Atlas Shrugged: Part I.

Review #2321: Atlas Shrugged: Part I.

Cast: 

Taylor Schilling (Dagny Taggart), Grant Bowler (Henry "Hank" Rearden), Matthew Marsden (James Taggart), Graham Beckel (Ellis Wyatt), Edi Gathegi (Edwin "Eddie" Willers), Jsu Garcia (Francisco Domingo Carlos Andres Sebastian d'Anconia), Michael Lerner (Wesley Mouch), Jack Milo (Richard McNamara), Ethan Cohn (Owen Kellogg), Rebecca Wisocky (Lillian Rearden), Christina Pickles (Mother Rearden), Neill Barry (Philip Rearden), Patrick Fischler (Paul Larkin), Sylva Kelegian (Ivy Starnes), Jon Polito (Orren Boyle), and Michael O'Keefe (Hugh Akston) Directed by Paul Johansson.

Review: 

You may or may not know the novel Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. Born and educated in the Russian Empire, she moved to the States in 1926 and wrote a handful of novels and plays (I vaguely remember reading Anthem as a high school freshman over ten years ago but can remember more about Orwell's Animal Farm by a landslide). Describing the book as her magnum opus and one about "the role of man's mind in existence", the book grew a certain following among libertarians among a wide variety of reviews (one review said that within the novel, "a voice can be heard ... commanding: 'To a gas chamber—go!'"). Every year, over 400,000 copies of the words of Rand (including the novel) is donated to high schools by an institute that bears her name. For decades, there had been rumblings of trying to make the novel into either a film or a miniseries, with Rand even trying to make a screenplay before she died in 1982. The rights ot the film had been given to her heir in Leonard Peikoff, who had sold an option on producing the film to investor John Aglialoro in 1992 (a chairman of Cybex International and a member of the Board of Trustees of The Atlas Society). Through failed attempts at a miniseries on TNT and a project overseen by Howard and Karen Baldwin and Lions Gate Entertaiment that went nowhere in the 2000s, Aglialoro eventually took it upon himself to write screenplay with Brian Patrick O'Toole (as opposed to using the script by Randall Wallace that would've somehow made the movie into a two-hour work) that eventually got into production just two days before the film option was to expire. Stephen Polk was replaced by Paul Johansson as director just before filming began; Johansson is mostly known as an actor to go alongside directing fourteen episodes of One Tree Hill and go figure that this is his only directing credit. Shot over the course of less than six weeks for apparently over $10 million (speculation was that it actually was $20 million, but at any rate, "red camera technology" was used to get digital images for the film), the movie had to go through covert marketing outside of the usual norm that saw promotion from whatever "FreedomWorks" is. The movie never was released to more than 500 theaters at any point during its release cycle that started in April of 2011. Aglialoro went so far as to call critics who panned the film as "lemmings" that were scared of Ayn Rand and called it motivation to get the sequels made, which were done with lessening budgets and different directors and cast for each successor in 2012 and 2013. 

Honestly, I don't really try to put much of a political slant in these reviews (editorializing is more fun in calling Evel Knievel a bum than trying to spend sentences on Michael Moore, for example), I just go for what might be interesting (with Turkey Week being the "fun" alternative). It was either going to be this film or God's Not Dead (2014) and I shudder to wonder if I picked the sillier movie by accident. You just have to love a movie where an overhead shot cuts to a closeup where one says, "In order to save my family's business [actor pause] I'm going to have to abandon it" which is then immediately followed by a guy playing with a train set. I just have to ask myself: what in the actual hell is this movie? Where the hell did the money go to make a movie that has the trappings of a Hallmark movie? Do libertarians treat this movie like folks treat religious movies? The only thing "epic" about this movie is that it has the absolute weirdest sensibility about storytelling and dialogue that feels like it was written by aliens. This weirdo rendition of 2016 somehow makes the real one look sane by comparison, complete with obsession for trains. The jargon that gets spoken on screen makes me appreciate the technobabble heard on Star Trek episodes because at least those episodes didn't feel like pants about to rip in two from stress or involve a "State Science Institute". Folks disappear when people ask about "John Galt" while their photo turns to black-and-white that lists their name as if it was an NCIS episode, with the last guy being "on strike". People either share exhubrance for being in boardroom meetings or trains in a manner that suggests the movie is actually the product of someone actually having sex with a boardroom or train. I suppose there might have been something about "makers vs. takers" and capitalism to talk about here, but the whole experience is hollow and not at all compelling enough to not move past being a self-righteous screed about governments and money that has the persuasive power of a homeless man talking to you about certain men being the Devil for 97 minutes. The only amusement I get is the random bits with name actors trying to make sense of playing such weird caricatures, whether that involves Armin Shimerman (best known as Quark on possibly the best Star Trek show in Deep Space Nine) talking about "social danger" metals or Polito and Lerner playing spooky elites. Schilling and Bowler don't prove ideal to serving these leads because the characters have very little depth to actually deliver substance (you would almost rather see a hammy actor) that might actually make you wonder if they swapped brains with Neil Breen. Beckel just gives off crazy vibes. By the time one gets to burning oil wells for the climax (okay, funny word to use for the film but still), one is as satisfied in getting to the "End of Part I" title card as one would be in finding that one's housekeys were on the roof. As a whole, this is a baffling movie to watch, having little to offer people in actual production value that looks and feels cheap in the ways that matter most for a hollow experience. It somehow seems out of date and out of touch in terms of delivering a point beyond meandering mealy-mouth mush.

Overall, I give it 1 out of 10 stars.

Candidates that fell by the wayside for our fifth and most successful Turkey Week in terms of terrible crap seen: 

Mitchell (1975), If Ever I See You Again (1978), Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, Simon Sez, 

 Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever, Killing Me Softly, Project Moonbase, Shanghai Surprise / Body of Evidence, The Slime People, Don't Go in the Woods, H.G. Wells' The Shape of Things to Come, Folks!,

The League of Extraordinary Gentleman, Billy Jack Goes to Washington, Return to Blue Lagoon, 

The Starfighters, The Identical / God's Not Dead, Date Movie, and 2024's Reagan / The Crow. 

We shall see where the road takes Turkey Week in 2025.

Miller's Crossing.

Review #1629: Miller's Crossing.

Cast:

Gabriel Byrne (Tom Reagan), Marcia Gay Harden (Verna Bernbaum), Albert Finney (Liam "Leo" O'Bannon), John Turturro (Bernie Bernbaum), Jon Polito (Johnny Caspar), J. E. Freeman (Eddie "the Dane"), Steve Buscemi (Mink Larouie), John McConnell (Bryan), Mike Starr (Frankie), Al Mancini (Tic-Tac), Olek Krupa (Tad), and Frances McDormand (The Mayor's Secretary) Written, Produced, and Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen (#659 - True Grit (2010), #765 - Fargo, #1063 - Blood Simple, #1517 - The Big Lebowski, and #1552 - A Serious Man)

Review:

"It doesn’t really concern me if the audience sometimes loses the thread of the plot. It’s not that important to understand who killed the Rug Daniels character, for instance. It’s far more important to feel the relationships between the characters. The question of intelligibility concerns me more, but, until now, I haven’t received any bad reactions concerning that."

It can be amazing to look upon the early part of the career of a director and see how they can synthesize entertainment with their own particular brand of craftsmanship and characters that entices one with wit and intrigue in where it all will lead by the time of its final shot. The Coen brothers certainly have done well with cultivating memorable films over the span of four decades, with a fair share of notice to accompany it depending on how it reaches them. Miller's Crossing, the third film directed, written, and produced by the Coens, was made on a budget of roughly $10-$14 million, but it did not shake the world with fervor upon release, likely owing to the fact that it was released days after Goodfellas (1990). Granted, they are not entirely similar when it comes to dealing with the gangster film genre, since this one is more of a synthesizing of the gangster and noir genre than anything - they were not so much inspired by the gangster film but rather with the gangster novel with the works of Dashiell Hammett, particularly with the novels The Glass Key and Random Harvest (incidentally, the Coens have argued it to be more closer to noir than the gangster film). Incidentally, the time it took to write such an intricate plot (roughly eight months) led to writer's block, during which the Coens were inspired to write what became their next feature with Barton Fink the following year.

It sure is a puzzle with a dazzling look to go with it. It is a series of contradictions and machinations, whether that means a struggle for ethics in illicit activities or various angles for all but the one that matters (i.e. the man who takes more blows than a sunken ship). In short, it moves like the breeze on a fedora in a forest (that particular image spurred the idea for the film). They wanted to make a film with a jigsaw puzzle in the background as a plot that makes one focus on the momentum of the folks inhabiting a "dirty town movie". The 115 minute run-time moves with the shift of a long con that can go for humor alongside curiosity but also melancholy, which is naturally aided by its soundtrack by Carter Burwell and look (shot but not exactly set in New Orleans - this was the third and final film that Barry Sonnenfeld shot for the Coens). It's a journey with various twists that goes with such a visual and complex punch that has a rhythm of greatness that always keeps itself a step ahead of the viewer without shaking them down for it. There are a variety of memorable presences, all of which spring down from its primary man of inscrutable charm in Byrne, who actually had to lobby with the Coens to keep his native Irish accent for the film (The Irish accent would also be done by the British-born Finney). He protrudes icy confidence with reasonable edge, one that can take a hit or an angle without ever striking a false note throughout all the layers. He weaves his way through a rough and tumble rat-a-tat kind of film with the sense of a lead presence taken from 50 years prior (such as a Bogart) but without the sense of being duped into watching an impersonation, which works with scenes that revolve around banter with Harden to moments spent in counsel with Finney. This was the first major role for Harden, who had a few roles on television and stage prior to this feature - she does well here, fitting the screen well in sultry jaded charm (in a sea of gangsters and molls, who expects anything less?) that keeps in motion with Byrne in clear-cut noir interest. Finney was a last-minute casting choice, as Trey Wilson died just before shooting was to begin. Who knows how it would have worked out with Wilson, but one sees Finney right at home with this role, one that is sprinkled through the film with great character role presence in wry intrigue. He has likely the best scene in the whole film, involving him in a shoot-out while "Danny Boy" (sung by Irish tenor Frank Patterson) plays in the background to a constant pulpy hail of gunfire. This was the first collaboration between the Coens and numerous actors that they have worked with in various films, such as Polito (5 in total), Turturro (4 in total), and Buscemi (5 in total). Each are memorable in their own way, such as Turturro and his rambling cover of hustling, which naturally sticks with one in scenes dealing with guns in a forest or in a dark house. Polito (who was actually approached to play the Dane but insisted on reading for Caspar) proves his own among a talented group of ethically challenged folks that try to avoid (or give) the high hat. Buscemi may have just one scene, but he sure talks his way into it (and webbing of the plot) with worthy ease. Freeman finishes the job with worthy smarm required of a second man in a film full of triangles between folks. What we have is a film that moves on its own plotting, detailed in its style with intricate care that will leave one curious by the time of its climax and its last fateful scene in the trees. It is the kind of noir that fits like a glove with others of its ilk in one category: it merits more than one viewing in a positive way, where one wants to follow along with the webbing of its story and characters through and through, because it looks and feels so good to do so. It may not have been the proper respect it deserved three decades ago, but it surely has found a place in worthy entertainment in the noir and gangster genres that one should be looked upon with great interest in the progression of the Coens in their execution of story and style.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Crow (1994).

Review #1160: The Crow.

Cast: 
Brandon Lee (Eric Draven/The Crow), Michael Wincott (Top Dollar), Ernie Hudson (Sergeant Albrecht), Rochelle Davis (Sarah), Bai Ling (Myca), David Patrick Kelly (T-Bird), Angel David (Skank), Jon Polito (Gideon), Tony Todd (Grange), Sofia Shinas (Shelly Webster), Michael Massee (Funboy), Laurence Mason (Tin-Tin), and Anna Levine (Darla) Directed by Alex Proyas (#086 - I, Robot)

Review: 
The Crow is based off a 1989 superhero comic book series of the same name created by James O'Barr, which soon became an underground success. Tasked with writing the screenplay adaptation is John Shirley and David J. Schow, who were each known for their work on writing novels (cyberpunk and splatter-punk horror, respectively), with un-credited rewrites being done due to the tragic accidental death of Lee on March 31, 1993, which occurred a few days before production was set to end. Narration (along with a few new scenes) was added to accompany stand-in actors (such as Chad Stahelski) and CGI digital superimposition. The resulting product is a movie that is pretty entertaining, mostly due to its style and some fair performances, starting with Lee (in his fifth and final appearance in a film). He shows a good deal of charm and compelling nature (complete with a nice-looking costume) that dominates the screen for most of its 102 minute run-time. Wincott, although not having as much time to make up much of a villainous presence, proves entertaining enough. Hudson is enjoyable in pulling some watch-ability out of the cop role without feeling hollow, having a bit of humor to him. Davis does a fine job as well, going along well with Lee and Hudson. Although the supporting cast of adversaries are a bit routine, they aren't detrimental to the film's credit. The climax (complete with rain, naturally) is satisfactory to help cap the film, having a decent showdown that tries to make the final result a little less than easily predictable (for a vigilante hero, anyway), which works okay to a point. After all, this is a movie with a guy back from the dead who is accompanied by a crow that flies around, but at least there isn't some sort of shoehorned explanation of the origins of the title hero. The film is dark and moody with its approach, particularly with its cinematography by Dariusz Wolski that sure makes the setting come to life with plenty of fine shots to look at, reminding me of Batman (1989) and Blade Runner (1982). The film doesn't have too much in the way of a great story at times, and it can fall prey to some cliches, but I found that there are enough enjoyable moments to make this a entertaining experience. It makes for a fine vigilante film that has some fine action sequences to accompany a movie that certainly earns a cult following and at least one watch for people curious for some style and action.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.