“I swear I saw a little Chinese kid looking right back at me from the other end.”
Rating: 9 out of 10
There are a wide variety of animation styles out there in the cinematic landscape ranging from the subdued tones of Les Triplettes de Belleville to the mind warping surrealism of Heavy Metal, and that doesn’t even begin to jump into the realm of anime (Japanese animation). Each style brings its own level of emotional connection and differing amount of level of disbelief the audience allows, but the one style that consistently reaches across that fictional landscape and grasps the hearts and minds of audiences the world over is stop-motion animation. Something about the effect of having physical 3-dimensional objects, not purely pictures someone created, either on screen or on paper, allows the audience to feel the reality of the character no matter how fantastical they look. If they think they can actually touch it, then they can connect to it. There have been some masters of this style over the years (Nick Park for one), but the one who holds the reins of this current generation is none other than the visionary director of the holiday masterpiece, The Nightmare Before Christmas, Henry Selick. He recently graced us with his new creation, Coraline.
Coraline is a young girl, uprooted from her familiar surroundings by busy, career-minded parents on the move. Landing squarely in the middle of nowhere, Coraline begins to investigate her lonely and droll surroundings. She meets the boy from over the hill and a handful of odd characters that inhabit the rest of the apartment building, but what finally turns the crank of interest in her mind is a small door she finds covered up in her living room. Beyond the door lay a parallel world; the same, yet different; familiar, yet full of discovery; and charming, yet deceitful. Like when curiosity kills the cat, Coraline quickly finds herself part of a dastardly trap to keep her in the “other place” forever.
Right off the bat, before talking about the content of the film itself, a definite stand out point in this case is the movie was made from the beginning with 3-D animation in mind. It was never a 2-D animation that got the new technology run over it, this was planned from the get go with 3-D visuals in effect and that early knowledge gives Coraline a much better grasp on what that technology can do to affect the story and mood. The usage of 3-D here is much better than in my most recent foray into dimension-shattering cinema. The makers of Coraline created a flow and balance of how the technology plays out, using very subtle examples of it in the beginning, more to help create depth than anything else, but as the story unfolds and the rabbit hole runs deeper, the animation and technology bleed into each other for a much more exciting and chilling effect. Towards the end they even toss in a few of the crowd favorites with nasty looking pointy bits jaunting out of the screen, threatening to brush your cheek.
As for Coraline herself, the character is one I think many people can actually relate to, whether as an adult or a child. Her main dilemma is she was yanked out of her comfortable life and dropped into unfamiliar surroundings. Finding herself lonely and unattended to she wanders restlessly hoping to find a purpose for being there. She’s young, precocious and battle-ready at the drop of a hat, but really she just wants someone to show they care about her. Once resigned to her new living situation, she soon finds herself pestered and pursued by a nearby neighbor, a young boy named Wybie. Wybie actually provides one of the most charming and laughably honest moments in the film as he acts out this delicate dance between excited young boy and angst-ridden soul child. Some incredibly amusing barbs are fired from Coraline towards Wybie, both in the real world and the alternate version.
There is a colorful menagerie of side characters that fill out the story and various quests Coraline must go on to reach her goal. Two of these are a pair of ex-vaudeville acrobatic entertainers who live downstairs. Still clinging to the memories of their heyday, these sisters launch into a flashback dousing the film with a light blue humor. Some of their section might not be totally appropriate for young kids and I was honestly surprised the movie wasn’t touting a PG-13 rating. Also falling under that topic would be the villainess, the Other-Mother, who takes on a most frightening and gruesome shape towards the end. Even at my ever-so-advanced age, I still sat back a bit and thought, “Please don’t let me dream of her tonight.”
Voicing the characters are some big names, like Dakota Fanning (Coraline), Teri Hatcher (Mother/Other-Mother), John Hodgman (Father/Other-Father), Ian McShane (Mr. Bobinsky) and Keith David (the cat). All these people showed a great amount of dedication to the project because it took five full years to complete. Of course, not all the actors were voicing the characters from beginning to end, but Fanning did begin working on it at nine years old and didn’t speak her last line until she was fourteen. Surprisingly enough, you wouldn’t even know it was her in the film. All the other voices are fairly recognizable, but Fanning once again shows impressive acting chops and crafts her own voice around the character of Coraline.
Recommendation: Coraline satisfies on a number of levels; as a fairy tale, a moral lesson and lastly, as an entertaining adventure. Once again, not something I would bring the youngest of the clan to see, but I think parents will find it more interesting and enjoyable than they first imagined. Oh, the movie is also an adaptation of a popular childrens book, which you can check out here.
I swear, just one more stop. Old Navy is having a fantastic sale.
Rating: 6 out of 10
There’s always something chuckle-worthy about particular movies and their release dates. Most people tend to forget the immense amount of time beforehand that goes into the creation of these films, so when something hits the theaters and happens to be particularly poignant to the current cultural climate, everyone thinks it’s just another hack writer or short-sighted studio executive greenlighting “hip” projects. Yet, most of these movies take years and years to make it to the big screen, so if they land at what many might see as “the right moment”, you can thank karma, your local psychic or just dumb luck. Now why would I start my review of this movie with such a particular topic? Good question, let me paint the picture for you.
The International is a suspense thriller about a dogged Interpol agent on the trail of one of the biggest banks in the world, the IBBC. At the heart of the investigation is allegations that the bank is using their deep pockets to fund third world wars in efforts to expand its global control and everyone who has tried to turn against them or gotten to close to the truth has disappeared or died. When the partner of our heroic Interpol agent is killed, he goes for broke and starts finding ways around the halls of justice. It becomes a tense game of cat and mouse as the agent tries to find ways in, while the bank tries to find ways to have him killed.
There you have it, a movie about someone trying to take down a huge international bank that is rank with corruption and the misusing the funds of its clientele. Sound familiar? It’s only mostly similar to the headlines in the financial section of every big newspaper over the last year. No, there might not be murders mentioned or third world guerrilla wars, but the idea that banks have become the villains in much of what is wrong with the financial markets today is incredibly easy for movie audiences to connect with. Toss in a gun-toting international agent who wants to show these banks they can’t just do whatever they want and you have something just ripe for the viewing market right now.
At the center of this whirlwind of money and deceit is Clive Owen, playing our agent with the tunnel vision of justice, Louis Salinger. Owen has been on a meteoric rise since his big break in a series of BMW mini-movies. He had been working for quite some time before that, but his audience grew exponentially from that advertising coup and now he is one of the top British imports to American films and solidly stands atop the list of male “bad ass” actors. He’s got the stare, he’s got the accent and he’s truly got the moral ambiguity to do play characters who do what needs to be done (aka his performances as Smith in Shoot ‘Em Up and Dwight in Sin City). He does a great job of playing people who play in the dirt and manage to stay clean. He doesn’t get as much leeway in The International, where Salinger is on a one track mission to bring down the IBBC, and there are only brief mentions of his past, but Owen still manages to create a compelling persona on screen. Opposite him on screen, also on the side of justice, is Naomi Watts, playing the American consulate agent Eleanor Whitman. Watts is usually a spectacular and powerful performer, but she fell a little short this time. The movie centered much more around Owen and gave Watts very little to work with and in the end it left her character feeling one-dimensional and emotionally forced. The biggest thrill as far as the acting goes is seeing the return of Armin Mueller-Stahl. Ever since his intensely acclaimed turn as the rigid father in Shine, he bounced around television and smaller films for many years, but in the last few he has landed bigger roles once again worthy of the weight and gravitas he brings. Here he plays an aging Communist relic trapped inside a capitalist world still trying to turn the tide in his own small way. He becomes the one character in the film who actually reaches a moral crisis and he plays the scene beautifully. After this we are lucky enough to be seeing him in the upcoming Angels & Demons, which if my dreams come true will be paced nothing like it’s predecessor, The DaVinci Code.
The International is a suspense thriller, not an action film, but nevertheless provides one of the most entertaining action sequences so far this year. With the construction of a picture perfect replica of the inside of the Guggenheim museum in New York, the filmmaker stages a highly charged, briskly paced gunfight which bears a sort of “reverse homage” to the legendary villain’s lair sequence in Bruce Lee’sGame of Death. In Lee’s version he has to fight his way up, floor by floor, through this mansion defeating a new boss on each floor. In The International, Owen has to shoot his way down a massive spiral walkway, dodging and dealing death around every spin, in order to walk out alive. They even built a completely fake exhibit to house in the museum just to have it destroyed, which provided that little extra kick of excitement.
Recommendation: A solid film, yet not mind blowing in any real sense. As most suspense thrillers go, it is better enjoyed with big sound and big picture, but theater viewing is not wholly necessary. Clive Owen continues to do what he does best and it will leave you buzzing with anticipation for what he has in store in Sin City 2 (which unfortunately is not due until 2010. Until then you’ll have to make due with Duplicity, due out later this year)
“What? All I said was I thought Mr. and Mrs. Smith was a cool movie. What?”
Rating: 6 out of 10
There comes a time when the norm needs to be redefined, or in some rare cases, reaffirmed. This usually happens in areas where there are just too many signals, too many varied social customs to keep track of and no scene is more rampant for study and redefinition than the dating scene. While not being the most skilled movie to tackle the subject or the most flawed, it currently holds the title for being the most recent, which is why you get to read more about it right now.
He’s Just Not That Into You is romantic web spun around a modern day version of the group from St. Elmo’s Fire. One way or another all these people are connected to each other and at one single moment in time they are all experiencing a singular and unique version of love and relationships. From the tender awkwardness tickled by tiny sparks to the touching sorrow of bitter disappointment, all the heart strings are played. It is also another in the continuing trend of book adaptations from the “chick lit” market, following in the stylish, stiletto heels of The Devil Wears Prada, Sex and the City and the upcoming Confessions of a Shopaholic, proving that coveting the female moviegoer, over the commonly praised 18-24 year-old male market, can be an extremely profitable move.
This movie has a couple things working in its favor. First, their release date is near Valentine’s Day and makes for a perfect early date night with that certain someone. Second, it offers up an amazing ensemble of talented actors to portray this bevy of bumbling romantics. Yet, that last one also ends up being one of its biggest detractions. There are just too many story lines at work here and over half of them fall by the wayside before the credits roll. When trying to showcase each and every type of relationship problem, very few movies can give them all equal and effective share of the screen time (Love Actually, which is an immediate and highly superior comparison to this film, is nearly perfect, but still could’ve dropped one of its many tales.) As the pacing clumsily drives to the closing moments, only two of the couples were emotionally worth following anymore and everything else felt like a distraction from the meatier bits. I’m sure in the book there was more time to get involved with each and every relationship, but on screen it comes off as a bunch of separate movies trying to be told at the same time. The throughline just isn’t strong enough here.
Getting back to the impressive, yet excessive casting, the people who shined brighter than the combined spotlight of the group are Justin Long, Ginnifer Goodwin, Jennifer Aniston and Ben Affleck. Long and Goodwin take the prize as the most emotionally satisfying and most complete character arcs in the movie. Long once again proves that he is much more than a jokester and begins to show off as a leading man, even if it is inside of a crowded room such as this one. I’ve been impressed with his comedic timing and earnestness ever since Accepted (the ending speech is pretty close to brilliant) and I pray he keeps getting chances to hold the reins in the romantic comedy world. Goodwin, on the other hand, epitomizes the hope and trusting nature of all those standing outside the party waiting for someone to invite them in. She’s adorable in a way that goes completely unchallenged in this film and I have no doubt she will be capitalizing on that in the coming years. Aniston and Affleck, arguably two of the biggest names in this cast, pull off touching and poignant moments inside the most subtle and least flashy story arc in the piece. Aniston has had her share of hard knocks since leaving the TV mega-hit, Friends, and Affleck also shows up with some bruises on his resume, but they are incredibly well matched here and take their scenes far above the level of B-movie romanticism.
Falling to the sidelines in the overcrowded group are Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Connelly, Scarlett Johansson, Drew Barrymore and Kevin Connolly. All of the characters here gave little to nothing to root for and because of that gained no real closure at the end. Cooper, who feels he was bullied into his marriage and now finds himself tempted by the incredibly alluring Johansson, enters the film the nice guy in a tough situation, but as the minutes slide away, so does his righteousness and strength as a character. In turn with that, Johansson brings up a common social question about what happens when you fall for a married man, but loses her focus in the third act, but that gets nicely blamed on Kevin Connolly, who plays a friend, sometimes “more than friend”, who wants more from her. Although that is a commonly played and often shown arc for the romantic comedy, Connolly neglects to bring the charm needed to bring the audience behind him and ends up looking needy and addicted to attachment. Jennifer Connelly gets the joy of playing Cooper’s silently bullying wife, who jumps back and forth between teasingly imbalanced and bravely stoic. If we got to see one of those ideas progress into the other, instead of the frantic switching between the two, maybe she would have been in the former category of actors, but her character ends with the audience wondering whether she was righteous or just walked on. The only one to escape this particular state of character confusion is Barrymore, but she falls into the singular fate of being only present to act as social commentary on the dating scene as a whole. Her story is practically non-existent outside of being a cultural narrator and it gets tied up in the closing moments in such a trite fashion that begs the idea they just didn’t want to leave her alone when the credits rolled.
Multi-story movies are not easy by any means and few of them can really handle the pacing and balancing act required to emotionally satisfy each and every character (again, see Love Actually for an example of doing it right, or as close to right as it gets). This film would have come off much stronger if it only chose those story lines from the book that owned their romantic notions and fulfilled the complete journey. Sometimes, you just have to be cruel and chose one from the many and leave the others to rest between the paperback covers at the local book store.
Recommendation: It’s a date movie, that much is clear, but an afternoon matinee this weekend might be the way to save a couple bucks and not feel like you ended the night just thinking, “Well, that was just alright.” Find a theater where the arms raise up between the seats so at least you can make your moves, even if the people on screen aren’t.
There are parts of our cultural heritage which inspire and motivate countless generations to push beyond their boundaries and raise the limits of the human potential. Yet, just as there is light, there is also dark. Other parts of our history serve to tear down those heroes, knock cracks into the pedestals they have been raised up on and bring them crashing down to earth only to gain the opportunity to crush them underfoot. Whether it is from jealousy, spite, envy or greed, these despicable actions by a flawed few can damage the whole in ways I find particularly vile.
Here are just a few of the recent examples:
- Michael Phelps: record holder for most gold medals won during a single Olympic games (8 during the Beijing Games) has a photo posted of him taking a hit from a bong. The controversy ignites like a firestorm, sending shockwaves through not only his fan base of athletes all over the world, but also to his numerous corporate sponsors. Already his Kellogg’s contract is not getting renewed and Subway is looking for a way to cancel their current deal with him, along with requesting their previous sponsorship money back. Phelps was suspended for three months from the U.S. Olympic swimming team and is now on the fence as to whether he will even compete in the 2012 Olympics in London. (Recent Update: Subway, while not being supportive of his actions, has decided to stick with Phelps and not pursue exiting their contract.)
- Christian Bale: accomplished and critically acclaimed actor who began his career at an incredibly young age with a dramatic performance in Empire of the Sun and recently helped reshape the legendary caped crusader, Batman, and bring about on the biggest and widely loved comic films in history, The Dark Knight. His most recent effort was to reshape and relaunch another franchise, The Terminator, as he took on the role of the adult John Connor. While filming the first installment of the new batch of films, Terminator: Salvation, Bale went on a verbal tirade against the Director of Photography, Shane Hurlbut, for stepping into his line of sight during a rather intense rehearsal. An audio recording of that barrage was leaked online in an apparent effort to show people Bale was not the knight in shining armor audiences were making him out to be. This incident, coupled with an arrest last year in London for an argument with his own mother and sister, Bale is being draped now with a persona of a violent, temper-tantrum throwing prima donna. While the fallout from this last attack on his character is not known as of yet, Bale already issued an apology and plea for people not to write off his upcoming film based solely on his on-set reactions.
- President Barack Obama: Yes, I am including him, not in a subliminal effort to say Bale or Phelps are in the same league, but because Obama is suffering already from the same type of political and social character attacks. Barely three weeks into his inaugural term, members of the old guard in Washington are openly and continually putting their feet down in the way of progress and change. They have already caused the withdrawal of three different cabinet choices based solely on tax issues that they found and they have caused a dangerous and dangerous delay in the stimulus package by holding it up in the Senate. It is crystal clear that if this plan whether the plan goes through or not, we are in for tough economic times and I have no doubt the old shadows of Washington are going to blame Obama for continued damages, especially those which they are currently refusing to help fix.
These are only three examples and they are have widely differing effects on our cultural landscape, but they all stem from the same negative phenomenon. When someone rises above the masses, through hard work or sheer happenstance, someone will always be there to try and tear them down. Justifications will be wrapped around them like warrior cloaks, but inside can’t escape the truth, it’s all ego. “I need money, so I’ll sell this incriminating photo.” or “This guy’s famous, but I’m not, so I’m gonna embarrass him.” or lastly “If he can actually fix our mistakes it’ll actually prove we made them to begin with. We must stop him.” The people behind the attacks are always thinking of themselves above all others and that’s where we fail as a society. I’m not trying to move people to another dogma or impose Communism, thinking of the group above all, but there has to be a balance where the individual can appreciate the success and acclaim of another without seeking to shift the spotlight onto themselves. Envy is described as a sin and can truly be a detriment when left uncontrolled, but wanting what someone else has worked so hard to achieve can also be used as a motivator. The achievement of the mantle ‘role model’ once served as a positive thing, but now acts as double-edged sword due to the intense pressure of perfection draped over their shoulders. A person, be it movie star, athlete or politician, can still exist as a role model even after flaws have been uncovered. No one is perfect and trying to force that on someone is only a guarantee of disappointment. When cracks are found in the chiseled veneer they work so hard to craft, instead of raging and calling for their utter downfall, we should relax and remember that they are only ordinary people with extraordinary skills. When we let ourselves devolve into actions like these attacks we not only damage them, but we damage ourselves and our society. Just in the examples above it ranges from millions of dollars lost to a single person to billions of dollars in aid denied to the entire country and for what? We need heroes, we need people to look up to, we need people to point to and tell our friends and family we want to be like them, because if we don’t see anything over the horizon, we will have nowhere to go.
I am not suggesting that these people, or any others like them in the realm of cultural spotlight, are deserving of extra leniency or a new set of rules. They should adhere to the same laws and be punished by the same consequences we all deal with by the sheer fact of living in this country (and more specifically in our individual states). Yet in the cases above, these people are not being judged and punished by the legal system, it is by the court of public opinion, which is wildly hypocritical. This doesn’t necessarily come into play in Obama’s case, and as far as I know it is not a crime to be a raving lunatic on a film set (lucky you, Bale) , but being caught with weed is still illegal everywhere, depending on the amount on your person, so Phelps is indeed treading in murky waters. But once again, he should be treated like everyone else at that party. Are there pictures and possible criminal trials being hunted for anyone else there? Do we really believe he was the only one smoking at that party? On top of that, unless Phelps gives a complete and detailed confession to smoking weed that night and even the amount that he was holding, that photograph is not nearly enough to convict him of anything other than being stupid enough to be caught on camera doing it in the first place. The punishment should always fit the crime, no matter the person involved and Phelps is being socially persecuted for something in some states only equates to a fine and a warning. Equality works both ways, people. Take a look here to listen to a more comedic and acerbic take on the Phelps fiasco.
So please keep this in mind next time you have the opportunity to snap a photo of a celeb walking slightly off the beaten path, or catch and athlete relaxing from his training a bit “too much”, or next time you’re at the voting booth and you have the opportunity to elect people who are shaking hands with our new President instead of slapping it away.
“Wait one more sec, he was in Fantastic Four? I can’t be seen with him.”
Rating: 4 out of 10
Just over three years ago hordes of people sat in their living rooms and bore witness to the birth of a phenomenon (however short it may have lasted). Heroes debuted and quickly gained a worldwide following as people everywhere attached themselves to the notion of ordinary people suddenly becoming extraordinary. While being glued to the comic-book styled serial every week, we all silently asked ourselves what power we would want, what would we do with those powers and would we turn into a ‘hero’ or a ‘villain’. No matter what the end result of those internal polls was, we were hooked to the live-action X-Men update and the rest of Hollywood was quick to make a note of that. Cut to three years later, Heroes is fighting to regain its mass appeal and while the shine has worn off of our shiny new TV toy, Hollywood unleashed their response to the comic book craze, Push.
Push takes place in a world where descendants of human experiments conducted under the Nazi regime have evolved into modern-day test subjects for the U.S. Government. Powers are unveiled, but not controlled, so a group known as Division is created to hunt down and collect ’special’ people. In all the various types of powerful people, one group is called the Watchers, who see the future, and a young, inexperienced Watcher has a vision which she must change, because if she doesn’t, she and others will die. A ragtag group of mutant outcasts on the run is brought together to fight Division and take possession of the one object they need to bring the whole conspiracy down to its knees and finally find their freedom.
On paper you have everything you need for a youthful, superhero-laden smackdown between the forces of good and evil, but what Push delivers is a badly paced, clunky, big-brother-esque mess only working its way up to four points on my ratings scale due to a fantastic fight scene at the end. In truth, those points might be cancelled out since while gaining points for the badass action sequence, it lost equal points for proving it could make great action scene and just chose not to. I fully support the right to try and create something new in an over-worked genre, but there are particular criteria which remain steadfast and necessary, like a training montage (such a popular tool, the South Park fellas made a song about it). We were supposed to buy the transformation of a main character from barely being able to mentally tip over a pair of dice to yanking down entire building structures without any increased practice with his powers. Beyond the holes in the structure, the visuals also leave something to be desired since numerous times throughout the film it cuts to grainy, 16mm-looking stock in an effort to make it look cool and edgy, but while dazzling you with the flashy technique they hope you won’t notice the scene is either totally unnecessary or unmotivated. I celebrate stylistic choices, but using them purely to make up for a bad script is sacrilege. Another sacrilegious thing is using a cinematic style that is a poor representation of Danny Boyle. Slumdog Millionaire is not a fluke, he’s just that good.
Flexing their dramatic abilities in this colorful mess is a group of young actors with a couple seasoned vets tossed in for critical weight. First in the brat pack is Chris Evans, who is no stranger to the land of comic book inspired cinema. He lit it up as The Human Torch in the pair of Fantastic Four movies and I will give him a certain amount of credit for being one of the only things done right in those tragedies. Evans gets a touch lost in the current landscape of young male leads, but he has done a decent job in the roles he sneaks in. He actually gave a surprisingly good show in the dark sci-fi thriller, Sunshine (directed by none other than Danny Boyle, coincidence?). Evans plays Nick, our reticent hero with the ability to move things with his mind, but unfortunately for the audience he is unable to move them for most of the running time of the movie. Next in line, stepping out of her creepy adult-like doll phase, is Dakota Fanning, who plays Cassie, the inexperienced and willfull Watcher who sees bad things ahead for her band of misfits (does she possibly see the sequel?). Fanning is doing her best to remind people she is a teenage girl and growing like a chemically-laden flower. There are a few moments where I think they took her need to look more adult a touch too far, considering she was thirteen when she shot it in Tokyo, but then again, Fanning played a rape victim at twelve, so nothing is really going to push her too far at this point. She still proves her level of talent and in a few scenes manages to vault herself above her castmates, but in the end the project felt more like a choice to open her up to a broader audience instead of being base don the merit of the story. Camilla Belle rounds out the youthful runts of Push, playing Kira, the mind-controlling supersoldier escaped from government hands. Of course, she also has a few hidden plot twists up her sleeve, but those never seem to play out right or feel supported in any fashion. They mostly appear in moments where the writer was thinking, “I bet they think it is going to go this way. It should go that way. Logically hat way makes sense. So I’ll do something totally different and they’ll love it because it’s unexpected.” Such a simple and flawed argument. Bringing in a touch of critical weight, beyond Fanning, is Djimon Hounsou, who first burst onto the scene as the earnest and determined slave looking for human rights in Amistad, which won him a Golden Globe nomination as well. Hounsou plays Carter, a powerful mind-controller on the government’s side who is on the hunt for Kira and has no qualms about who or what gets in his way, even his own people. While there is no doubt Hounsou has the ability to be amazingly intimidating, his stone-like stares and deep intensity have no context in the movie and never really get the chance to grow. His smoothness is indisputable, but the audience never truly gets to see how he backs up all that confidence. Not to be left out, Ming Na and Cliff Curtis have side roles as a “sniffer” who can figure out google-levels of information from the scent of anything and a “shifter”, which is basically a fancy term for an illusionist, respectively. Both do a decent job, but I know their work is much more layered when given better environments to perform in.
My last issue with Push is it repeats one of the worst things about Jumper, which easily qualifies as one of the worst sci-fi flicks of last year. Both films fail to adequately resolve the main story and arrogantly tease a sequel they fully expect us to beg for. Although Push gets to walk a couple spaces ahead of Jumper in the line of quality, neither is deserving of a second go-around.
Recommendation: My review isn’t all doom and gloom. There is a kick-ass fight scene at the end, which hopefully will be properly emulated if the filmmakers use some sort of mutant power of their own and manage to create a sequel. Wait until this hits cable TV, unless you have never learned to properly cook a decent hot dog, then go to the Arclight for a matinee. :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
Posted 1 year, 1 month ago at 10:56 am. Add a comment
This girl, she was on ‘Lost’. You’re going to tell me what the hell her character was really doing there. TELL ME!!!
Rating: 9 out of 10
Sometimes it’s good to take a breather after watching a film, really take some time to process what you thought about it. Strolling out of the darkness on Friday night, I was on an adrenaline high from the film I just witnessed. I was already writing the headline in my mind, “First Perfect Score!”, “10 out of 10!”, or “I Got Taken!”, but now that I’ve had a couple days to catch my breath and really mull over the difference between the movie itself and the movie experience, I regretfully say you are going to have to wait a little while longer to hear me rant and rave about my first perfect film. But take heart, Neeson and crew came achingly close and I’m thrilled to give it the credit it deserves.
Taken is a terrifyingly simple story: Overprotective Dad find out his young and virginal daughter has been kidnapped. Of course, most fathers are going to do everything they can to get their daughter back, but in this case, “everything he can” encompasses a lot more than the usual retiree father. Calling on skills from his previous job as a “preventer” for the government, the father races off to Paris to follow his daughter’s trail and pick apart anyone and everyone who either stands in his way or had anything to do with the crime. It’s a prime example of a man on a mission and nothing in the world is going to stop him.
Simple story, right? So what could possibly make it so good or so much better than all the other ‘action/spy/thriller’ films we’ve seen in recent years? First off, Liam Neeson, who plays the incredibly dangerous dad, Bryan Mills, already brings a level of talent and pathos to the character we would have lost with a less skilled actor. Neeson is no stranger to playing undeterred heroes, in such films as Michael Collins, Rob Roy and even Schindler’s List. These were all men who were willing to step way over the line in the fight for what they believed in. Now you mix that determination with the moral ambivalence of another of Neeson’s previous creations, Darkman, and you get our paternal savior from Taken. Neeson is an unstoppable juggernaut, once set in motion he is unswerving in his determination to achieve his goal. The hero’s code has no place in the world of this character and brings a fresh feel to what normally would have been a very standard role. Picture Jason Bourne without a conscience and you’ll be right on the money. The care and ethical treatment of others is void from his actions, even those who would be considered his friends. Another reason why I liked this character so much is it reminded me of an adult version of Brick, another film with a lead character who steamrolls over everyone in his path. (If I had been reviewing film back then, Brick would have undoubtedly received a perfect score. If you haven’t seen it yet, make it a priority.) Outside of Neeson’s stoic violence, the only other actor worth mentioning is Maggie Grace, who plays Kim, the kidnapped daughter. She amazingly looks the part, even though her real age is far above the seventeen she plays in the film, but there were a few moments where she regressed a little too far, playing closer to fifteen or even thirteen. I can’t be sure whether it was a bad choice on the director, actor or if they were trying for a subliminal critique of how sheltered the character was from the real world, but either way, it just came off odd.
Continuing it’s reasons for success, Taken is also written extremely well, with a solid sense of pace and a keen eye towards the importance of development when needed. Most spy movies jump right into the espionage and a gunfight will erupt within minutes of the opening credits, but the inciting incident, the kidnapping, doesn’t actually come for at least twenty minutes. This gives the audience plenty of time to get to know daddy Mills and his daughter Kim, what their relationship is like and by the time she disappears, Mills has already had one chance to show off his skills, so the audience has a logical basis for all the damage he is about to incur on the villains. That brings up another particularly interesting twist in screenwriting; there is no antagonist character here. No villain which we can all attach our hate and anger to, the antagonist of the film is the crime itself and the society that promotes it. Each time a face or a name is revealed to be the person Mills is after, he finds them and dispatches them before anyone gets a chance to really attach anything to them. Normally this would be a failure in the writing, but screenwriters Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen achieve a lofty switch by making this movie all about the crime itself, instead of a single person. This writing duo is not unfamiliar with the action/thriller landscape, having penned the Transporter series, along with The Fifth Element, Kiss of the Dragon and Leon (the last one was Besson alone), so it doesn’t come as a big surprise that Taken has such a rich underbelly of character and subtext usually unfound in this genre.
Recommendation: A pulse pounding thriller with a slow burn to begin, this is a rare find in the cinematic world. There are moments in this film you will definitely not see coming and those alone make it worth a viewing, whether in the theater or at home. Neeson truly succeeds in making your first meeting with your girlfriend’s dad scary once more. :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
Posted 1 year, 1 month ago at 8:12 am. Add a comment
“I swear I saw a little Chinese kid looking right back at me from the other end.”
“What? All I said was I thought Mr. and Mrs. Smith was a cool movie. What?”
There are parts of our cultural heritage which inspire and motivate countless generations to push beyond their boundaries and raise the limits of the human potential. Yet, just as there is light, there is also dark. Other parts of our history serve to tear down those heroes, knock cracks into the pedestals they have been raised up on and bring them crashing down to earth only to gain the opportunity to crush them underfoot. Whether it is from jealousy, spite, envy or greed, these despicable actions by a flawed few can damage the whole in ways I find particularly vile.
“Wait a sec, she’s only thirteen?!”
This girl, she was on ‘Lost’. You’re going to tell me what the hell her character was really doing there. TELL ME!!!
DandyID
Facebook
Twitter