The Quick and Dirties: Prepping for the 2015 Dellies

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Morgan Freeman Week: Now You See Me

Morgan Freeman Week continues...

Directed by Louis Letterier.

2013. Rated PG-13, 115 minutes.

Cast:

Jesse Eisenberg

Mark Ruffalo

Morgan Freeman

Woody Harrelson

Isla Fisher

Dave Franco

Melanie Laurent

Michael Caine

Common

Michael Kelly

Elias Koteas

A quartet of magicians manages to really do the impossible. Daniel (Eisenberg), Henley (Fisher), Merritt (Harrelson), and Jack (Franco) are putting on a huge Las Vegas magic show. They pluck an unsuspecting man from the audience and make him disappear. That's not the trick. The trick is that the man reappears in a bank vault in Paris. When they zap him back to Vegas, all the money in the vault comes with him. Both the FBI and Interpol are quite interested in figuring out how they really robbed a bank on another continent. Working the case are Agent Rhodes (Ruffalo) for the former and Agent Dray (Laurent) for the latter. Also after our heroes is Thaddeus Bradley (Freeman), a former magician who now makes a living exposing trade secrets.

Now You See Me is an insanely watchable movie. It captures our interest early and clinches it tight. Truth is, whether we admit it or not, all of us like to see a good magic trick. When we see one, we immediately try to figure out how it was done. This is the key to the film's intrigue. It repeatedly puts us in the position of bewildered yet fascinated spectator. This spills over from the stage show of our would be heroes into their cat-and-mouse with the law. As a result, the plot moves at a brisk pace while we try to keep up. It's not that the plot is terribly intricate or complex in any way. Our minds are just pre-occupied with the 'how' of what we just saw.

Eventually, the movie has to give us some answers. This is where the problems start. The process of elimination will likely give you the answer to the most pressing question. That question is not how, but who. You can follow that up with why. The answer is unsatisfactory in either case. Scrutinizing things only makes it fall apart even more. Still other things can only be explained by the term "movie magic." We get the same feeling of disappointment Dorothy had after her first peek at the man behind the curtain in the land of Oz.

Of course, if all the big reveals work for you then just ignore the entire previous paragraph. You'll sing its praises and possibly fling around words like 'brilliant' and 'genius.' Though I disagree, I wouldn't even dream of trying to dissuade you. It does take some serious ingenuity to keep up the various ruses as long as it does. And like I said, it is fun to watch as it rolls along. If you haven't seen it, be prepared. The movie may make or break itself during those last few scenes.

MY SCORE: 6.5/10

Click here to see more Morgan Freeman related treats!

30 Minutes or Less

Directed by Ruben Fleischer.

2011. Rated R, 83 minutes.

Cast:

Jesse Eisenberg

Danny McBride

Aziz Ansari

Nick Swardson

Dilshad Vadsaria

Michael Peña

Bianca Kajlich

Fred Ward

Brett Gelman

Dwayne (McBride) isn't nearly as smart as he thinks. To boot, he is a slacker at odds with his wealthy dad (Ward). Really, he’s just waiting for the old man to die so he can inherit everything. When he lets this bit of info slip to Juicy (Kajlich), the stripper giving him a lap-dance, she tells him she knows someone who could expedite the process for a hundred grand. Of course, he doesn’t have that kind of money. With his sidekick Travis (Swardson), who happens to be good at making explosives, he decides to kidnap someone and force them to rob a bank for him. This is where Nick (Eisenberg) comes in. He’s a pizza delivery guy with problems of his own. He just had a fight with his best friend Chet (Ansari) and he’s attracted to Chet’s sister Kate (Vadsaria), but won’t tell her. He is also the unlucky chap who makes a delivery to Dwayne and Travis. He is quickly knocked out when he gets there. When he wakes up he finds he has a bomb strapped to his chest and is told he will rob a bank today, or else he’s going to go boom. In case you aren’t quite sure, this is a comedy.

Most of the movie consists of us, along with Dwayne and Chet, following Nick around as he decides what to do and figures out how to go about doing it, with Chet’s help, naturally. On both sides of this coin, we get lots of bickering between two guys. There is less where Dwayne and Travis is concerned as the former is mostly in charge. If you boil down all the yelling they do it equals one guy coming up with an idea and the other calling him stupid. Eventually, a course of action is agreed upon which doesn’t go as planned and the cycle starts over. This repetition lends itself to the theory of diminishing returns. The jokes yield fewer and fewer laughs as the movie goes on because they really haven’t changed since the beginning. The only real variation being how inventive the guys get with their swear words, of which there are more than enough.

To the movie’s credit, the plot hurtles forward with a kinetic energy. It rarely slows down, knowing it has to jam everything into an hour and a half. Those brief occasions are to set up our romance, but that’s about it. Most exposition is taken care of during those shouting matches I referenced. The rest of the film is made up of some form of action. Though they lack any real tension, they are occasionally entertaining.

More than any other genre, whether or not we like a comedy depends on how we feel about its stars. You either find certain people funny or you do not. I like Eisenberg okay, but can’t say I think he’s hilarious. I am also lukewarm on Danny McBride. Generally speaking, Ansari and Swardson both annoy me far more than make me laugh. When you add all that up, you get a movie that I believe has some funny moments, but mostly falls flat. The other aspects, like the story and action, are also rather hit-or-miss. Give it an additional demerit for reducing Michael Peña to a total stereotype. Now rewrite sentences three through six of this paragraph to better reflect how you feel about this movie’s stars.

MY SCORE: 5/10

Rio

Directed by Carlos Saldanha.

2011. Rated G, 96 minutes.
Cast:
Jesse Eisenberg
Anne Hathaway
Leslie Mann
Rodrigo Santoro
George Lopez
Jamie Foxx
Will.i.Am
Jermaine Clement
Wanda Sykes
Bernardo de Paula
Tracy Morgan

As a wee little baby bird Blu (Eisenberg) is snatched from his habitat in the wilds of Rio de Janeiro and winds up in Minnesota as pet to Linda (Mann). One day, ornithologist Tulio (Santoro) shows up and informs Linda that Blu is the last male of his species, the blue macaw. He needs Blu to mate with Jewel (Hathaway) in order to save said species. Of course, they have to go back to Rio for this to happen. Once there, we find out a few things. Jewel is very interested in escaping Tulio’s lab and not at all interested in Blu (she has no use for humans). Smugglers are also interested in our not-so-in-lovebirds, realizing that these are the last two of their kind and very valuable. Finally, Linda and Tulio seem very interested in each other. Chasing, match-making and singing ensues.

What also ensues is little more than an hour’s worth of blandness. It finds its comfort zone in a paint-by-numbers tale that doesn’t hold any real surprises and is more than happy bing cute and slipping in a slightly risqué joke every now and again. Occasionally, something pretty funny happens, it moves along at a nice pace and at a total length of just a bit over 90 minutes it never overstays its welcome. Howerver, it never really differentiates itself from the scores of other animated kiddie flicks made in the last half decade, positively or negatively. Even the songs are kind of ho-hum, not particularly memorable with the exception of the villainous Nigel’s (Clement) tune. This is a shame because you have both Jamie Foxx (Nico) and Will.i.Am (Pedro) in the cast. Love them or hate them, they’ve both made a killing by delivering catchy numbers to pop radio. Most of what we get here feels ripped off from Madagascar.

Don’t fret. This isn’t a bad watch. It’s a perfectly pleasant time-passer. There are some excellent visuals helped by the use of color and the absence of it, in Nigel’s case. Humor comes at a decent rate with the occasional punch line that goes over the kiddies’ heads. They’ll enjoy it and you probably will, also. I’m not sure either of you will love it, but I’m pretty sure you won’t hate it.

MY SCORE: 6/10

Holy Rollers

Directed by Kevin Asch.
2010. Rated R, 89 minutes.
Cast:
Jesse Eisenberg
Justin Bartha
Danny A. Abeckaser
Ari Gaynor
Jason Fuchs
Mark Ivanir
Elizabeth Marvel
Bern Cohen
Q-Tip
Hallie Kate Eisenberg

At twenty, Sam’s (Jesse Eisenberg) life appears to be already mapped out for him. He lives with his parents and leads a fairly strict Hasidic lifestyle. He is studying to become a rabbi and it has been arranged for him to marry a very pretty girl. He also works at the dry-cleaners his father owns. That business puts food on the table, but affords the family no luxuries. Even the necessities are worn and ragged. Particularly problematic is the ancient stove. Turning it on requires a pair of pliers and just the right touch.

Sam dreams of bettering his family’s circumstances. If nothing else, he wants to buy his mom a new stove. This is where Yosef (Bartha) comes in. Yosef lives next door and is the older brother of Sam’s best friend. He is also a drug-runner. He works for Jackie (Abeckaser), an Istraeli born Ecstasy dealer. To help the operation, Yosef dupes straight-laced Hasidics into thinking they’re transporting medicine from Amsterdam into the U.S. for the wealthy. Yosef not only recruits Sam for such a trip, Jackie likes Sam so much he quickly becomes an integral part of this small outfit. He’s also sucked into the fast paced lifestyle and becomes an outcast amongst his friends and family.

This is based on a true story. It is interesting and efficiently told. Aside from the fact we’re dealing with Hasidic Jews, there’s not much that’s unique about Holy Rollers. It also lacks the storytelling acumen of movies it’s so clearly influenced by like Scarface and Blow. Though their tales were familiar, even when we first saw them, their sweeping narratives stick with us. Though HR takes its cues from those others, it never really strives to be the type of epic they are. Instead, it moves rapidly through its story, sure not to overstay its welcome.

However, I did say it is efficient. Despite clocking in at a hair shy of 90 minutes, it hits all the spots it has to in order to keep us vested in what happens to Sam. Everything needed to give us a solid crime drama is present. It’s just that not much of it is explored enough to make HR stand out. Part of the problem is that Sam isn’t a dynamic enough personality. Yes, we see that he has dreams and aspirations and the things he’s willing to do to achieve them. Still, he’s little more than a reflection of whoever he happens to be around at the time. Perhaps most troubling, we see how his religion reacts to his indiscretions, but never really find out if there is a real struggle within him. We don’t know if he’s having knee-jerk reactions or really turning his back on his faith. It’s an aspect that could’ve helped the movie by allowing us to participate a little more.

Regardless of its issues, HR is a solid watch. The acting is top notch. In spite of what it leaves out, it never feels like it is rushing through what it has. It makes its way from beginning to end in a manner worthy of your perusal. It just doesn’t quite live up to its potential.


MY SCORE: 6/10

The Social Network

Directed by David Fincher.
2010. Rated PG-13, 120 minutes.
Cast:
Jesse Eisenberg
Andrew Garfield
Justin Timberlake
Armie Hammer
Brenda Song
Bryan Barter
Rooney Mara
Rashida Jones
Joseph Mazzello

“If you could’ve invented Facebook then, you would’ve invented Facebook,” Mark Zuckerberg (Eisenberg) coldly says to one of the people suing him for allegedly stealing their idea. That statement is at the heart of all matters in The Social Network.. The movie never doubts Zuckerberg’s genius. It never suggest that Facebook could ever have come into existence without him. The question becomes how much did others contribute to making his vision a reality and whether or not they should be compensated.

Technically, the entire movie takes place inside a hearing room where three sides battle back and forth with flashbacks fleshing out the proceedings. Of course, there’s Zuckerberg. Then there is his former best friend, Eduardo Saverin (Garfield) suing Mark for pretty much muscling him out of the company. Finally, there’s the Winklevoss twins (Hammer in a dual role) who claim to have come up with the idea for Facebook.

Through it all, we see Zuckerberg’s not-so-humble beginnings as a drunken young man, bitter about just being dumped, venomously blogging about his now ex-girl while simultaneously hacking into much of the school’s online network to create an instant rate-a-girl site called FaceSmash. Eventually, we arrive at the point where Facebook is a worldwide phenomenon and Zuckerberg is the youngest billionaire in the world. We already know that. Many of you reading this not only have a Facebook page, but have children, parents and even grandparents that their own Facebook pages. This more about trust and what people do with it when they’ve earnied it. Trust is abused so often, we eventualyy have decide when that abuse is justified and when it is not.

TSN is also about the decade we’ve just lived through. It’s about how technology in general, and Facebook in particular, alters our world in increasingly rapid ways. It’s about how prepared or unprepared we are for those instantaneous changes. Can anyone really be prepared to go from average joe to king of all he surveys in just a few years? Strangely enough, though Zuckerberg is the focal point, the movie is not necessarily on his side. Through an excellent performance by Eisenberg he comes across as arrogant, aloof, vindictive, selfish and overly envious of others. He’s the modern day mad scientist who has succeeded in taking over the world, but found it’s not all its cracked up to be. We don’t root for him.

The person we root for is Eduardo Saverin, who put up the initial $1000 to fund the site’s development. We like him. His position seems undeniable so we sympathize with him. We desperately want Zuckerberg to come down from Mount Olympus and show gratitude to the little person that helped him get there.

This movie works because no matter how unlikeable our protagonist might be, we can see his side on a lot of things. Simultaneously, we can understand other viewpoints, as well. This keeps us locked in along with sharp dialogue in which characters rarely mince words. What also engages us is how relationships disintegrate. We’re intrigued to see if anything can be salvaged. However, the winds of sudden success has wreaked havoc on these people. Essentially, we’re watching a divorce procedure. At stake, the custody of their 500 million “kids” worldwide.

Zombieland

Directed by Ruben Fleischer.
2009. Rated R, 88 minutes.
Cast:
Jesse Eisenberg
Woody Harrelson
Emma Stone
Abigail Breslin
Bill Murray

Plot: A virus that transforms people into zombies has infected most of Earth's population. Columbus (Eisenberg) is among a handful of survivors and tries to survive and wants to make it back to his hometown in hopes of reuniting with his estranged family. Strangely enough, love intervenes.

The Good: It's downright hilarious. It perfectly spoofs zombie flicks and road movies, alike. A little commentary on society is thrown in for good measure. Woody Harrelson give his best performance in years, getting back to his roots as a comedic actor. His never-ending search for what remains of the world's supply of Twinkies is way funnier than it should be. Even better is the cameo by Bill Murray (playing himself). His time on screen is hysterical and some of his best work in a few years, as well. Story-wise, it moves along at a nice pace and includes some really well done flashbacks. There are also some very fun and funny action sequences.

The Bad: Our two females are rather bland. They're both serviceable characters but not particularly memorable. In a movie where there are only four humans, the two ladies (one of whom is a preteen) should do more than just be chased (including by our heroes). So other than just being really horny due to a dearth of women, I've no clue why Columbus is head-over-heels for Wichita (Stone), the older girl. Speaking of Columbus, I have the same problem with him as I did James in Adventureland: he's played by Jesse Eisenberg. I don't necessarily dislike him, he just reminds me so much of Michael Cera, its distracting. Finally, we needed more zombie stuff.

The Ugly: How Bill Murray's scene ends. Comedy gold.

Recommendation: My faith in the future of spoofs has been revived. It was trampled nearly to death by the unrelenting crappiness of Dance Flick. Thankfully, this one's actually funny. As far as zombie spoofs go, it's not quite as over-the-top or gory as the recent Planet Terror half of Grindhouse but its even more tongue-in-cheek and delivers more consistent laughter.

The Opposite View: Scott Foundas, Village Voice

What the Internet Says: 8.1/10 (#233 all time) on imdb.com (11/14/09), 89% on rottentomatoes.com, 73/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 9/10