Takers

Devil

Directed by John Erick Dowdle.
2010. Rated R, 80 minutes.
Cast:
Chris Messina
Bojana Novakovic
Bokeem Woodbine
Geoffrey Arend
Jenny O’Hara
Jacob Vargas
Joe Codben
Matt Craven
Logan Marshall-Green
Joshua Pearce

One of the elevators gets stuck in a Philadelphia skyscraper and all hell breaks loose, literally. Watching from the viewpoint of the elevator’s camera, one of the security guards figures out for us that one of the stranded passengers is actually the Devil. Woah, let’s back up. The security guard doubles as our narrator. Right off the bat, he tells us that suicide opens the gate for the Devil to take human form and kill up some folks. Of course, the first actual happening is someone presumably jumping to their death from said skyscraper. Just never you mind who that is, or why. All you need to know is this not only lets the Devil in, but also gets Detective Bowden (Messina) into the building. Five years ago, his wife and son were killed in a hit-and-run.

Oh, you wanna know who’s in the elevator? It’s the standard Hollywood rogue’s gallery. We’ll start with the pretty girl (Novakovi), because there’s always a pretty girl. Next is the token black guy (Woodbine) because there’s always a token black guy. Actually, he fulfills both the quotas for a good black person and a bad one. He’s a thuggish security guard. There’s also the creepy guy who talks too much (Arend), the creepy guy who doesn’t talk nearly as much but seems to know way too much about the wrong things and an ornery old woman. Periodically, whichever one of them is Satan makes the lights go out and kills one of the others.

It’s an interesting setup. The execution of it runs on a pretty standard loop. The lights go out, we hear a lot of ruckus. When they come back on, we discover someone’s been hurt or killed. They all yell accusations at each other until the next time it goes dark. Meanwhile, Detective Bowden tries in vain to keep them calm by talking to them through the security system as others try to either get the elevator moving or the people out. Rinse, repeat.

Overall, it is not necessarily a bad watch, just philosophically confusing. Is the devil’s ultimate purpose here to do good? Either way, our fallen angel suffers from movie-villainitis. All movie long, Satan acts swiftly and offers no explanations. However, when we get to the end of our tale it’s suddenly time to talk, hiss, seeth and otherwise try to act all scary. It feels hokey and also leads us back to the question of what the devil is the Devil here for. It only makes sense that M. Night Shyamalan wrote and produced this. Still, while it’s not a bad watch, it’s not a good one, either.

MY SCORE: 5/10

Cool Hand Luke

Directed by Stuart Rosenberg.
1967. Not Rated, 126 minutes.
Cast:
Paul Newman
George Kennedy
Strother Martin
J.D. Cannon
Lou Antonio
Jo Van Fleet
Clifton James
Robert Drivas
Dennis Hopper

Drunk, and possibly bored, Luke (Newman) gets busted for cutting the heads off about a dozen parking meters. He is sentenced to a prison where he has to work on the chain-gang every day. For you young’uns, there was a time when prisoners did much more on the highways and by-ways than picking up the trash. Being convicted of a crime meant physically exhausting work on those roads on a daily basis. Luke enters just such a place.

Luke also has a smug attitude and unwillingness to conform that tends to rub people the wrong way, at first. Upon his arrival, neither the officers nor his fellow inmates care much for him. Soon, his unbreakable spirit wins over the other prisoners and even most of the guards. However, it also earns him some trouble. Eventually, the movie becomes a battle of wills between Luke and his captors.

The man in the lead role facilitates the battle, perfectly. Paul Newman shows once again why he is a Hollywood icon. His trademark smirk shows just enough arrogance for us to be hesitant about liking him. Arrogance soon reveals itself to really be the type of confidence that attracts people. Then, somehow despite his movie star looks, he never feels like a pretty boy. He’s simply magnetic.

As good as Newman is here, George Kennedy is his equal. As Dragline, Kennedy is charismatic, funny and a commanding presence. His rapid-fire, rumbling voice practically scores the film. Indeed, he seems to do a great deal more talking than our hero, Luke. Dragline is the one that seems to come around on Luke, first in spite of the rocky start they get off to. His near constant chatter helps everyone else do the same.

From the outside looking in, we grow to love Luke just like the inmates. Early on, before us or them is really on his side, Luke finds himself in a fistfight with Dragline. Luke is pitifully overmatched. He gets knocked down so often you’d think it was his mission in life. However, it’s what happens between knock-downs that is his real purpose. He gets up. He gets up, over and over again. He keeps getting up even when it doesn’t seem to be in his best interest. It’s just who he is. Who he is endears him to us. We wish we had his courage. That’s why, during the latter parts of the movie, our sentiments echo those of the convicts during that lopsided fight. From our seats we feel helpless, yet we keep begging him. Stay down, Luke. Stay down.

Let Me In

Directed by Matt Reeves.
2010. Rated R, 116 minutes.
Cast:
Chloë Grace Moretz
Kodi Smit-McPhee
Richard Jenkins
Cara Buono
Elias Koteas
Sasha Barrese
Dylan Kenin
Richie Coster
Dylan Minnette

Owen (Smit-McPhee) is twelve years old and has no friends. Even worse, he’s the class punching bag. Things are so bad, he hangs out alone at night, in the courtyard of his apartment complex and fantasizes about getting revenge. If that weren’t enough, he lives with his mom who’s in the process of divorcing his dad and is an emotional wreck. One night, he notices a girl his age moving into the apartment next door to his with her father. Eventually, we find out her name is Abby (Moretz). As it turns out, she’s also a loner who seeks solitude in the courtyard most nights. Even though, it’s the dead of winter she doesn’t wear shoes. Owen notices this and also finds out rather quickly that she leads some sort of tortured existence, as well. The two seemingly kindred spirits strike up a friendship. However, Owen doesn’t realize something we already know. Abby is a vampire.

To remain as conspicuous as possible, Abby’s “father” (Jenkins) supplies her with blood by killing random people, draining the blood from them and carrying it back to her. Whenever he fails at this task, or hunger overwhelms her, she has to hunt for her own meals. Let’s just say her table manners are less than desirable.

The movie’s pace is deliberately slow but it doesn’t drag. It draws us in through the growing relationship between Owen and Abby. It also never forgets that there are murders being committed so the police are working feverishly to find out who’s responsible. All along, we wonder what will happen when things get figured out? What will happen when Owen comes to understand what Abby really is? What happens when the police figure it out?

Of course, the vampire craze of the last few years can be traced back to the Twilight series. Everything in that critic-proof juggernaut is dolled up to appeal to young girls and teach them about the virtues of abstinence. While that’s a fine message it’s done in a manner that makes the idea of vampires even less tangible than it already is. It’s not just fantasy. It’s impossibly sanitized so that any thoughts deemed to be impure are like the greatest evils know to mankind. On the other hand, any good things are romanticized to the nth degree. In short, the Twilight films alternately panders to and preaches to its audience on a continuous basis.

In Let Me In, the characters are not in some totally foreign dimension where everything is glossy and nice where vampires can go out in the daytime and wean themselves from human blood. Instead, the vampire is dropped into our reality. This offers insight into what it might be like if there really were such a creature in our midst. To understand the difference between this world and the Twilight world think about the Batman movies. Specifically, think of how Gotham City is portrayed in the recent Christopher Nolan movies and in the franchise-killing Joel Schumacher flicks. LMI would be the Nolan films, not quite fully realistic but enough to seem a lot more plausible.

For those of us lucky enough to have seen it, there is yet another elephant in the room. That one is the Swedish original, less than two years old when its American remake hit theaters. Technically, like its predecessor, LMI claims to be based on the novel Let the Right One In. The Swedish film keeps the full title while this one truncates it. Otherwise, there’s not enough of a difference for me to say it isn’t a remake. There are some changes here and there. Most notably, there is one glaring omission and one event moved to the beginning of the film. The omission is the now infamous crotch shot of our vampire. The event involves the father and is key to the movie so I won’t spoil that.

The fact that this is largely the same movie is not a knock on the American flick. It wisely follows the template already created. Aside from the omission I mentioned, it doesn’t water things down, at all. Unlike most remakes, the additions don’t become subtractions. There are no overly big showy moments for no reason other than injecting some perceived excitement. To its credit, the one recognizably American thing it did actually works. It adds a little more gore. However, it does so for good reason and not at the cost of character development as is often the case. It is rare that a remake can stand up to the original, particularly when the remake is American and the original is not. This one does. What I’m going to say next may seem even stranger than that. When the subtitleophobes tell you this one is better, ignore that they’re probably basing their opinion solely on the fact it’s in English. They might actually be right, this time.

Let the Right One In

Let the Right One In AKA Lat den ratte komma in

2008. Rated R, 114 minutes.

Director: Tomas Alfredson. Starring Kare Hedebrant, Lina Leandersson, Per Ragnar, Henrik Dahl.

Plot: In a 1982 suburb of Stockholm, 12 year old bully-magnet Oskar (Hedebrant) befriends Eli (Leandersson), the mysterious girl who's moved into the apartment next to his. Her arrival in town coincides with a series of grisly murders in which the victims had the blood drained from their bodies.

The Good: It's a very unique vampire movie. In fact, it's more of a puppy-love movie featuring two 12 year olds. It just so happens that the girl is a vampire. That's the twist that makes it sizzle. A constant tension hangs over the film as we try to figure out whether she'll hurt or help him and for a while, whether he'll find out what she really is. It also uses her obvious power and his weakness to build metaphors and give Oskar a life-lesson. The pacing of the movie is deliberately slow, but doesn't drag. It draws you into this awkward yet budding romance. Don't worry though, it's not some sappy affair. We get a number of 30 Days of Night-esque attacks on the human-folk.

The Bad: At the beginning of the movie, Eli has an adult, presumably human guardian who actually commits the early murders and brings her the blood (not at all a spoiler). We never really learn the nature of their relationship (it's vaguely hinted at, once). Also, about midway through the movie something happens to him, or at least seems to. Despite the fact what we've seen suggests we should, we never see him again. That was bothersome for me. It's like they all of sudden forgot about him.

The Ugly: When our two lovebirds share their first kiss. When you see it, you'll say "Ewwww."

Recommendation: Though the main characters are both only 12 years old, well one is 12 and the other just appears to be (they do discuss this, by the way), this is not another vampire movie for teenage girls. This is for more mature fans of the genre who've seen plenty of them and are looking for a fresh take on the subject. Subtitleophobes can breathe easy. This is a Swedish film, but the DVD plays the English dubbed version by default.

The Opposite View: Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly

What the Internet Says: 8.2/10 on imdb.com (#192 all time as of 4/14/09), 97% on rottentomatoes.com, 82/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 9/10

Megamind

Directed by Tom McGrath.
2010. Rated PG, 95 minutes.
Cast:
Will Ferrell
Tina Fey
Brad Pitt
Jonah Hill
David Cross
J. K. Simmons
Ben Stiller
Jessica Schulte
Justin Theroux
Amy Poehler
Like most supervillains, Megamind (Ferrell) can never quite beat the hero in town. Try as he might, his plans are always thwarted by Metro Man (Pitt). To give you a point of reference, Metro Man is basically Superman dressed in all white. Megamind has spent practically his entire life trying to overcome the do-gooder. However, he hasn’t really thought about what he would do if he were actually victorious. So, when he finally manages to defeat Metro Man, he finds out that total domination isn’t all he thought it would be. With no one to challenge him, and no one to share his success with, he gets bored.

In order to spice things us, Megamind takes on two tasks. First, he tries to woo TV news reporter Roxanne Richie (Fey). Essentially, she’s the Lois Lane of our tale. In the past, he’s kidnapped her way too many times to count. Therefore, he creates an alter-ego. He also creates an alter-ego for his second task: coaching someone else up to be a hero and provide him with some opposition. This other alter-ego is a bit problematic for the movie’s target audience. Most kids simply won’t get it. They’re just too young. Whether or not parents get it seems to depend on whether they’re fans of the Superman movies, or not. That’s because the shape Megamind takes for this is that of Superman’s father as portrayed by Marlon Brando in those movies. If you have that point of reference, it’s a great source of comedy. If you don’t, not so much.

The rest of the movie works pretty well. It nicely spoofs both superhero and supervillain lore by poking fun at the clichés we’ve all come to know and love. This keeps us chuckling for much of the runtime. In addition, we come to genuinely feel for the bad guy. We even come to be on his side as he works to correct his mistakes. Surprisingly, we also find ourselves thinking about Metro Man at the end. What happens when the hero becomes tired of, or is left unfulfilled by being heroic? The movie treads lightly in this area so it doesn’t drag us down, emotionally. However, it is still a question that’s left out there.

In the end, Megamind is a fun affair that does what it sets out to. It entertains us with a family-friendly redemption story. It shares a number of similarities with Despicable Me, but is different enough that watching both is no issue. However, I will say that even though I enjoyed both, which you like best might be predicated on which you see first.

MY SCORE: 7/10

World's Greatest Dad

Directed by Bobcat Goldthwait.

2009. Rated R, 99 minutes.
Cast:
Robin Williams
Alexie Gilmore
Daryl Sabara
Henry Simmons
Geoff Pierson
Evan Martin
Lorraine Nicholson
Zach Sanchez

Plot: Aspiring but unsuccessful writer and high school poetry teacher Lance Clayton (Williams) lives alone with his unapologetic jerk of a teenaged son Kyle (Sabara) and carries on a relationship with fellow teacher Claire (Gilmore) even though she doesn't want to be seen in public with him.

The Good: Robin Williams is usually only seen in two modes. He's either zany, verging on being totally out of control but fighting for some grand cause or morose and perhaps more than a little perverted. Here, he's much more a regular guy who seems to have life living him, instead of the other way around. He pulls it off, perfectly. Like so many of us in real life, his emotions are conveyed not by his words but by his facial expressions and body language. It's a wonderful performance. To aid this, we get a story that's excellently written. It's subtle, even when it seems to be over the top. It also puts us in position to seriously ponder what we might've done in the same situation. This brings us to the writer and director, Bobcat Goldthwait, who also shows up in a tiny role. Those of us who can actually remember the 1980s might be mildly surprised he hasn't already died of an overdose. Given that you might be completely blown away that he's still capable of coherent thought, much less writing a cerebral character examination. Kudos to him. Oh, I haven't even mentioned the fact that it's funny.

The Bad: Where is Kyle's mother? Unless I missed it, she's never mentioned. Doing so would've added another layer to both Kyle and the movie as a whole. We would be better able to psychoanalyze him, as we're already doing without quite enough information. I would have also love for us to meet Andrew's (Martin) mom, the alcoholic. She could've added tons, as well.

The Ugly: How and why the tragedy occurred.

Recommendation: We have another excellent effort in dark comedy, making 2009 a very strong year for the genre. As with most of them, there's just not enough hijinks and shenanigans to hold some people's attention. If you don't go in expecting another gross-out bromance or get too pissed off in the first few minutes that Lance hasn't beat the crap out of his son, you'll be in for a fun ride. Those of you into character studies, this one's for you.

MY SCORE: 8/10