Safety Not Guaranteed.

Review #1561: Safety Not Guaranteed.

Cast: 

Aubrey Plaza (Darius Britt), Mark Duplass (Kenneth Calloway), Jake Johnson (Jeff Schwensen), Karan Soni (Arnau), Jenica Bergere (Liz), Mary Lynn Rajskub (Bridget), Kristen Bell (Belinda), Jeff Garlin (Darius's father), and William Hall Jr. (Shannon) Directed by Colin Trevorrow. 

Review: 

""We are not the first people to make a time travel movie, we were very aware of that. We felt if we were going to step into that arena we wanted to find our own reasons for why we had a right to do it in the first place. It was an opportunity to make a movie about time travel – why we all might need a time machine sometimes, to fix our mistakes. Much more human issues.”

There is a first time for everything, particularly for directors and writers. This was the first feature film effort for director Colin Trevorrow and writer Derek Connolly, who had met as interns at Saturday Night Live (both had also been students at New York University Tisch School of the Arts in the late 1990s). Trevorrow had been making films since he was 12 and continued with film as an adult with his first short release and a documentary (Home Base in 2002 and Reality Show in 2004, respectively) before thinking about doing screenwriting, and it was meeting Connolly again on a task to do a script together that led them to become writing partners fulltime. Connolly was inspired by a particular ad involving time travel and bring weapons to write the feature (which by the time of him seeing it in 2007 was already a well-known meme), which he wanted Trevorrow to direct - which was done with a budget of roughly $750,000 over 24 days primarily in Seattle, Washington.

I will admit that this film has been on the backburner for quite a while, and the question always comes up after watching a film as to why I shuffled it on in the first place, whether it is good or not. Perhaps it was the cover for the film, displaying an advertisement that attracted the idea to do a film in the first place, which I repeated here to try and bring up a point: Who would be brazen (or perhaps bold) enough to do an ad like that, particular if they were actually truthful? Of course the actual advertisement was written in 1997 by John Silveira, done at the last minute for Backwoods Home Magazine as a joke. But hey, stranger concepts have worked before (I don't know, tell someone in 1983 there will be a classic about a time travelling DeLorean and the response would involve pointing out that car isn't being made anymore), so maybe this really does have some legs to shine with humor for its road trip to time travel. Oops, I mean bait-and-switch kind of road trip to time travel, since by the end of it I was not so much wondering about the machine itself as I was thinking about how disappointed I was in the overall presentation of its attempts at humor with quirks that seems more appropriate for tackier romcoms. But hey, let's talk a bit about the cast, since there is a small ensemble tasked to mumble their way forward. Plaza is okay, doing fine with showing the insecurities that come from one with flaws not easily remedied (whether as an intern or a time travelling partner). Duplass is technically right for the role, in the sense that I could believe the basic interest in someone with forthright suspicion and ambition for something more - but the ultimate goal and the reasons for it betray actually caring about him for the latter half, and by that point I also found the chemistry between him and Plaza to be on shaky ground more than the fulfillment the film wants to really portray. Johnson may very well be funny in other films, because he sure is a bland thorn as the third leg of this group (trio if one doesn't count the first time Soni that is just fine), a skeptic in search of a clue to be more interesting than surly pathetic-ness. 

Exactly what is it about this movie is interesting enough to make me care about these folks? I can't think of a single moment that made me really smile or laugh more than the times I rolled my eyes at how it winds up the clichés faster than it can say the very word it aspires to be: "original". Maybe it is a film about what it means to try and yearn back to the past and what was before with the contrast to how it really went way back when. If the desire to go back in time really felt real and interesting, that might be the case, but as you might guess from my concealed seething disappointment, that isn't the case (one could just quibble about the potential paradox created by making a time machine made to prevent someone's death succeeding and then there is no reason to create a machine if they are alive- and now my mind threatens to go to paste, so I retreat to thinking about baseball). I think the nail that seals the coffin for my disappointment ultimately springs to that ending, one that quite literally was flipped at the last minute by Trevorrow, who stated later that the original ending involving the time machine not working "didn't feel right". With what has occurred not even ten minutes ago with the unfolding of a mediocre rom-com playing pretend with sci-fi, believe it or not it might have actually worked better with the original ending - because why I would want to see it work with a nutter at the controls like this? Sure, it isn't the first time travel film to involve theft to help build its machine, but there's a certain aloof quality to how the film thinks it can brush aside contrivances and a lack of meaningful foundation under the guise of seeming "relatable and human" while instead being a mumbling bumbling mess of mediocrity. To me, it would've proven pretty amusing to have claimed to have built a time machine on the premise of rescuing an old flame from death and then have it all literally unravel right there and then (or better yet, have them travel accidentally into the future, where they don't have to worry about their friends or family since they see the heat death of the universe), but then again this sounds like it is verging on what I wish the film should have been rather than what it is instead. Giving this an average grade is aptly appropriate, in that it doesn't overstay its welcome at 86 minutes while not being anything more than blandly inoffensive, which makes it better than just being a 5/10 film with no real high quality. In that regard, it is far too mediocre to deserve anything other than a mild following, constrained by an overindulgence of whimsy to hide its weak handling of humor and drama with wavering acting that nevertheless served as a distinct little film for its era in terms of independent moviemaking prevailing on tight budgets for rookie directors soon to be better known for presumably better features. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Firewall.

Review #1168: Firewall.

Cast: 
Harrison Ford (Jack Stanfield), Paul Bettany (Bill Cox), Virginia Madsen (Beth Stanfield), Mary Lynn Rajskub (Janet Stone), Jimmy Bennett (Andy Stanfield), Carly Schroeder (Sarah Stanfield), Robert Forster (Harry Romano), Robert Patrick (Gary Mitchell), Nikolaj Coster-Waldau (Liam), Kett Turton (Vel), Vince Vieluf (Pim), Vincent Gale (Willy), and Alan Arkin (Arlin Forester) Directed by Richard Loncraine.

Review: 
Sometimes the most frustrating films to write words about are the ones that are middling and uninspired in terms of execution and action, where they aren't so much terrible to watch as they are just ones that are neither films that are just fine or just awful - they are okay to watch when bored or without many choices on a weekend, but they aren't something that will fall as anyone's version of a classic to love or mock. Trying to rip into a film like this is basically like trying to be angry at an old dog who kinda messes with how the house looks by putting a bunch of hair on the couch. Firewall passes just as quickly, having nothing too particularly interesting to note besides some mediocre action and okay acting. Supposedly the film was originally going to be called "The Wrong Element", which is certainly a bit of a ridiculous title to say out-loud, but it also seems like a title cliche enough for a film in the 1970s.

Ford is okay, but he doesn't really give too much enthusiasm towards the role besides a slightly gruff frustration, but you would be better off with other Ford movies (as long as it isn't Hollywood Homicide (2003), anyway) at least. Bettany isn't too particularly threatening, playing the villain with a bare presence of menace, particularly since he harms more of his own henchmen than the actual family he's holding in their own house. Actually, the whole group of henchmen aren't really menacing to begin with, and the fact that the one moment where a family member is in danger is because of an allergic cookie makes this especially apparent. I imagine that an actor with a bit more menace (or an improved script that gives off more suspense) would've helped make this seem better. He and Ford don't really play off too greatly together, and their fight at the end isn't really anything too special. The cliches of the tough henchman and sympathetic henchman, along with the kids, are what you would expect. Madsen (playing an architect, which doesn't really have too much impact on the plot - surprised?) is okay, but she seems more annoyed at the presence of these henchmen than anything. The other actors are okay, but no one really stands out too interestingly. At 105 minutes, it isn't a painful chore, but there are certainly better ways to use your time up than this, particularly since the climax is just okay at best. The plot goes through the typical motions one would see coming for a heist film while having a few twists that come and go just as quickly. Strangely enough, the film was slightly edited upon release to DVD. One notable edit was different angles and shots for the ending, while adding two cop cars that arrive at the end of the film. I suppose this is to make the ending seem less abrupt, although it doesn't really change that fact too much. Once the final fight happens (and ends) between Ford and Bettany, that is pretty much it for the movie - I'm sure that would've been just fine in an older film, but it just feels amusing that the film kinda just ends. It isn't the kind of movie that will inspire long rants or long defenses of where it goes, being the kind of filler film or footnote in someone's career. On the whole, the film isn't too particularly exciting nor suspenseful, but it is at the very least tolerable enough to pass without torturing the senses too much.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.