA and has endured a lot for the good ol’ USA. Still, one day a man claiming to be a Russian defector shows up at the agency and says that she is really a spy from his homeland. Naturally, more and more doubt is cast upon her allegiance to the stars and stripes as parts of the man’s story seem to check out. Of course, through much mayhem and Houdini-like escapability, she gets away from the law and goes on the run. The question is whether she’s trying to clear her name or commit the assassination the defector says she will.

This is a movie filled with breath-taking stunts, brutal fight scenes and narrow escapes. There’s hardly any “down time” but what little there is perfectly sets up what’s to come. It also gives us just enough insight on the title character for us to care. No, we’re not talking grade A character development, but it’s more than sufficient for an action flick.

Helping all this out are a few very deftly performed sleight of hands that keep us guessing what’s really going on. Eventually, it’s not enough, but only because the number of possibilities is limited, at best. There simply aren’t enough characters to keep the mystery going. To keep the ruse up as long as it does is remarkable.



I’d be remiss if I didn’t compliment the star. This is not a role which will get Angelina Jolie nominated for an Oscar. However, it’s a role she plays perfectly. It helps that the role is tailor-made for her. I’m hard pressed to think of another woman who could do the role justice with both her acting and athleticism. Uma Thurman? Milla Jovovich? Lucy Liu? Kelly Hu? I say maybe on all of them, but no doubt on Jolie.

In the end, Salt is very much a female version of The Bourne Identity. You can knock it for that and for the ending blatantly setting us up for a sequel. And frankly, the program said to be causing all this trouble is a flimsy foundation for a story. All of this would drag down a lesser movie. I didn’t mind any of them because they’re all minor and the movie is slick enough to overcome its faults. The overall ride is just flat out fun, even though it is undeniably preposterous. Question my judgment, if you must, but I loved every second of it. Why yes, I am anxiously awaiting that sequel.

The Adjustment Bureau

Directed by George Nolfi.

2011. Rated PG-13, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Matt Damon
Emily Blunt
Anthony Mackie
Michael Kelly
John Slattery
Terrence Stamp
Amanda Warren

Like tons of movies before it and what I’m sure will be tons more to follow, The Adjustment Bureau is about a boy chasing after the girl of his dreams. He meets her and for some reason or another she keeps getting away. This is the plot of TAB in a nutshell. Widening the scope reveals a religious debate on the free will of man vs. God’s master plan.

The boy is David Norris (Damon). At age 24, he became the youngest person ever elected to Congress. Now in his thirties, he’s working on a run for the Senate. It looks like it is going to be a successful one until an impulsive mooning incident is caught on camera. Just before he is to give his concession speech he has a chance meeting with the girl, Elise (Blunt). At least we think they meet by chance. Along with David, we soon learn that everything happens according to The Chairman’s plan. Yes, we very quickly surmise The Chairman is the name we’re using for God, even if David doesn’t.

David wasn’t supposed to learn of the plan at all, but one of the adjusters literally fell asleep on the job. This allows our hero to see other adjusters at work. Adjusters make seemingly random things happen to keep us following the plan. Of course, when they’re spotted by David they quickly get a hold of him and reluctantly fill him in on the whole plan thing and let him know two things. First, if he ever reveals the existence of the Bureau, even by accident and regardless of whether anyone believes him, his brain will be permanently wiped clean. He’ll know nothing nor be able to remember anything, an instant vegetable. Second, he’s never to see Elise ever again. That just isn’t part of the plan. Of course, this begs the question if they could completely wipe your brain or adjust your reasoning as they do to Charlie (Kelly), David’s best friend, couldn’t the adjusters simply remove his memory of them and the girl? That would certainly be more effective than hoping he does what he’s supposed to. Who am I kidding? If they did that, we’d only have about a 30 minute movie. So off he goes back into the world armed with knowledge he was never supposed to have.

As we all know, the flesh is hard to deny and our hero is determined to get the girl. Whenever he manages to get near her, the adjusters are never far behind. Throughout all this, one of them develops a soft spot for David. His name is Harry. He’s played adequately by Anthony Mackie. Harry is important both within the confines of the film as well as outside its boundaries. What he means to the story is fairly obvious. He pretty much serves as David’s guardian angel. This makes him another in Hollywood’s (and American Lit’s) long line of the archetype known as “The Magical Negro.” This is an African-American character with unnatural abilities who’s sole purpose is to aid the white protagonist. If you think I’m thoughtlessly playing the race card think about The Legend of Bagger Vance, The Matrix, The Green Mile, Bruce Almighty, Ghost, Percy Jackson & the Olympians…I could go on for a long time. It’s troubling because it is such an oft-recurring stereotype that seems harmless but reeks of subjugation. It’s also jarring in movies where that is only black character as Harry is here.

Still, I don’t deem TAB a success or failure solely based on my views of harry. He’s just one item in a very mixed bag. It’s a solid movie with an intriguing premise and fun chase scenes. It’s almost like Damon were playing Jason Bourne again, constantly on the run. The difference is David doesn’t engage in hand to hand combat and nothing blows up. It also has a spiritual aspect the Bourn movies never aspire to. This can lead t o deep, philosophical discussion, which is always good. However, it also defies its own logic for the sake of a clean ending. I have to give it credit because it ends with a brave stance if you think about what it’s saying.

Insidious

Directed by James Wan.
2010. Rated PG-13, 103 minutes.
Cast:
Rose Byrne
Patrick Wilson
Ty Simpkins
Barbara Hershey
Lin Shaye
Leigh Whannell
Angus Sampson
Andrew Astor
Ruben Pla

Meet the Lamberts. They’ve just moved into a big pretty house. Almost immediately things start going bump in the night…and sometimes during the day, too. Mom Renai (Byrne) notices things the most. She whimpers and cries a lot. Dad Josh (Wilson) is almost perpetually on his way out the door and sleeps fairly hard do he doesn’t notice anything at all. Their oldest son Foster (Astor) says he’s scared once then we hardly ever see him again. I guess Hollywood is compliant with child labor laws after all. Speaking of which, there is an infant who’s name I can’t recall. She’s also sensitive to the strange happenings and cries almost as much as her mother. Finally, there’s middle-child Dalton (Simpkins). He seems to be the target of all this paranormal activity. See what I did there? Smooth, huh? He bumps his head, sees something scary and a day or two later slips into a coma. The doctor says it’s not really a coma. He doesn’t know what it is, but whatever. Mom and Dad bring Dalton home so he can be in his own bed during his not-coma and weird things keep going on.

Before I go any further, let’s talk about this house. It’s a gorgeous house with at least two floors of living space plus an attic. All of the rooms are huge including a living room in which their piano looks small. For a family of five, with the parents presumably in their thirties, it’s pretty much a dream house. Mom is an aspiring but non-paycheck earning songwriter. What does Dad do? He’s gotta be a young hotshot exec at some highly successful company, right? No. maybe he’s a lawyer or a doctor? Try again. Pat yourself on the back if you said school teacher. I’m not talking professor at a prestigious university. I’m talking middle-school. Uh-huh. Let’s move on.

As they tend to do in such movies, the noises and sightings intensify. Unable to take it any longer, Mom demands the family move immediately. The very next day, or so it appears, the Lamberts are moving into a smaller but still very nice house they’re leasing according to the sign on the lawn. Seriously, what district does this dude teach in? Anyhoo, in their new-new home there’s more random noises and sightings of grumpy looking dudes stomping around. Who ya gonna call? Momma-in-law (Hershey) has been hanging around the new-new place and is seeing stuff, too. She calls Ghostbusters, sort of. It’s really Elise (Shaye) who is a friend of hers who has a pair of geeky employees with lots of equipment. Long story short, we get the revelation we either figured out on our own or already knew because it’s in the trailer. Lady, it ain’t the house. It’s that little snot-nose that’s been lying in bed for the last 40 minutes of this flick. I won’t tell what happens after that because then we’d be getting into spoilers. It’s far beyond me to totally ruin a movie watching experience for you. Maybe.

I will do what I’m here for. I’ll tell you how I feel about all this. If you’ve ever seen a haunted house movie, this one will be less than thrilling. It is even more derivative than most. It feels like a mashup of Paranormal Activity and The Amityville Horror with a heaping helping of Poltergeist thrown in. At this point, the entire sub-genre can only be so creative. This one merely regurgitates what it got from those others without the tension carrying over. It never grabs you. The whole thing feels more hokey than scary. It doesn’t help that this set of apparitions is comparatively impotent. They pace back and forth, hide in corners and occasionally reach for someone. Sadly, it’s painfully obvious they’ll never get there. Worse, they look like they know they’ll never get there. The last scenes provide some intrigue and is a decent setup for a sequel. It’s just not a sequel I’m particularly anxious for.

MY SCORE: 5/10

Willard

Directed by Glen Morgan.
2003. Rated PG-13, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Crispin Glover
R. Lee Ermey
Laura Harring
Jackie Burroughs
Laura Harring

Loner and incompetent worker Willared (Glover) befriends the pack of rats that have congregated in his basement and trains them to do his dirty deeds. Remake of the 1971 film starring Ernest Borgnine which I haven't seen, yet. Crispin Glover is absolutely perfect in the title role. In fact, he might be too perfect as his career hasn't exactly taken off since this came out. It's a delightfully odd movie that has many of the elements of a horror movie but really isn't one. That is, unless you're one of those people who completely freak out at the sight of rats. It's more of a bazaar revenge flick. The way the rodents, in particular Ben and Socrates, are portrayed is outstanding. The audience is never really sure either of them are capable of the things Willard thinks they are but we can't rule out the possibility. As a result, we can simultaneously pity Willard for losing his mind and disdain him for the heinous things he has the rats do. It's one of the stranger movies I've seen, but it's deftly directed and maintains enough camp to keep things just off-kilter.

MY SCORE: 7.5/10

Cloverfield

Directed by Matt Reeves.

2008. Rated PG-13, 84 minutes.
Cast:
Mike Vogel
Jessica Lucas
Lizzy Caplan
Odette Yustman
TJ Miller
Michael Stahl-David
Margot Fairley

New York City is under siege by a giant monster. Again.

In the old Godzilla movies we always saw people running and screaming. However, the stories always focused on a few people who were tasked to stop or help Godzilla. The basic idea here is to focus on a random group of people among those running and screaming who essentially have nothing to do with what would normally be the main plot. They aren’t out to stop this menace. They’re really just trying to keep from getting killed by it as they move about the city in hopes of saving a friend. This approach works very well. It accomplishes several things: It keeps the monster from being overexposed, gives it an air of originality and of course, keeps the budget down. Speaking of budget, what they did with theirs is spectacular. The monster is beautifully rendered, as are the parasites that fall from it. Still, the real success of the special fx team is the city itself. If you rent this, watch the special features on the DVD. You will be amazed at just how much of this movie was made on a computer.

The cast of characters are some of the dumbest people in cinematic history. Hud (Miller), who’s holding the handheld camera for most of the movie is seen through, is the worst offender. Nearly every time he opens his mouth he gives a new answer to the question “How stupid can you be?” These people put hate in my heart. I was rooting for the monster. Well, except for in the case of Jessica Lucas who plays Lilly but only because she’s…uh…fine. Forget I said that. Anyhoo, they also left the door wide open for a sequel that will likely be far worse. My reasoning is since nothing is explained here, they’ll spend much of the second movie developing some cockamamie story to satisfy the internet fanboys who feverishly debate where the monster came from. It will simply be a run-of-the-mill creature-feature with a Hollywood ending. Seriously, once you’ve shot your wad with all this “mysterious monster” business what else can you do? Once the gimmick is successful, leave well enough alone and just count the millions you’ve made.

This is for people who want to see a different kind of monster movie. Basically, it’s the Blair Witch Project of the genre. Thankfully, I haven’t had a bunch of morons trying to convince me it was real like they did when Blair Witch came out. However, I have had people telling me about all kinds of stuff they read online that supposedly fills in the back story for both the monster and the inane people we’re stuck with. Enough already. It wasn’t in the actual movie so I don’t really care. If you can manage to turn your brain off for an hour and a half, you’ll enjoy the ride. If not, skip it.

Sunshine

Directed by Danny Boyle.
2007. Rated PG-13, 107 minutes.
Cast:
Cilian Murphy
Chris Evans
Rose Byrne
Michelle Yeoh

Fifty years into the future the great sustainer of life, the sun, has started dying. Eight scientists/astronauts are on their way to the fading star with a giant nuclear bomb strapped to their ship, the ominously named Icarus II. They hope to release the bomb into the sun, then detonate it in hopes of reigniting it and save mankind from freezing to death. We learn that seven years earlier the same thing was attempted by a crew aboard what else? The Icarus I. No one involved was ever heard from until our heroes pick up their distress signal. There are decisions to make, tempers to calm, emergencies to quell and consequences to deal with. All of this is handled well as the opposing forces of selfishness and selflessness. In the bigger picture, there’s also man’s will to survive vs. God’s plan. However, if you’re paying attention and have seen the Ridley Scott classic you’ll notice a number of references to [i]Alien[/i]. It feels like a nice homage at first. I was hoping it was just that and not a sign of things to come. After all, the tension from such an inherently dangerous and important mission is more than enough to carry the movie. Alas, directory Danny Boyle can’t control himself and we find ourselves suddenly thrust into a very weird space-monster movie. Lame.

SCORE: 5/10

Red Riding Hood

Directed by Catherine Hardwicke.
2011. Rated PG-13, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Amanda Seyfried
Gary Oldman
Shiloh Fernandez
Virginia Madsen
Billy Burke
Max Irons
Julie Christie
Lukas Haas
Shauna Kain
Adrian Holmes
Michael Hogan

The gang’s all here. We have a not-so-little Red Riding Hood (Seyfried), Grandma (Christie) and the woodcutter (Fernandez). It should go without saying that we have a big bad wolf. In this case we don’t just follow Red, er, Valerie on her trip to Grandma’s. The wolf is not quite the same as we’ve been reading all these years. It’s a werewolf and it is terrorizing the entire village. Understandably, the villagers are on edge because it has decided to attack for the first time in twenty years. Apparently, the animal sacrifices they’ve continuously given over that period are no longer enough. Even more disconcerting, no one know its human identity. Any one of them could be the big bad wolf. Reluctantly, they hire Solomon (Oldman), who specializes in this sort of thing, and his band of unmerry men to find and kill this evil creature.

It’s an interesting premise. Though its know the world over as a children’s story, the original tale is actually violent and dark. Therefore, reimagining it as a horror flick is not quite the leap many believe it is. In that story, the wolf eats Grandma and would do the same to Little Red Riding Hood if not for the Woodcutter taking an axe to him. See? And I haven’t even mentioned the pedophilic and cross-dressing aspects. Honestly, this removes those particular subtexts and adds some of its own. Freedom of religion, adultery and uncomfortably implied incest all figure into the proceedings. Add in some werewolf attacks and bouts of mob mentality and you get a wild ride through an ancient village.

With all of these things swirling about, Red Riding Hood should be an infinitely more enjoyable watch. Sadly, it botches the one thing at which it tries hardest: the love story. We all knew there would be one. It seems you can hardly make a movie without that element. Our Red…Valerie...is sort of engaged in a love triangle. She’s been in love with the Woodcutter, er Peter, her entire life. However, due to her family’s lack of funds it’s been arranged without her consent for her to marry Henry (Irons). The whole thing is way too reminiscent of Twilight. That should be no surprise since director Catherine Hardwicke helmed the first film in that franchise. Even if you don’t like those movies (or books) you have to admit the Edward vs. Jacob dynamic provides some sparks. Here, there is no such excitement because both guys seem to have Edward’s demeanor and personality. Not to mention that I’m not so sure either guy can give Robert Pattinson a run for his money in the acting department, as bad as that is. The portions of RRH that focus on this are tedious work to sift through.

Fortunately, what’s going on with Red’s family is far more intriguing and keeps the movie somewhat afloat. The same can be said for Solomon, his hunting of the werewolf and his interactions with the villagers. Gary Oldman plays it to the hilt, as always. Though his character is here to do a good thing, we’re not sure whether we like him or not. That’s a good thing. On the other hand, it never scares us and judging by the less than thrilling werewolf attacks, it doesn’t really try to. Still, combine this with a lame love story and RRH has a very uneven feel. It vacillates between intriguing and boring without ever settling on either.

MY SCORE: 5.5/10

The Fourth Kind

Directed by Olatunde Osunsanmi.
2009. Rated PG-13, 98 minutes.
Cast:
Milla Jovovich
Will Patton
Hakeem Kae-Kazim
Elias Koteas
Raphael Coleman
Mia Mckenna-Bruce
Eric Loren
Corey Johnson
Enzo Cilenti
Daphne Alexander

Dr. Abigail Tyler (Jovovich…and the actual Dr. Tyler) suspects that the abnormal amount of unexplained disappearances in Nome, Alaska are due to alien abductions. This is supposedly based on “actual case studies” and interviews with Dr. Tyler.

It’s a fascinating subject. Though many of the dramatic events can’t quite be called evidence, they are compelling side-effects, allegedly. During these scenes, the energy level is ramped up and much of what we see is disturbing. Will Patton gives us the film’s best performance as Sheriff August. His skepticism grounds the movie, keeping it from completely coming apart at the seams.

Director Olatunde Osunsanmi made a decision that absolutely sinks his movie. He tries to make a documentary and a dramatization about the same story, simultaneously. We’re often shown video footage, reportedly of actual events, alongside scenes of actors re-enacting the exact same occurrences in split-screen. It’s a distracting style in which each half of the screen subtracts from the other. Why do we need Milla Jovovich when we have the real Dr. Tyler? Instead of being taken in, maybe even persuaded by what’s going on, we’re busy picking out differences in the actor’s performance and the real thing. Incidentally, this is why I believe Will Patton’s performance is the movie’s best. His is one of the few not repeatedly juxtaposed with the genuine article. The bottom line is this should’ve been either a documentary or a dramatization, not both.

If you’re a conspiracy theorist who not only believes in alien abductions but also that the government is going out of its way to cover them up, you will find plenty of fodder for your cannon, here. The “actual” footage we see is interesting, though some of it is of questionable validity. It suddenly becomes too grainy or otherwise unwatchable at appropriate moments. However, the style makes it a frustrating watch. We can never get settled into what we’re watching and therefore can’t feel the horror it wants us to. Nor can we reach the conclusion it wants us to. Nothing here will change your mind, one way or another.

MY SCORE: 4/10

Source Code

Directed by Duncan Jones.
2011. Rated PG-13, 93 minutes.
Cast:
Jake Gyllenhaal
Michelle Monaghan
Vera Farmiga
Jeffrey Wright
Michael Arden
Cas Anvar
Max Denoff
Brent Skagford
Gordon Masten

Colter Stevens (Gyllenhaal) finds himself aboard a commuter train in Chicago and he has no idea how he got there. He really freaks out when he makes his way to the restroom and sees a face different from his own in the mirror. He returns to his seat where his behavior disturbs Christina (Monaghan), whom he doesn’t know but who appears to be his traveling companion. Of course, she thinks he’s whoever that was in the mirror and has no clue about what’s happening. In a few minutes, the train explodes, he blacks out and wakes up in a capsule talking to Cpt. Goodwin (Farmiga) through a monitor. By the way, he doesn’t know her, either. Shortly, we’re let in on the plan. Through an invention/discovery called Source Code the last eight minutes of a person’s life can be retrieved to be relived by someone who is a close enough match. Our soldier is a match for the man in the mirror. His mission is to find out who blew up the train. He can go back into the matrix…er…Source Code numerous times, but he always only has eight minutes before he’s kicked out. Back and forth Colter is tossed apparently through time and/or space to conduct his investigation 480 seconds at a time. He also pursues other curiosities on his own since it seems he was volunteered for this mission without his knowledge or consent.

Source Code lost me pretty quickly. Though the movie tries its best to confuse you early on, that wasn’t it at all. I followed just fine. Perhaps I followed too well. I say this because the one thing that ruins a movie built on suspense happened. I knew who the bad guy was within eight minutes of being told what our hero was supposed to do. That’s roughly fifteen minutes of real time. It was pretty simple, actually. I looked at the only person who struck me as a viable candidate, said to myself “That’s who did it,” and waited to be proven right. Unfortunately, I was. There was no mystery for me. Watching him accost person after person in hopes of hitting the jackpot felt like a pointless exercise. It was similar in feel to an episode of CSI. Yes, what’s going on is vaguely interesting but I know the person they bring in at 15 after the hour and 30 after aren’t the killer. It’s always the one they start chasing at 45 after.

Once you’ve figured out the villain it’s easy to sit around looking for other things. Not one to resist this particular temptation, I mapped out how I thought the story would play out in my mind. Sadly, I got almost all of it right including the emotionally manipulative finale. It’s the type of ending I’d normally be okay with because my energy would’ve been spent guessing the identity of the killer. To make matters worse, it spends its last few minutes of screentime breaking every rule of its own movie science without sufficient explanation.

So far I’ve been relentlessly bashing SC but take it with a grain of salt. The truth is if you don’t know who the terrorist is this is probably highly intriguing sci-fi. Even though the protagonist relives the same eight minutes repeatedly, it manages to not be boring like the similarly styled Vantage Point a few years ago. On top of that, some will fall hook, line and sinker for what’s intended to be a tear-jerker climax. It just failed to grab me. Each time it threatened to do so I dodged it by finding something else to nitpick. If it manages to get a hold of you, you’ll probably enjoy it. If it doesn’t, welcome to my world.

MY SCORE: 5/10

Madea's Big Happy Family

Directed by Tyler Perry.
2011. Rated PG-13, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Tyler Perry
Loretta Devine
Cassi Davis
Shannon Kane
David Mann
Tamela Mann
Bow Wow
Lauren London
Teyana Taylor
Rodney Perry

Director Tyler Perry’s most famous creation is back for another adventure. This time, the big family actually belongs to Shirley (Devine) and they are anything but happy. Shirley has come down with an almost immediately terminal form of cancer. Her doctor informs her she only has four to six weeks to live. She’s actually been battling this for seven years and was thought to be in remission. Her family knows none of this. She decides the only way to let them know what’s going on is to have them all over for a grand dinner and break the news after they’ve filled their bellies. However, as soon as her three adult children lay eyes on each other sparks fly, tempers flare and they all flee in different directions. This mix is made even more volatile by the fact that aside from their problems with their siblings they all bring and display their issues with their spouses and children, as well. The two daughters treat their husbands like dirt and the son has baby mama drama and a gold digging girlfriend. As a dear friend of Shirley’s, Madea is asked to help straighten up this dysfunctional bunch.

From the very beginning it is clear that this is classic Tyler Perry. Everything is over the top, both dramatically and comedically, problems mount at an alarming speed, and there’s plenty of sermonizing. This is the director’s tried and true formula. That formula is largely influenced by the movie Soul Food. Much of his work mimics that movie’s tone and style with Madea and/or others adding extra zaniness and homespun wisdom. Here, we practically get a remake. A television set full of money seems to be the only thing missing.

Even without understanding this, most of his core audience doesn’t even get to be surprised by all the plot developments because they’ve likely seen the play of the same name Perry created, toured around the country and sold on DVD the year before. They still flock to his movies, though. It’s become a genius marketing plan. He’s created an entire industry where duplication of product is not only expected but ravenously craved by its consumers.

From my viewpoint, Madea’s Big Happy Family is a colossal disappointment. Part of the problem is its exactly the same as every other movie with the name “Madea” attached to it, as well as a few others. What makes it feel worse than those is it comes on the hells of “For Colored Girls.” Whether you liked that movie or not, it showed Perry as an artist willing to take risks and leave his comfort zone. Even if he didn’t stray very far he still tried to stretch his wings some. Since he has the eyes and ears of so many trained on his every action. I hoped that FCG signaled the start of an artistic growth spurt. I hoped he had either found something more to say or was at least willing to try different ways of delivering his message. Lastly, I hoped he was becoming confident enough to let his audience question what they’ve seen which may in turn make them question themselves and stimulate their own growth. Instead, we get a regression to the norm. It’s a highly profitable norm, but it’s a spiritually unfulfilling one. This is particularly troublesome given the Christian slant to his work. It reaffirms what his core fans already believ in but doesn’t encourage them to do anything more than nod in agreement, laugh and wait impatiently for the next installment in the Tyler Perry canon.

For those that are fans, this is right up your alley. Madea is as outrageous as ever. Mr. Brown (David Mann), Cora (Tamela Mann) and Joe (the director in a dual role) are back for good measure. The movie moves swiftly and maintains a southern gospel tint. Every second of it is precisely who we know Tyler Perry to be. It never once threatens to be anything more. The question is does this float your boat, or not?

MY SCORE: 4/10

Jumping the Broom

Directed by Salim Akil.

2011. Rated PG-13, 112 minutes.
Cast:
Paula Patton
Laz Alonso
Angela Bassett
Loretta Devine
Mike Epps
Meagan Good
Tasha Smith
Julie Bowen
Valerie Pettiford
DeRay Davis
Gary Doudan
Romeo Miller
Brian Stokes Mitchell

And the y lived happily ever after. That Jumping the Broom ends this way should not be a surprise. It’s a romantic comedy named after a centuries old wedding tradition. You should already know how it ends. Our main character is food of saying “the details make the person.” So it is in the details where JtB is made or broken. That main character is Sabrina (Patton). Tired of dealing with no-good men, she asks God to send her a soul mate and vows abstinence until He does. Don’t worry, she immediately bumps into Jason (Alonso), who is apparently “the one.” Skip ahead a bit to after what we’re told is “five incredible months” he proposes, she says yes and then the movie starts.

The nuptials are to be held at the mansion of Sabrina’s rich parents on Martha’s Vineyard. Evidently, they’ve been rich a very long time. There is one little detail that makes this movie go. Sabrina has never met Jason’s family. They’re quite the opposite of Sabrina’s folks. Jason’s family are working class people from Brooklyn. Nevermind that no one of them speaks with anything that sounds even remotely like a New York accent. Just know that they are on their way to the Vineyard fro the wedding and Mom, the widowed Mrs. Taylor (Devine) is none too pleased that she’s never met her future daughter-in-law. Rich people interacting with poor people and lots of melodrama ensues.

Details keep flying at us. How well we deal with them will determine whether or not we enjoy it. They come fast and most of them help keep this a fairly light affair, moving us quickly through the near two hour runtime. The problem is after a while there’s so much going on the movie feels cluttered. Most of these strands are amusing but not always necessary. It begins to feel like the wedding episode of a daytime soap opera. Among those things that need to be cut entirely is the language switches. From time to time our wealthy characters will suddenly start speaking French. It’s presented like its just something sophisticated rich folks do. Maybe, but it comes across as strange and certainly isn’t needed to provide us with a clear distinction between the classes. The rest of the movie does a perfectly fine job establishing this.

Still, there is another detail that could stand some fleshing out. It’s really just one line of dialogue, but its drawn from history and transcends the movie. However, it may do so in a disasterous manner. In a spiteful retort to Mrs. Taylor, Mrs. Watson (Bassett) proclaims her family once owned slaves. Yes, there really were blacks that owned slaves. Most often, they purchased them as a way to get/keep them from under the thumb of white slaveowners whom, as we know, were harsh taskmasters to understate it by a couple thousands miles. To those not aware of this historical tidbit, Bassett’s line goes far beyond the villainy its trying to assign to her character. It reeks of self-hatred and shows a level of elitism even greater than I think the filmmakers are going for. A thirty second explanation would balance this. Those is charge should never assume their audience is stupid. By the same token they also should assume knowledge of any particular historic fact. This is especially true when the much more widely known and still practiced tradition that the movie is named after is explained in full.

That entire previous paragraph might be nit-picking. The more important issues to our enjoyment are the crowded feeling it gives us, as I’ve already mentioned, and the bombardment of clichés we’re hit with. The things that happen in most rom-coms happen here. In addition, it’s also heavily influenced by the Tyler Perry canon. Thankfully, it’s not as loud or outlandish as those films, but the formula of secular humor punctuated by Christian heedings is clearly visible. To this end, it should be noted that Evangelist Bishop T. D. Jakes, who’s made several movies himself, has a small role and is one of the producers.

There are some good things here. As I’ve said, much of it is amusing. It doesn’t often cause uproarious laughter, but there are some chuckles to be had. Our cast is game. The continuous sparring between Angela Bassett and Loretta Devine is enjoyable melodrama. Leads Patton and Alonso acquit themselves well enough and fans of Romeo can rejoice he’s a slightly better actor than his dad (Master P). Admittedly, that last one isn’t saying much but roll with it. In all, it adds up to one big giant package of “meh.”

The Tourist

Directed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck.
2010. Rated PG-13, 103 minutes.
Cast:
Angelina Jolie
Johnny Depp
Paul Bettany
Steven Berkoff
Timothy Dalton
Rufus Sewell
Christian De Sica
Alessio Boni

The police are hot on the trail of Elise (Jolie). Everywhere she goes there are a couple of agents practically within spitting distance. Cameras are constantly trained on her and her every move is reported back to Inspector Acheson (Bettany) in real time. However, they’re not really interested in her. They are after her super reclusive boyfriend Alexander Pierce. They don’t know what he looks like. Still, they’ve managed to surmise that she is leaving Paris to meet him on their way to Venice. To throw the hounds off her scent, Elise throws herself at tourist Frank Tupelo (Depp) on the train, making the cops think he is the man they’re looking for. Why the law is after Pierce isn’t immediately clear. Why someone else is after him is made plain right away. He’s managed to steal over $2 billion from a ruthless gangster who also isn’t sure what he looks like.

Watching Jolie get followed around is mildly interesting. Trying to figure out who’s the mystery man is a tiny bit moreso. Occasionally, we get a chase scene as Frank either flees for his life or gets rescued by Elise. Mostly, these are not spectacular action sequences. They’re just adequate and advance the plot just a bit. It’s all rather bland.

Our two leads were brought in to be anything but bland. Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp are both stars. This is without question. Each has considerable presence, demanding we watch them. That is their job and both do it well. Sadly, the rest of the movie fails them. Who the actors are is remarkable. What they are doing is not. As a result, the romantic sparks that may have ignited this affair are missing. The humor that may have carried the day is hit or miss, at best. This means this movie has many of the same problems as a pair of movies of recent vintage: Knight and Day and Killers. Unfortunately, this has less action than either of those to distract us with. This wants to be smarter than those. It is. It’s just not smart enough to mask its flaws and raise itself from mediocrity.

MY SCORE: 5/10