The End of the Page

Shutter Island: This is Your Mommy’s Thriller

Listen here, Ghandi! I want the truth! Where did you hide the Snickers bars?

Rating: 9 out of 10

The moment your cast and crew are announced, the bar is set in the minds of your audience. You tell people that Martin Scorsese is directing a new film and the bar moves up a notch from its humble beginnings. You tell people he is getting Leonardo DiCaprio to star in it, click, there’s one more notch. Then you lay on people that the film is based on a Dennis Lehane novel, which might not mean anything to a majority of people, but once you clarify that he is the author behind such stories as Mystic River and Gone Baby Gone, well, now you’ve got their attention. With a quick glace at your expectation pole, you might find this upcoming film to be teetering near the top, almost daring you to shake it off, which is inevitably what happens to most films in this predicament. The bar gets lost in the clouds and the audiences walk out of the theater staring at the ground; but every now and again the pieces slide into place and you just might find yourself glancing at the tip of the pole through a break in the cloud cover. Now is one of those times (so you can leave the raincoats at home).

Shutter Island is a harrowing tale of two Federal Marshalls called to a lonely island that only houses one thing–a psychiatric institute for the criminally insane. The worst of the worst are sent here because there is no hope or possibility of escape. The marshalls are called in due to the recent disappearance of a certain prisoner, vanished right out of her cell like air. As they being to peel back the layers of clinical observation, polite discreteness and congenial denial they find a labyrinth of deceit underneath. Questions are being asked, but not answered, and the marshalls start to wonder whether they are the ones investigating an actual crime or if indeed they are the ones being investigated.

Reaching a pinnacle in your career is a dangerous thing. With each new project people can claim that it is the best thing you’ve ever done, thereby making your next project pale in comparison before you’ve even begun. In some cases artists under that kind of pressure have just given up, chosen not to fight against their own glory in an effort to eclipse it. Martin Scorsese is surely one who has had to battle against the easy way out underneath the weight of his celebrity. From his early exploits with Mean Streets and Taxi Driver to his recent accolades with The Departed, Scorsese has never given up telling stories. It hasn’t been a consistent rising arc for him, with bumps along the way like Gangs of New York, but his name still holds its ring of Hollywood mastery and clout. In Shutter Island, he reminds people why he got that name recognition by going backwards in style and substance, back to the earlier days of thrillers and chillers. Shutter Island plays itself out much more like Hitchcock or Kubrick’s The Shining than anything in today’s cinematic landscape. Scorsese’s breadth of past experience comes to the forefront through his tonal control and tempo while twisting his audience into his personal web.

One of the glorious moments in cinema is witnessing an acclaimed director find his muse. Although there is an overtly sexual tone to that idea, as in Tarantino and Uma Thurman or Rodriguez and Rose McGowan, it is not always the case. Furthermore, very few directors can find two in one lifetime. Scorsese has done just that with his early display of works with Robert De Niro and now with his younger go-to-guy, Leonardo DiCaprio, who has starred in four films under the Scorsese banner: Gangs of New York, The Aviator, The Departed and of course, Shutter Island. The best thing about this dynamic duo is they seem to be bringing out the best in each other. Although The Departed was fantastic, I actually think DiCaprio’s performance here was more demanding and more fulfilling. The same goes for Scorsese, although I feel Shutter Island is more on par with The Departed instead of outdoing it. Other actors also gave their all in this twisted mind-bender, like the always rewarding Mark Ruffalo, the continually mischievous Max von Sydow and the man with an unending sense of power and grace, Ben Kingsley. Everyone played their parts with extraordinary poise and gratitude for the other actors on screen and watching that ability to share the spotlight never fails to delight.I would also be terribly remiss if I didn’t give accolades to the great cameo monologue by Jackie Earle Haley. Very rarely does a man disappear from Hollywood for such a long time and then erupt back on the scene and make us wonder, “How the hell did that guy get away from us before?” I don’t think we’ll be making that same mistake twice.

The End of the Page Recommendation: If you are a fan of Hitchcock or the original The Shining, you should fit right in on the island. If you are not someone who enjoys a good twist, well, maybe just check out The Island instead. No thinking required in that one.

This is It: Going Out Before the Bang

Who over there keeps requesting songs from “The Wiz”? Seriously, for the last time, that costume was itchy and I’m not doing it.

Rating: 6 out of 10

Sitting in the screening room, nearly breathless with anticipation, I waited for the lights to drop, the camera to roll and the music of the legendary “King of Pop” to fill the room. With that singular focus in mind, this concert film-cum-documentary fit the bill like a shiny sequined glove. Yet when you look beyond the harmonies and continually catchy beats, This is It fails to really capture much more and didn’t deliver the true experience many people are likely to be hoping for in terms of Michael Jackson’s final words.

This is It chronicles the final rehearsals for Michael’s massive and seemingly impressive last tour. If the level of performance and showmanship hinted at throughout the film was any indication of what the actual full concert experience would have been like, Mr. Jackson would have certainly cemented his place (if there was still any real doubt) as one of the best entertainers of all time. From a 3D movie experience built into “Thriller” to the iconographic dance routines brought back once more in “Beat It”, “The Way You Make Me Feel” and other #1 hit songs, the concert was set to amaze audiences with flashes of the new with blasts from the past.

The main downside of the project is that the footage, according to the opening preface, was commissioned by Michael for his personal archives. This was never really meant for widescreen audiences and in that respect wasn’t shot that way. It is tossed together as a montage of Michael’s greatest hits with a few CGI cutaways showing what things would have looked like if he had made it to the opening night of the tour. What is lacking from this is a real sense of who Michael was. On screen he is detailed as a generous, but strict perfectionist and loved and respected by everyone on the project alongside him, yet there is really no sense of what this tour meant to him and what it was like to get back on the stage again after so many years in relative seclusion. Again, that is not the fault of the director as much as it is a integral problem with why the footage was even shot in the first place.

There is a certain nagging voice in the mass consciousness wondering what the actual reason was for putting the movie together in the first place. Was this to give Michael’s fans one last look into what the King’s final bow would have looked like? Was this an attempt by the tour promoter to recoup some of the millions spent in preparation for this incredibly expensive spectacle? Was it pressure from Joe Jackson, Michael’s father, in an effort to keep himself viable in an industry he is largely shut out of? It’s hard to dig through the statements and actions on all sides and figure out the truth because they are all saying something different, but either way, the film itself proved two things: First, Michael was a consummate performer who at the amazing age of fifty could still move and sing and was prepared to deliver one hell of a final tour, and second, we will never truly know who he was underneath the shine and sparkles.

The End of the Page Recommendation: If you are one of the millions who enjoyed his music, this is entertaining just to hear those songs one more time from the man himself. Yet if you are looking for a deeper look beyond the legend and into the real person, this remains unfulfilling and nothing more than a concert film.

The International: Tension-Laced, but Underwhelming

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’s Game 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)

Taken: Neeson Brings the Pain

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.
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::