The Descendants.

Review #1558: The Descendants.

Cast: 

George Clooney (Matthew "Matt" King), Shailene Woodley (Alexandra "Alex" King), Amara Miller (Scottie King), Nick Krause (Sid), Beau Bridges (Hugh King), Judy Greer (Julie Speer), Matthew Lillard (Brian Speer), Robert Forster (Scott Thorson), Patricia Hastie (Elizabeth King), and Mary Birdsong (Kai Mitchell) Directed by Alexander Payne (#635 - Nebraska and #1169 - About Schmidt)

Review: 

I’m deathly afraid of being too sentimental. But a film should be emotional. There is a letter from Chekhov in which a young writer asks him for some feedback, and he’s kind enough to do it. He writes the guy back and says, basically, ‘It’s too damn sentimental. If you want emotional effects, you have to place them against a cold background, so they stand out in relief.’ I think that’s true.”

It's easy to make a film about fulfillment of the self and finding a way through crisis when you have a director ripe for it. Payne was born in Omaha, Nebraska (which to perhaps some surprise has had several notable people come from there, such as Marlon Brando) to parents with Greek descent. He developed an interest with film early as a child from viewings at the theater with his parents (noting several filmmakers that influenced him such as Robert Altman, Akira Kurosawa, and Luis Bunuel), and receiving an old Super 8mm projector from his father as a teenager helped in that regard as well. He made dual studies in college, studying Spanish literature and history at Stanford University before moving on to UCLA Film School that led to a master's degree alongside attention with his thesis film with The Passion of Martin (1990). While a deal with Universal Pictures didn't result in a film with them (the one script they had him write would be made - as About Schmidt, a decade later), he eventually found his way to feature filmmaking with Citizen Ruth (1996) and his breakthrough with Election (1999). Since then, he has made five further films (with a few even set and shot in his hometown) that have made him an interesting auteur filmmaker to follow through with his mix between drama and comedy with a majority of success with audiences.  

The film is an adaptation of the 2007 novel of the same name by Hawaii-native Kaui Hart Hemmings, who described her experiences growing up there as important to understanding ideas she found interest in such as the "complicated issues of land, history, and inheritance," describing the state as like a silent force more than just a simple drama (with this mix of tragedy and dark comedy being apparent as well in the film). As he has done for most of his films, Payne served as a co-writer of the screenplay (although without usual co-writer Jim Taylor, who instead co-produced the film with Payne), doing so with Nat Faxon and Jim Rash, both of whom were making their debut as writers with a script that languished for a while in development. In any case, what we have here is a capably human film that hits its mark with flawed people living in a world past our first impressions (whether that involves a happy life or "paradise" living in Hawaii). It benefits from a useful cast that accomplishes most of what it wants to display about a life turning around on decisions to be made and ones made for them and finding a way out of being trapped by monotonous life or wracked in pity. Sure, there are no easy solutions to said problems in life, but it is how one steps into their contradictions and deals with it that makes them find something more than just living on some land day after day - a crisis of marriage, a crisis of family, and a crisis of business for 115 minutes that is just well enough. In that sense, Clooney does well in lining up these dilemmas and work it out with conviction that represents a worthy challenge to bring together for an actor like him, never drawing upon emotional smarminess or anything meant to guide away from the character as a whole. Woodley proves well in motion over time with this film, growing around the edge with well enough emphasis, and her moments with Miller or with Krause lend well to some worthy inspection and chuckles. Others make their mark in parts with touches of breeze or flint with Bridges and Forster, respectively, or folks for the climax with Greer and Lillard that make effort count. On the whole, it works in a majority of its moments in generating capable drama without lounging itself too much in pity or with condensation while leaving the audience to see where the path lies for them in resonating with it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Jackie Brown.

Review #1307: Jackie Brown.

Cast: 
Pam Grier (Jackie Brown), Samuel L. Jackson (Ordell Robbie), Robert Forster (Max Cherry), Bridget Fonda (Melanie Ralston), Michael Keaton (Ray Nicolette), Robert De Niro (Louis Gara), Michael Bowen (Det. Mark Dargus), Chris Tucker (Beaumont Livingston), LisaGay Hamilton (Sheronda), Tom "Tiny" Lister Jr (Winston), Hattie Winston (Simone), and Sid Haig (Judge) Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino (#638 - Kill Bill: Volume 1, #639 - Kill Bill: Volume 2, #1180 - Reservoir Dogs, #1218 - Pulp Fiction, and #1251 - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood)

Review: 
For a crime film, a well-detailed story can go a long way to make an experience worth remembering. Quentin Tarantino certainly had plenty of films to showcase interesting people and the environments they inhabit, and Jackie Brown proves no different, showing plenty of wit and charm through a 154 minute leisure that has a solid cast and pretty good execution that leaves one fairly satisfied. This happens to be the only Tarantino film where he adapted a previous work, with the source material being Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard (which Tarantino did over adapting Freaky Deaky or Killshot after re-reading), for which there were a few changes made involving its title character alongside her race that Leonard approved of, reportedly saying that this was the best screenplay he had ever read. For his third directorial effort, Tarantino uses a little less violence and a bit more chronology when it comes to telling his story, which works pretty well within some casual confines, featuring six distinct players in something reminiscent of blaxploitation films (having Grier helps in that regard) without losing itself too much in clear style. The main group of actors do pretty well in that regard, starting with its main lead. Grier, already a trail blazer for female action heroes in the 1970s, proves just as capable in sinking her teeth into a towering presence, capable of holding her own with whoever is on screen without even having to use a gun all too much. Jackson exudes ruthless confidence to a tee here, capable of sticking any kind of line involving unseemly things (such as trying to get someone in a trunk as a favor) without too much reluctance. Forster seems completely in his element here, a world weary straight-laced player with complete professionalism and subtle chemistry with Grier that makes for a well-deserved comeback for the character actor that ended up with an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor - the film's only Oscar nomination. Fonda and De Niro also provide welcome players, casual and raw for the moments that need to happen, which all comes full circle with the parking lot sequence in terms of emotion and payoff (sometimes you just need to see it all play out to make it really count). Keaton doesn't have as much time, but it sure is nice to see him and the rest of the supporting cast in those little moments to surround the environment of the plot. It has its choices when it comes to music or homages, doing so with careful ambition that extends to a plot that plays by the book in gathering these characters to the moments that matter without shortchanging them with cheap gags or rushes. The film has its amusing moments, but it knows when to drive itself with sharp senses of focus with characters who all seem to have been around the block a few times and seem weary for it. It's a nice movie that drags itself with daring regard for plenty to see with its characters and its sudden turns that make it all feel worth it. Sure, it isn't his best film, but it does prove a worthy one to view once if not twice to see how the run plays out.

Overall, I give it 8 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.

Supernova (2000).

Review #1139: Supernova.

Cast: 
James Spader (Nick Vanzant), Angela Bassett (Dr. Kaela Evers), Robert Forster (A.J. Marley), Lou Diamond Phillips (Yerzy Penalosa), Peter Facinelli (Karl Larson), Robin Tunney (Danika Lund), Wilson Cruz (Benjamin Sotomejor), Eddy Rice Jr (Flyboy), Knox Grantham White (Troy Larson), and Vanessa Marshall (Sweetie) Directed by Thomas Lee (Walter Hill (#1072 - 48 Hrs and #1091 - Last Man Standing), Jack Sholder (#476 - A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge) and Francis Ford Coppola (#592 - Dementia 13))

Review: 
Surprise, it's a late-night second review to begin October! Welcome to Spooktober. This month will have numerous reviews of things related in some way to horror, and I hope to write and post ten reviews before the month ends on the 31st. This film, of which belongs to the sci-fi/horror genre, has a bit of an...interesting history that helps give context to the final released product. The review of the film itself begins in the second paragraph.

The idea for the film originally was developed by William Malone as "Dead Star'', which involved a space expedition finding alien artifacts and brings them back to Earth with consequences, and it was first pitched to studios in 1990 as "Dead Calm in outer space". Painter and noted set designer H. R. Giger was asked to make some concept sketches to help promote the film. Gradually the story (done by Malone and Daniel Chuba with screenplay by David C. Wilson) changed to one about a medical ship answering a distress signal that finds a vessel near a black hole and rescues the only survivor of the ship who is carrying a mysterious object with him. Geoffrey Wright (director of films such as Romper Stomper) was originally hired as director for production, which was set to begin in April 1998. However, he left just prior to production beginning, having creative differences with the producers. Hill was brought in with only a few weeks to spare before the start of filming, and he wanted to make changes to the script, but his vision was different from what the studio had wanted. The budget was apparently cut in half during production, with the final budget for the film (a USA-Switzerland co-production) being around $90 million. The effects were done by Digital Domain, but with less effects than planned. MGM had a partnership with them that would provide effects for the film below usual rates for effects, but the partnership fell through, meaning it would cost more to put it, resulting in the effects-work being cut in half. Upon completing principal photography a few months later, Hill assembled his cut of the film, but without all the effects added into it, due to them not all being finished. When MGM wanted to show his cut without the effects to test audiences, Hill was opposed, stating that the film would not have good reception without the effects added in, which proved correct. Further arguments led to his departure from the film. Shoulder was enlisted to do re-edits and re-shoots to try and salvage the film. His version streamlined things a bit more, and although the results were a bit better in screenings, the results weren't up to what the studio wanted, and they shelved the film until 1999. Coppola, a board member for MGM and famed director of such films like The Godfather trilogy, was enlisted to help try and give the film another set of editing, most notably by adding a romance scene between Spader and Bassett's characters - by re-editing out-takes from a romance scene involving two other people and digitally editing their features and skin color. In any case, this is a movie that couldn't even have a decently cut trailer for its January release, utilizing deleted, extended, or alternate footage not seen in the film.

Knowing the details of a production as troubled as this one was doesn't make the film any more palatable to sit through, but it at least gives some sort of context for why this is such a sloppy movie. Whether as science fiction or horror, it manages to be a complete failure, having little to none of the standards needed to succeed on any level, being neither scary nor interesting to look at. They managed to make a film that feels like it was created from the scraps of other films and their ideas, with Alien (1979) being one I can think about off the top of my head. At least that film didn't have some magic MacGuffin with a bunch of science mumbo-jumbo to go with it, including one bit about the orb being "nine-dimensional" - but that is just one of several things to pick at with this film. The characters in this dreck are all fairly stale and not too particularly interesting to go along with, with the actors only being able to drag these paper people they play as far as they can. Spader and Bassett come out of it with the least lost, and while they can't save the film, they are at least watchable in some way, presenting some sort of charm - even if they don't have too much chemistry with each other. Forster clearly suffered in terms of screen-time from the edits, since he's in the film for not even twenty minutes, so there isn't much for him (or for the viewer) to grab onto. Phillips does okay with not being too one-note for a character such as this. Facinelli plays the villain of this sorry film, and he can't quite make this character come off as anything other than mildly annoying. I especially like the fact that the climax was re-edited in order to take out a big effects sequence involving his character changing form because the studio "couldn't see the actor" - yep, because that was the only issue. Tunney doesn't do much to generate interest with her character, which also can apply to the other people in this limited cast.

By the time the film wants to start a body count, there isn't really many people that it can use to even make a body count, and the people that it does take out are pretty much taken out in a span of about ten minutes. The look of the film certainly doesn't help make this fun, since a good chunk of the film has some sort of shade of blue dominate the screen, which can make the effects (which already feel like a cut-scene) seem a bit murky. By the time the movie throws its shamble of a climax at the audience, you will be left wondering how they managed to pass such a weird junky product in only 90 minutes, complete with a laughable reveal. On the whole, this is a laughable misfire of a movie that is best left to the dumpsters of obscurity for horror and sci-fi fans, worth only for the cheapest thrill of seeing how such a dumb product can possibly be made.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Me, Myself & Irene.

Review #979: Me, Myself & Irene.

Cast: 
Jim Carrey (Charlie Baileygates/Hank Evans), Renée Zellweger (Irene P. Waters), Chris Cooper (Lt. Gerke), Robert Forster (Colonel Partington), Richard Jenkins (Agent Boshane), Zen Gesner (Agent Peterson), Michael Bowman (Casper), Rob Moran (Trooper Finneran), Daniel Greene (Dickie Thurman), Anthony Anderson (Jamal Baileygates), Mongo Brownlee (Lee Harvey Baileygates), Jerod Mixon (Shonté Jr. Baileygates), Tony Cox (Shonté), Steve Tyler (Delivery Room Doctor), Traylor Howard (Layla Baileygates) Directed by Peter Farrelly and Bobby Farrelly.

Review: 
Admittedly, I didn't have high hopes for this film, in part because I had remembered seeing the first five or ten minutes on television roughly a few years ago and not really being interested enough to watch it all the way through. Years later, it only makes sense that I watch it in a month as middling as this film turned out to be. Carrey does exactly what you would expect in terms of his facial expressions and mannerisms, which can be amusing or at worst tedious, depending on your view of Carrey as a comedian. He works best when playing the Jekyll aspect of his character, having more amusement (and charm, which applies when subject to different kinds of abuse) than when playing the Hyde aspect (diagnosed as advanced delusionary schizophrenia with involuntary narcissistic rage...yes I'm serious), which doesn't really feel funny to watch nor particularly welcome to watch dominate over the other persona (with ensuing times of revenge over people) for a good majority of the film. Seeing him change personas also isn't particularly funny, though that may be because of how many times he shifts throughout the film, such as when he argues with himself in the climax.

Much like the plot, Zellweger's character doesn't really have much depth (though she is fairly charming enough), with the film also not doing fairly well either as a black comedy or a road movie, mostly because the jokes themselves aren't really that special. Obviously there is a market for gross out comedies, but for me it just didn't work most of the time. Sure, there's a decent sequence with a cow, but other jokes feel longer than they should (such as the case with Bowman and his character). The narration by Rex Allen Jr (whose father did the narration for The Incredible Journey - #917) is fine. Did I mention there was a plot? Yes, something involving the EPA and crooked cops, but it all feels secondhand along with not particularly interesting (with Cooper not being given much to do as the de facto bad guy along with Greene). His three children (Anderson, Brownlee & Mixon) are somewhat amusing, though they can't really lift the movie towards anything too clever. The film runs at 116 minutes and even longer on television, but in any case it feels too long. This isn't a terrible experience, but it is also is not a fun experience, at least for me anyway.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Black Hole.

Review #092: The Black Hole.

Cast
Maximilian Schell (Dr. Hans Reinhardt), Anthony Perkins (Dr. Alex Durant), Robert Forster (Captain Dan Holland), Joseph Bottoms (Lieutenant Charlie Pizer), Yvette Mimieux (Dr. Kate McCrae), Ernest Borgnine (Harry Booth), Tom McLoughlin (Captain S.T.A.R.), Roddy McDowall (V.I.N.CENT), and Slim Pickens (B.O.B.) Directed by Gary Nelson.

Review
The film is unlike other Disney films in the fact it's more suited for more then just kids. And for that reason, it succeeds. The film has special effects unlike other films, such as Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. The acting's standard good, and the robots are great. they're unlike other droids of their time, such as R2-D2 or Dewey. I like those droids and the others as it's imaginative and useful. The film has action, even if it is in the last 25 minutes. But it's still a good film for what it's worth. And with this review, Robot Week ends. It was great to do reviews involving robots, especially one every day. Now then, what number are we on? Number 92? We're getting closer and closer now. 10, 9, 8...This ends Part VII of Robot Week. Thank you for your appreciation.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.