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

January 9, 2025

High Fidelity.

Review #2333: High Fidelity.

Cast
John Cusack (Rob Gordon), Iben Hjejle (Laura), Jack Black (Barry Judd), Todd Louiso (Dick), Catherine Zeta-Jones (Charlie Nicholson), Lisa Bonet (Marie DeSalle), Sara Gilbert (Anaugh Moss), Chris Bauer (Paul), Lili Taylor (Sarah Kendrew), Joan Cusack (Liz), Tim Robbins (Ian "Ray" Raymond), and Joelle Carter (Penny Hardwick) Directed by Stephen Frears.

Review: 
“I liked the idea of it being in America. It had a sort of, this sort of more optimistic way in which Americans live, seemed to me to add something to it, rather than taking it away. So it lost some of its stoicism and became slightly more romantic.”

Yes, movies from the new millennium are soon to turn 25 years old, so it seemed apt to cover a movie just as much a result of the writers as it is the director. In 1995, essayist Nick Hornby (probably best known already for his 1995 memoir Fever Pitch), had his first novel come out to the frenzied attention of British audiences who apparently found something in themselves with a setting at a London record shop and a distinct inner monologue. There were rumblings of doing a film as soon as the book came out, with plans ranging from having a draft script done by Scott Rosenberg set in Boston or having Mike Newell involved as a director. Eventually, it was sprung to have John Cusack take a crack at writing a film screenplay, one done in collaboration with D. V. DeVincentis and Steve Pink, who each had worked on Grosse Pointe Blank (as released by Buena Vista Pictures Distribution in 1997). It was through Hornby's permission that they could change the setting to Chicago. Basically, Cusack and Pink/DeVincentis would each go through the book and write what they structured from the book and eventually edit what they saw by basically approaching it as "a checklist of things we need to get done". Cusack suggested trying to approach Stephen Frears to direct. He had actually studied law at the University of Cambridge before electing to work as an assistant to Lindsay Anderson at the Royal Court Theatre (he also worked as an assistant to Karel Reisz as well) and he soon honed his skills for British television. He became a feature director with Gumshoe (1971), but he became a name with My Beautiful Launderette (1985). Hornby was apparently quite satisfied with the adaptation, mostly because a good deal of the dialogue addressing the audience is basically straight from the book. In 2020, a television adaptation of the book came out that lasted one season.

There is something strangely comforting about a comedy that doubles as a sort of male confessional. It is the kind of movie made for people who besides having a certain interest in music maybe, just maybe, need to grow up. The love affair one can have with music in all of its meaningful depths and reaches is palpable with the people we experience in the film that actually end up feeling like people we know in some way or form. Maybe we don't all make top five lists, but we sure do stew on something in the great book of lists and hang-ups. Strangely, it reminds me of Annie Hall (1977), which also handles the anatomy of a breakup through a lead that likes to address the audience (of course, one actually feels the pulse of a tolerable human being in terms the direction and in the acting with High Fidelity, so chew on that). From the jump, it is quite understandable to see Cusack at his most curious and possibly his most effective role. He corrals the movie with a certain kind of slacker (one can operate a store and still slack) charism that really does come through in a manner that we follow along with in ways that a lesser actor would've simply just made a muddled mess. I posit that while some people are self-absorbed, we call them friends anyway because there is a difference between terribly behaved people and people with terrible behavior (i.e. the type that needs to hear "shut up!" once in a while), and some movies win out with weirdos like this. We chuckle and recoil at what we see and hear of a person in all of his bewildering aspects because Cusack just happens to have the voice to carry that drumbeat of weirdness to finding something to do besides just looking back. Of course, it just so happens that there is a pretty capable cast right behind Cusack to make things work beyond just a grandstand for music. Black and Louiso are a dynamic pair of amusement because each just happen to have their own distinct type of humor that connects from the jump in terms of timing and general energy for the material that is palpable in more ways than one. Hjejle goes along with the proceedings that arise from being presented in the prism of one-sided weariness that works in parts. There are a few other little surprises to be found in small moments to see someone such as Robbins take one on the chin in one particular scene of imagined confrontation or one particular cameo to raise a chuckle. I like the overall mood of the film, one that doesn't just dally to conventional means to try and say something about weird hangups or the people you see along the way, and doesn't overstay its welcome at 113 minutes. In general, what we have is a film made by people who clearly had an interest in making a confessional for the hang-ups in all of us that has a distinct love for Chicago and enough charm to make one mix themselves into seeing it play out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

July 8, 2022

Grosse Pointe Blank.

Review #1859: Grosse Pointe Blank.

Cast: 
John Cusack (Martin Q. Blank), Minnie Driver (Debi Newberry), Alan Arkin (Dr. Oatman), Dan Aykroyd (Grocer), Joan Cusack (Marcella), Jeremy Piven (Paul Spericki), Hank Azaria (CIA Agent Steven Lardner), Barbara Harris (Mary Blank), Mitchell Ryan (Mr. Bart Newberry), K. Todd Freeman (CIA Agent Kenneth McCullers), Michael Cudlitz (Bob Destepello), and Benny Urquidez (Felix La Poubelle) Directed by George Armitage.

Review: 
Yes, this was a movie script that was first written by a man who received an invitation to their 10th high school reunion. Michigan native Tom Jankiewicz worked as both an advertising copywriter, a substitute teacher and cashier when he was developing a script that would become this movie, which he started in 1991, which had a variety of characters that were based on people he had known (no, not the lead character). The script, when finally picked up for production, would feature re-writes that saw three people credited alongside Jankiewicz in the final version: John Cusack, Steve Pink, and D.V. DeVincentis. In the end, this was the only feature script that Jankiewicz would see made into a film, although he did serve as a script doctor on a handful of scripts while working primarily as an advertising copywriter and news-writer. In 2013, while participating in a question-and-answer session with college students about the movie, he collapsed and died; he was 49. Now, a film does need a solid director, which is where George Armitage comes into the picture, since Cusack sent him a copy of the script to see if he was interested. Born in Hartford with a move to California as a teenager, he started the road to filmmaking as a film fanatic who happened to study political science and economics at UCLA before being offered a mail room job at 20th Century Fox. He would do work for the studio on television while writing his first scripts in the mail room, most notably with Peyton Place. It was Roger Corman, who was there at the studio to make The St. Valentine's Day Massacre (1967), that helped inspire Armitage on his way to become a filmmaker, particularly his style of letting the actors improvise while getting his day in of shooting; he would write Gas-s-s-s (1970) for Corman (while also serving as an associate producer), and he was impressed enough to have Armitage direct his first film with Private Duty Nurses (1971). Armitage, when presented the script by the four writers, found himself having to guide them to cut down the script in pre-production in order to get it right for shooting (in a sense, he was doing un-credited script work, although he did not want to deal with the Writers Guild and their way of handling credits). It was shot three ways: the written version, a mildly understated version, and an over-the-top version, with the latter being generally utilized to go alongside actor improvisation. This was the fifth feature he directed in his career.

It's funny how you can make a movie about a morally flexible assassin trying to not satisfy their urge and end up having to do so anyway for a solid and clever movie, one that manages to get the finer points of what it really means to try and go home again. It is a coherent black comedy that rewards its viewer with solid characterization in the art of detachment and wry behavior that happens to also have a soundtrack by a member of the Clash. The strength comes from Cusack, wrapped in curiosity and well-placed timing in a character role that requires someone who can eke out something worthwhile in a mess of a character that isn't simply just a calm and collected mercenary. It all comes with the eyes of watching someone who has seen the other side of life and wants to come back, with a little bit of shooting on the side. Driver makes up the other part of the captivating chemistry that comes with the movie in passionate cynicism that has tried to re-invent themselves again and again only to find frustration and hesitancy, complete with sharing a kiss with Cusack from the get-go only to throw a mic on him to do on-the-air blasting in ten years of irritation. Of course, the other members of the cast lend a hand in curious charm, whether that involves Cusack and Cusack sharing brief scenes together or on the phone that matches stoic and chipper attitudes. Arkin makes a reluctant pairing with Cusack that results in a few good moments in the art of attempted conventional therapy. Aykroyd is enjoyably deranged here, making for a quality (union man) ham that makes a quality contrast to Cusack without overstepping him. The setup to get to the climax might be a bit convenient, but one could also find a variety of situations to be a series of convivences and coincidences, which it is really a dandy way of saying that some things are just fun enough to go with things. The 107 minute run-time makes for a pleasant breeze, one that carries its time back home with memories and long-gone people with select moments of action, most notably with a locker-room fight that is executed effectively. As a whole, Armitage and company cultivated a movie with plenty of lasting appeal that has not diminished in the 25 years that have followed the release of this film, one with capable wit and timing from its characters that make it a lingering classic worth checking out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

July 24, 2020

Broadcast News.

Review #1485: Broadcast News.

Cast:
William Hurt (Tom Grunick), Albert Brooks (Aaron Altman), Holly Hunter (Jane Craig), Robert Prosky (Ernie Merriman), Lois Chiles (Jennifer Mack), Joan Cusack (Blair Litton), Peter Hackes (Paul Moore), Christian Clemenson (Bobby), Jack Nicholson (Bill Rorish), and Leo Burmester (Mr. Craig) Written, Produced, and Directed by James L. Brooks (#1470 - Terms of Endearment)

Review:
"I always feel that I am the advocate for my character. More than anyone else on the set, including the director. I'm there to protect my character, in a way."

"I am a character actor in a leading man's body."

It must have been an interesting task to try and follow up a debut success like the one James L. Brooks had. And to do so with three captivating actors in a romantic comedy-drama about the news (for someone who worked at CBS News as copywriter and newswriter) is surely a solid curiosity, with each having been featured in a couple of films in their own interesting paths. The first key to the film is in Hunter, who had started acting from a young age and had entered film and television in 1981, with work gradually following that built to luck in 1987 with this (chosen prior to production after Debra Winger became pregnant) and Raising Arizona. The next key piece is Hurt, who shifted his focus to acting despite having studied theology at Tufts University, utilizing his training at Juilliard School to start in the stage in 1977 and then film in 1980. The third piece to the puzzle is A. Brooks, who quickly rose through the ranks of stand-up comedy to fair amount of variety and television fame before shifting focus to writing/directing his own films along with acting (most notably debuting in Taxi Driver).

Alongside Brooks' own experiences with the news, one other key inspiration for the film was producer Susan Zirinsky, who Brooks based for Hunter's character, who would also serve as technical advisor and associate producer. It is evident fairly quickly that we are dealing with a smart and capable movie, one with a distinct trio of performances that line up together for an interesting look upon the nature of romance within workaholics and a prevailing shift in the way news is delivered to the public. Each of these performances reflect well upon the other sides of the triangle because they all drive the film with comedic anguish that is easy to see traits of in ourselves without looking away. Hunter is the one to gravitate to first, with a high-strung performance that generates skillful intensity that can be both admirable and one to fear in anyone that hard-driving, which generally makes for plenty of interesting sparks when paired with anyone, particularly with Hurt; the best scene to represent that is when she is guiding Hurt through his first broadcast as anchorman with an earpiece, which almost in a way feels like sex. Hurt proves just as well with the other side of the news coin as the harbinger of fresh-faced infotainment that proves convincing in secretive charm, aware of the surroundings yet managing to never be sacrificed for pretty boy cheap shots. A. Brooks makes up the conscience of the film, and he is quite riveting in keeping our interest over with cynical charm and timing - one of the best lines come from him that asks if it would be "a great world if insecurity and desperation made us more attractive", which only makes scenes like his first anchorman show all the more entertaining. Others prove just as endearing in their own ways, such as the amiable Prosky or with Cusack (participant in another interesting scene involving a dash to get a tape in time), or retired news correspondent-turned-actor Hackes. And yes, Nicholson is also present for a time in the film, and he delivers his brief time with the spry standards one would expect from him. In general, the film does a fine job in showing people and the way they work around it in an evolving landscape along with how they work around themselves in various quibbles and high-strung desperation for 133 minutes. We seem them as children, then as adults, and then finally we see them all together again, steadfast in the honesty of who they are, for better or worse. On the whole, this is a fairly entertaining work, an achievement that hits most of its marks in sharp honesty and amusement that holds together long after its release because of how much we still see of it play out now.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

June 29, 2019

Toy Story 4.


Review #1238: Toy Story 4.

Cast: 
Tom Hanks (Woody), Tim Allen (Buzz Lightyear), Annie Potts (Bo Peep), Tony Hale (Forky), Keegan-Michael Key (Ducky), Jordan Peele (Bunny), Madeleine McGraw (Bonnie), Christina Hendricks (Gabby Gabby), Keanu Reeves (Duke Caboom), Ally Maki (Giggle McDimples), Jay Hernandez (Bonnie's dad), Lori Alan (Bonnie's mom), Joan Cusack (Jessie), Bonnie Hunt (Dolly), Kristen Schaal (Trixie), Emily Davis (Billy, Goat and Gruff), Wallace Shawn (Rex), John Ratzenberger (Hamm), Blake Clark (Slinky Dog), June Squibb (Margaret the Store Owner), and Carl Weathers (Combat Carl) Directed by Josh Cooley.

Review: 
I do admit to having feelings of trepidation when I heard that this film was announced. The first three films are great movies, filled with plenty of entertainment, charm, wonderful animation with a solid foundation that would be expected from Pixar. Next year will be the 25th anniversary of the release of the first film, so one would wonder exactly how long can a saga like this can really last, particularly one about sentient toys and the actors that accompany them (there are even cameos from Mel Brooks and Carol Burnett at one point). One would've thought it would've ceased after the last one nine years ago, and one could even make the case that it could've just ended with the second one with no hesitation. Each of those films close themselves out leaving the audiences (and corporate overlords, if one is to be cynical here) satisfied for the time - these films are accessible for everyone, young and old. With this film, the best thing that can be said is that I can't really fault the filmmakers for wanting to make another story with these characters - the result is not a disturbing cashgrab (unlike certain productions of the past decade), but it is a compromise that works hard at trying to justify its existence with quality cast, animation, and a fairly competent foundation to make it mostly worth it. After all, there are plenty of writing credits to go around, such as a screenplay by Stephany Folsom and Andrew Stanton but eight credited for story (John Lasseter, Rashida Jones, Will McCormack, Josh Cooley, Valerie LaPointe, Martin Hynes, Folsom, and Stanton), so that sure makes for plenty of hands to go around.

It isn't so much the worst of the Toy Story films as it happens to be the one that doesn't have as many flawless features - this makes it harder to say it is entirely necessary to view, which reminds me more of Pixar's recent sequels such as Finding Dory (2016) or Incredibles 2 (2018) - both fine follow-ups that don't soil the memory of the original, and this likely falls in the middle between those in scale of quality (the less said about Pixar's other certain sequel in the decade, the better). As before, there certainly are interesting new characters to view upon the ones we know and appreciate - the existential crisis of a utensil toy sure does make for an intriguing one, with Hanks and Hale being up to the task of playing off each other with purpose and charm. The cast sure does pull plenty of charm and fairly timed laughs, even if it has to split them into segments just to try and keep things threaded - at least until its climax, anyway. Hanks of course does just as well anyone can do with a role he fits perfectly for, full of passion and leadership that is easy to follow with as before, such as when trying to help a newly created utensil toy find himself as more than just "trash". Allen has his moments to shine when its wants to be on him (with one recurring gag to follow along with, much like the last one), handily fitting into the role and its final sequence without hesitation. Potts, last in the role two decades (and two films) ago, is just as able to jump right back into things with relish, capable as can be with what the film wants to do with her role without making it like a fractured portrayal, and the chemistry between her and Hanks goes seamlessly enough. Hale is quirky yet fairly amusing enough to hold the ranks as the resident new toy on the block with his own interesting personality and design that keeps up with the others without becoming just another gag on the wall. Key and Peele make for a few laughs when the light needs to shine on them, and Reeves is just as charming (who can resist a toy stuntman of Canada?). Hendricks makes for an engaging part of the film, offbeat in sinister nature yet fairly capable of being vulnerable that falls alongside the lines of other character types from the previous films without being a complete copy. The others of the cast don't have as much to really do, but they make their time count just fine. A 100 minute run-time makes for a finely paced film that doesn't linger too much of stringing all its threads to a complete stop nor leave the viewer hanging for too much time, even if its finish is just fine with where it closes as opposed to simply just great. Its outcome may prove a bit more fit for a discussion than a real out-pour of emotions (if that's your sort of thing from animated movies, I guess), but at least its character arcs do make it all fairly worthwhile. The animation is wonderful as to be expected, capable at holding to standards one would expect from before that has evolved with the times in the past decades, holding balance with when it needs to be light or darkly-lit as such. On the whole, I do appreciate that the people who crafted this film tried their hardest to make a story worth viewing one again through these characters without trashing what made them so compelling in the first place all those years ago; it may not be the most necessary film of the saga, but it surely will prove just as well in entertainment for people that yearn to seek out where it lands itself this time. Whether there is another one of these films or not, it sure has been quite a fun time to see these films play out beside the toybox over the years.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

October 7, 2014

Movie Night: School of Rock.


Review #645: School of Rock.

Cast
Jack Black (Dewey Finn), Joan Cusack (Roz Mullins), Mike White (Ned Schneebly), Sarah Silverman (Patty Di Marco), Miranda Cosgrove (Summer Hathaway), Joey Gaydos Jr. (Zack Mooneyham), Kevin Clark (Freddy Jones), Rebecca Brown (Katie), Robert Tsai (Lawrence), Maryam Hassan (Tomika), Caitlin Hale (Marta), and Aleisha Allen (Alicia) Directed by Richard Linklater.

Review
Rock and roll is awesome, let's just get that out of the way. We (audience included) could discuss our favorite bands all day, what we listen to and if disco is actually better than pop songs today, or we could do it over the comment section below. It's all up to you, but in the meanwhile, there's School of Rock to talk about. It figures that on Rocktober (Or Spooktober, but whatever), School of Rock pops up on television, and it was on my day off, which created a perfect storm (Imagine that, AMC actually showing movies for once.) to review it. Black was practically born to play a rocker turned teacher and he has so much energy, he seems to really just blend into the role and the fact that he's pretty good rocking it out makes for a real fun performance to watch. The rest of the cast is good, I do wonder if I was supposed to like Silverman's character (though I'd complain too if a rocker reject posed as a teacher by pretending to be someone else), though I think I'll just let that one slide, only because sometimes rock just invades the mind, "who made who", as you might say. It is a long way to the top, if you want to make a good film, and this film manages to overcome some quirks and become the pinball wizard. Whoops, I meant an enjoyable film.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

August 21, 2013

Movie Night: Toy Story 2.

Review #441: Toy Story 2.

Cast
Tom Hanks (Woody), Tim Allen (Buzz Lightyear), Kelsey Grammer (Stinky Pete), Joan Cusack (Jessie), Don Rickles (Mr. Potato Head), Jim Varney (Slinky Dog), Wallace Shawn (Rex), John Ratzenberger (Hamm), Annie Potts (Bo Peep), Estelle Harris (Mrs. Potato Head), Wayne Knight (Al McWhiggin), John Morris (Andy), and Laurie Metcalf (Ms. Davis) Directed by John Lasseter (#440 - Toy Story), Lee Unkrich, and Ash Brannon.

Review
Ever have a film sequel that actually might be better than the original? (yes, you could answer Empire Strikes Back, or Spider-Man 2, or Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan, but let's not get too off topic) Toy Story 2 manages to evoke that question, and it could be argued that it is better. This might feel tired, or stale (or both) coming from me, but the Toy Story trilogy could arguably the best film trilogy ever made (I...will probably take that back at some point, but yeah. That and the ambiguities of their being a potential fourth Toy Story), but oh well. Hanks and Allen again do a good job, but Grammer is a fine villain, and it is nice to watch Newman-I mean Wayne Knight in this film. The animation doesn't change too much, consistent, but very well done. There's not a whole lot to say about the film either because I'm sure everybody in the world has at least said something of the film, or because continuously giving praise over and over to different but similar subjects gets repetitive after a while. The film is good nonetheless, and Pixar once again did a fine job. Not bad for a film that originally was going to be a direct to video sequel (Gee, doesn't that sound similar *cough* Planes), isn't it? Countdown to 450 Reviews: 10, 9...

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

May 21, 2013

Movie Night: Toy Story 3.


Review #382: Toy Story 3.

Cast
Tom Hanks (Woody), Tim Allen (Buzz Lightyear), Joan Cusack (Jessie), Ned Beatty (Lotso), John Morris (Andy), Don Rickles (Mr. Potato Head), Blake Clark (Slinky Dog), Wallace Shawn (Rex), John Ratzenberger (Hamm), Estelle Harris (Mrs. Potato Head), Michael Keaton (Ken), Jodi Benson (Barbie), Emily Hahn (Bonnie), Jeff Pidgeon (Little Green Men), Timothy Dalton (Mr. Pricklepants), Kristen Schaal (Trixie), Jeff Garlin (Buttercup), Bonnie Hunt (Dolly), Whoopi Goldberg (Stretch), and Bud Luckey (Chuckles) Directed by Lee Unkrich (#074 - Monsters, Inc and #155 - Finding Nemo)

Review
The first two Toy Stories by now are probably films that this generation has for nostalgia. The first was released in 1995, the 2nd in 1999, and this one was released in 2010. In that case, it's like a cycle, from the beginning to the...end? After watching this, I wonder if it is the end for these characters and their stories. Whatever the case, if it is meant to be, they went out with a proper bang. Hanks and Allen do a good job, pairing off each other well as does some of the others. The animation is good, having new settings that do look pretty good. But the thing that holds the film together is Ned Beatty as Lotso. For a character to turn in motivation from when you first see him to later in the film, it's a pretty stunning transformation. The film has some dark themes, but they aren't too dark for anyone not to enjoy, and it makes sense, given the progression of the series. The ending has some weirdness to it, but that does not overshadow a film that is pretty good, really good.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

December 2, 2011

Movie Night: Addams Family Values.

Review #078: Addams Family Values.

Cast
Raúl Juliá (Gomez Addams), Anjelica Huston (Mortica Addams), Christopher Lloyd (Uncle Fester), Christina Ricci (Wednesday Addams), Joan Cusack (Debbie), and Jimmy Workman (Pugsley Addams). Directed by Barry Sonnenfield (#211- Men in Black, #212 - Men in Black II)

Review
This film is a entertaining sequel to the first film, as it delivers more fun and morbid humor, but not stale and tired ones, they're different ones that help make the film be itself. Once again, the acting is superb, with Lloyd, Julia, Huston, and Ricci being the large performances. The movie has that ability to be a good sequel that doesn't rely on old jokes, or an used story-line. It's a fine little movie, in conclusion.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

December 20, 2010

Movie Night: Looney Tunes: Back in Action.


Review #007: Looney Tunes: Back in Action.

Cast
Brendan Fraser (D.J. Drake), Jenna Elfman (Kate Houghton), Steve Martin (Mr. Chairman), Joe Alaskey (Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Sylvester, Beaky Buzzard, Mama Bear), Jeff Bennett (Foghorn Leghorn, Yosemite Sam, Nasty Canasta), Heather Locklear (Dusty Tails), Joan Cusack (Mother), Timothy Dalton (Damian Drake), Bob Bergen (Porky Pig), June Foray (Granny), Brendan Fraser (Tasmanian Devil), Eric Goldberg (Marvin the Martian, Michigan J. Frog, Speedy Gonzales, Tweety), Bruce Lanoil (Pepé Le Pew), and Billy West (Elmer Fudd, Peter Lorre) Directed by Joe Dante.

Review
This is the first film covered of the 2000s, a decade that has just passed us by recently. The film is a wacky, but fine comedy with animation and live action mixed in very well. The cartoon characters are voiced well, with decent acting from Fraser and crazier acting by Martin. It's a zany, but cool film worth all the comedy, action, drama, spyness, and more all into a 90 minute film that entertains even if it may have been overshadowed by Elf, Matrix Revolutions, and *sighs* Cat in the Hat (#210). I'd say it's an underrated gem, but you'll have to check it out to see for yourself. For me, it's successful.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.