Showing posts with label John Cusack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Cusack. Show all posts

Friday, February 21, 2014

Lee Daniels' The Butler

Directed by Lee Daniels.
2013. Rated PG-13, 132 minutes.
Cast:
Oprah Winfrey
Jane Fonda
Vanessa Redgrave
Clarence Williams III
Elijah Kelley
David Banner

We proceed through the life and times of Cecil Gaines (Whitaker). Mr. Gaines works in the White House as a butler beginning during the Eisenhower (Williams) administration and finishing during the Reagan (Rickman) years. As a very young child he witnesses atrocities in the Jim Crow South while working as a cotton picker on a plantation. Due to one specific tragedy, he is made a house servant. When he gets older, he leaves the plantation and heads north a bit where he works as a server in a private club. He is so good that he lands that White House gig. At home, things between he and his wife Gloria (Winfrey) are strained by all of his long hours at work. He also has a contentious relationship with his eldest son Louis (Oyelowo). The two see the world very differently. Part of our story follows Louis as he is literally becomes a major part of just about every front of the Civil Rights struggles of the 20th century. The rest, of course, deals with Cecil's duties in the White House, the stress on his marriage and plenty of acrimony between he and Louis.

Right away, we're told The Butler is inspired by a true story. Let's tackle this first. The key word is "inspired." The real butler is a man named Eugene Allen. He most certainly did serve in that capacity in the White House for 34 years. However, not much else is rooted in fact. If you're wondering what is and what isn't, I'll not go into too many details to maintain some form of brevity. Suffice it to say most things that happen outside the White House are fiction wrapped in a cloak of history while what happens inside it is plausibly, possibly, kinda, sorta true. From what I've read, our hero's relationship with the Reagans is the most factual, followed by his rapport with the Kennedys. However, none of this should cloud your judgement. In my opinion, you shouldn't deem the movie to be better or worse than it actually is because more or less of it is true than you think. Let's move on.

What the movie does best is position Cecil against the people he loves. He is a man that works long and hard to provide for his family in a material sense. On the other hand, he's absent from them emotionally. We watch his marriage falter and wonder if he is even aware of what's happening. He does know of her battle with the bottle, but there is more going on than that. With his oldest son, it is a never-ending war of wills. They bark disagreements at one another until it eventually becomes too much for them to occupy the same room. Even though both situations are overly melodramatic, this is where The Butler is most consistently good. Star Forest Whitaker and David Oyelowo are sufficiently angry and deliver fine performances. However, it's a truly remarkable Oprah Winfrey that glues this kitchen sink drama together and makes it go. Hers is the film's most complex and satisfying portrayal.


The movie stumbles over the one thing that was hyped before it was even released: its highlight reel of Black History. It simply fails to pack the punch necessary to give the film its intended power. Much of it is sped through and oversimplified, but doesn't linger long enough to impact the viewer who hasn't already been impacted. In other words, our prior knowledge, or lack thereof, plays heavily into how we feel without much prompting from the film. Early on, we're shown an earth-shattering event. However, that's really it. It's just a moment. Following this, the movie goes into 'tell us stuff we already know' mode by using Cecil to narrate. He basically says "This sucks. I'm outta here," just in a lot more empty words. The only historic part where the movie slows down and breathes is during Louis' time as a Freedom Rider. We see him go through the intense training for and then the harsh reality of staging a sit-in. After that, it's back to warp speed as there's a brief mention of Malcolm X, a stint in the Black Panther Party (incorrectly lumped together as being of identical philosophies, I might add), and failed political endeavors. What this does is sticks closely to mainstream America's very broad ideas of the many facets of the movement which helped shape society. In doing so, it commits a common error. That mistake is pushing the belief that only the aspects of the Civil Rights Movement that were associated with, and/or under the direction of, Martin Luther King Jr. are worth discussing. At least on the surface.

Beneath the surface, what's really going on is that the movie is simply using all of this as a plot device to develop the romance between Louis and Carol (Alafia, formerly Da Costa), a young woman he meets in college and goes through most of his phases with him. Even this is botched, often feeling awkward and eventually unnecessary as it ends unceremoniously without the 'oomph' the movie seems to be reaching for at all times. The one good thing we get out of it is an explosive dinner scene when the two visit Louis' parents. Again, thank Oprah for making this moment.

The Cliff Notes treatment is given to Cecil's younger son Charlie (Kelley) and another major event in our nation's history, The Vietnam War. The poor kid is barely in the picture. He and the war can be summed up in three short sentences. People didn't know why we were there. People protested. Soldiers died. Something else we already know. By sticking to this, the movie telegraphs its blow and fails to make me care as much as I should. The punches that floor you are the ones you don't see coming. This one starts with a huge wind-up that's impossible to miss. The truth of the matter is some of the issues could have been alleviated by telling the story through Louis' eyes. That would likely force some things to be fleshed out instead of skimmed over. Besides, Louis is a far more interesting character than his one-note father. Of course, this might give us a completely different film than the director intended.



Fortunately, all parts of The Butler are well acted. Terrence Howard gives us a great slimeball while Cuba Gooding Jr. shines as the comic relief. Also funny is Liev Schreiber as an abrasive Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson. James Marsden does a spot-on JFK, but it's Minka Kelly as Jacqueline Kennedy that gives us one of the movie's most heartfelt moments. It's another instance nearly ruined by too much narration, but it still manages to work.

By the end, this is a movie that feels oddly bloated and deflated all at once. The stronger parts of the movie are a bit overdone while the weaker parts are half-baked. The narration usually states the obvious, robbing prior or upcoming scenes of power. Finally, it wraps itself up in a nice, neat bow of sentimentality. Honestly, given the importance of the occasion, I can hardly blame it. However, the impact of these scenes depends largely on how you already feel about that occasion. They don't supply any of their own juice. Thankfully, the whole thing is well performed and very well paced. The run time flies by and we enjoy the people with whom we're spending time. This makes it a solid movie that takes looks at important parts of our collective past. Just understand that, for the most part, these are fleeting looks.

Friday, November 15, 2013

The Paperboy

Directed by Lee Daniels.
2012. Rated R, 107 minutes.
Cast:
Ned Bellamy
Nealla Gordon


Hillary Van Wetter (Cusack) is sitting on death row after being convicted of murdering the local sheriff. Charlotte Bless (Kidman) is a groupie for inmates who has fallen in love with Mr. Van Wetter through the letters they exchange. She has also sent some letters to big city newspaper reporter Ward Jansen (McConaughey) who happens to be from this particular small town, claiming Hillary was framed. Ward comes home, writing partner Yardley (Oyelowo) in tow, to investigate this possibly huge story and potentially save a man’s life. Also helping out is Ward’s little brother Jack (Efron) who still lives with their parents. Almost forgot, it is the nineteen sixties and we are in the south, so it is of some importance that Yardley, as well as Jansen family maid Anita (Gray), is black. Also vital to the tale is that our prisoner is certainly no angel.

What The Paperboy wants to be is a hyper-sexual, racially charged, and shocking thriller. To that end, it does things that are hyper-sexual, racially charged, and shocking. The problem is they don’t come together in a manner allowing it to be what it wants. The ones that work are undeniably memorable. I, for one, will never forget the scene of Charlotte’s first visit to Hillary in jail. The ones that don’t work merely add to the clutter.

Believe it or not, seeming to fly by the seat of its pants is not this movie’s worse offense. All of the different strands, even though they don’t congeal properly, are intriguing in their own way and could have made a really fascinating movie. The bigger issue is the mechanics it uses to tell these stories. An old adage that applies to art in any medium is that it is better to show than to tell. Lesser artists often tell, robbing their work of its power. Think of it like the punchline of a great joke. People who “get it” will probably laugh. Those you have to explain it to, will probably not. Through the use of Anita as a narrator, The Paperboy constantly explains itself. Nearly every time we hear her in voice-over, she’s either telling us what we just saw, or what we are about to see. This is a common pitfall for movies to fall into when employing a narrator. It’s one The Paperboy never even tries to avoid.


On top of being the annoying narrator, Macy Gray gives a terrible performance whenever she appears within the story. She often sounds as if she is reading. Even then, her words are garbled in a way that doesn't fit the character. She has a cameo in Tyler Perry’s most ambitious film, For Colored Girls. I am not a fan of Perry’s, but Gray combines with his direction to give us a wonderfully harrowing two minutes of film. She also has a solid, but brief turn in Training Day. Her performances in those movies versus what we get here lead me to believe she’s best in small doses. Very small.

Zac Efron as Jack, the actual focal point of all the goings on, also fails to impress. He doesn't do anything egregiously wrong. He just is not believable. He never feels as naïve and innocent as he should. I know that’s an odd thing to say about a guy best known for the High School Musical trilogy. The truth is, he’s become a sex symbol and wears the status like a second skin, giving off a confidence this character is not supposed to have.

If there is a saving grace for this movie, it’s the rest of the cast. Matthew McConaughey is his typically magnetic self. The man has undeniable presence and it is once again on full display. As the man on death row, John Cusack matches McConaughey, if not surpassing him. He completely takes over whenever he is on the screen. I fear that because this will not be noted as one of his better movies, it will be some of his most overlooked work. David Oyelowo is also very good. We’re never really sure how to take his character, but he’s awfully convincing doing all the things he does.


Outdoing all of the guys, we get our biggest kick out of, or are most disgusted by, a vamped up Nicole Kidman. She keeps the gas pedal to the floor all the way through the film. Her character is not likable and doesn't seem to be all there. She often only vaguely resembles a human being. It is just a ridiculously bad role. She couldn't possibly make it believable. Still, she plays it to the hilt, bringing an element of “so bad it’s awesome” to the proceedings. Watching her, Basic Instinct 2 came leaping to mind. About that movie, the late great Roger Ebert wrote “The Catherine Trammell role cannot be played well, but Sharon Stone can play it badly better than any other actress alive.” The same applies to Kidman, here.

As for the rest of the movie, things keep happening that appear independent of each other but the movie keeps trying to persuade us are part of a cohesive whole. Many of these seem to have been done simply for shock value. Our conclusion is fun, but doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Let me backtrack for a sec. What happens makes perfect sense. How it happens does not. We’re left with a film that has an awful lot going on and can be fun because of all the zaniness. However, it never feels like it actually works.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

1408

Directed by Mikael Hafstrom.
2007. Rated PG-13, 104 minutes.
Cast:
John Cusack
Samuel L. Jackson
Mary McCormack
Tony Shalhoub

Author Mike Enslin (Cusack) makes his living writing about places that are supposedly haunted. After numerous stays in numerous "haunted" locations he's never seen anything remotely supernatural. All of that changes once he checks into room 1408 at the Dolphin Hotel. Cusack delivers his usual excellent performance. Only this time, he's not the extremely quirky type he normally plays, just a guy who is genuinely freaked out. There aren't many 'gotcha' moments but the tension is amped up from the moment Samuel L. Jackson appears on screen (though he really has a small part) and rarely lets up. Its just well executed with a creepy ending.

MY SCORE: 7.5/10

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

2012


Directed by Roland Emmerich.
2009. Rated PG-13, 158 minutes.
Cast:
John Cusack
Amanda Peet
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Thandie Newton
Oliver Platt
Danny Glover
Woody Harrelson
Liam James
Morgan Lily
Zlatko Buric


Plot: A geologist discovers an increase in solar activity that will lead to the end of the world as we know it, socio-political Darwinism ensues. Oh, and dying – lots of dying.

The Good: Forget about Avatar, this might be the most beautiful movie of 2009. The end of the world is a truly spectacular sight. There are skyscrapers crashing into one another as they fall, multi-tier freeways collapsing, entire cities and their suburbs coming apart at the seams as the earth separates beneath them. Likewise for areas surrounding suddenly activated, fireball hurling volcanoes. And if you’re anywhere near any coast, or out to sea, you have to contend with super tsunamis. For the most part, it looks eerily realistic. Since another depiction of hell breaking loose is never more than a few minutes away, it’s lengthy runtime doesn’t feel so bad.

The Bad: This might also be the most disgusting, pointless and stupidest movie of the 2009. It’s disgusting in the sense that it is purely pornographic in regards to death. We literally watch people die by the thousands for two plus hours and are certain that the death toll is in the billions. The problem is we become so desensitized it’s hard to muster up any empathy for our main characters no matter what their situation. Of course, this is why there are kids in the movie. Filmmakers believe we automatically feel for the kids in tough situations. To a degree, they’re correct. However, here it’s not enough. Here, we feel like that one guy in other disaster movies that can only say to everyone “We’re all gonna die!” Besides that, none of the characters in this movie are worthy of our affection, anyway. It’s pointless because of three things. First, everything just kinda stops all of a sudden. Sorry, I don’t think that’s really a spoiler. Second, when the credits roll, we’re left with an overwhelming feeling of “Now what?” There’s no hopeful answer to that question even though the movie wants us to somehow remain optimistic. Third, much lip service, including the movie’s own advertising, is paid to the ancient Mayan prophecy of the world ending on December 21, 2012. However, the movie chucks that out the window and renders the Mayan notion coincidental, at best. Finally, it’s stupid for a variety of reasons. Most of them we’ve already seen play out in other disaster movies so I won’t go into it, here.

The Ugly: : How many government and military officials had to be left behind for Oliver Platt’s character to become acting President? He’s a head scientist of some department or another.

Recommendation: Armageddon, The Day After Tomorrow, Deep Impact, Independence Day, etc. If you liked these movies, this is for you. If you’re into big special fx, this is for you, too. As for the rest of you, move along nothing to see here.

The Opposite View: Dan Kois, Washington Post

What the Internet Says: 6.0/10 on imdb.com (7/27/10), 39% on rottentomatoes.com, 49/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 3.5/10

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Hot Tub Time Machine


Directed by Steve Pink.
2010. Rated R, 92 minutes.
Cast:
John Cusack
Clark Duke
Craig Robinson
Rob Corddry
Sebastian Stan
Lyndsy Fonseca
Crispin Glover
Chevy Chase
Lizzy Caplan
Collette Wolfe


Plot: Four down-on-their-luck friends decide to spend a weekend at the resort they used to hang out at during their glory days. After a wild night in their suite’s hot tub, they wake up in 1986.

The Good: It’s better than it has any right to be. Sure, it’s juvenile and crass but it does both so well. Watching our heroes try to replicate what happened the first time they lived through ’86 is fun. The running gag involving Crispin Glover is priceless. Most of the references to the 1980s work well. The dynamic between Lou (Corddry) and the rest of the group really carries the movie effectively.

The Bad: I did say it was juvenile and crass. However, its worse crimes are being predictable and rushing its ending. We know what’s going to happen, thanks in large part to one of the bigger storylines being a rip-off of Back to the Future, but it doesn’t work up to it. Instead, it meanders along with the various situations that have popped up and then suddenly and haphazardly sticks in, pardon the pun, a key component in shaping the outcome.

The Ugly: What’s the deal with the drunk guy in the bear suit?

Recommendation: It’s strictly a guy thing. ‘Nuff said.

The Opposite View: Mark Keizer, Boxoffice Magazine

What the Internet Says: 6.9/10 on imdb.com (7/7/10), 63% on rottentomatoes.com, 63/100 on metacritic.com


MY SCORE: 6.5/10