Showing posts with label Tony Goldwyn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tony Goldwyn. Show all posts

September 29, 2025

One Battle After Another.

Review #2426: One Battle After Another.

Cast: 
Leonardo DiCaprio (Bob Ferguson / "Ghetto" Pat Calhoun), Sean Penn (Col. Steven J. Lockjaw), Benicio del Toro (Sergio St. Carlos), Regina Hall (Deandra), Teyana Taylor (Perfidia Beverly Hills), Chase Infiniti (Willa Ferguson / Charlene Calhoun), Alana Haim (Mae West), Wood Harris (Laredo), Shayna McHayle (Junglepussy), Paul Grimstad (Howard Sommerville), Dijon Duenas (Talleyrand), Tony Goldwyn (Virgil Throckmorton), Starletta DuPois (Grandma Jennie), John Hoogenakker (Tim Smith), and Eric Schweig (Avanti) Written and Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson (#1546 - There Will Be Blood)

Review: 
"I think even before I had kids, I kind of felt a connection to how this father felt about his daughter. And it only grew deeper and stronger as I have had kids to understand what he was writing about in that way. And I’m trying to take from the book what I needed and pursue my own path and let it move in directions that it seemed that it wanted to go.”

I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised to encounter this in the proper place for a new film: a movie theater*. Apparently, Paul Thomas Anderson had wanted to do a movie based on Thomas Pynchon's 1990 novel Vineland for many years. He loved the book so much that he struggled with how to adapt it and set it aside. He found later that when he wrote a series of separate stories, he found it worked to combine those with certain elements of Vineland (a book set in 1984 dealing with a burnt-out hippie, a traitorous revolutionary and a DEA agent dealing with a secret that also features "like death, but different" Thanatoids, to provide an example of what the book sounds like) for what became this film; previously, he made an adaptation of Pynchon's Inherent Vice in 2014 and had taken slight inspiration from Pynchon's V. for The Master in 2012. You may or may not know that the title of the movie is shared with a statement put out by Weather Underground, the far-left militant organization (and described as "domestic terrorist" by the FBI) that had run for a good deal of the 1970s (with targeted bombing of government buildings and banks, with a good chunk having warnings set out beforehand) before it splintered off into other organizations.

It is an interesting movie, that's for sure. It probably goes without saying that it rises above just being termed an "action thriller", mostly in the strange places that it mines for screwy moments of humor without straining into parody or sanctimonious hokum. It manages to cycle through 162 minutes with such energy and charm that reminds one of the enthusiasm that can be found with letting movies flow on their own terms. The ensemble does work out for captivating interest in seeing where the wind blows in would-be revolutionaries in the eternal battle that comes not just from trying to challenge the system but also the battle of seeing what the world will look like for the next generation. It works out well for DiCaprio, who gets to play the role in all of its burned-out flaws that come with people that may or may not be ready for what lies ahead in real danger, whether that involves a gun or, well, being a person in someone's life. It is bleakly amusing to see how one sees him from the first thirty minutes (where he, alongside Taylor in her own path of self-serving nature, is depicted as in and later out of the French 75 lifestyle) to him for most of the film as the hazy chaser in a strange world around him. Consider how he looks when paired with del Toro (who just glides through the movie like a pro) in certain sequences of what you might as well call revolution with ideas of, well, responsibility. It befuddles me to note I had seen exactly one movie with Sean Penn in it before this one. At any rate, this is a movie with a real standout performance by Penn, who makes for a compelling adversary that actually does inspire the tiniest bit of humor from an aspiring fascist club member. There is plenty of menace to be found even within the growing absurdities that come with a character that really, really wants approval in all of the strange ways possible (as one does when starting out by being forced to get an erection before ending with, well, a pitch-black moment very fitting for him). He isn't too different from Taylor when it comes to self-serving people that love the sound of their own voice when it comes to force - really, he could be anybody who ever managed to make it to a certain position of privilege and still crave affection (notice how we never see if Lockjaw has a spouse or other kids) in such seething contempt because they can't just admit it. Likely the best representation of how Taylor (who does pretty well with a role that is only in the aforementioned first part but basically haunts the entire narrative) is similar is the robbery sequence where you might think the group is going to assert their identity of being able to move along freely (one does that by being on the counter without a mask, for example), loud and proud right up until Taylor's character just shoots a guard because he dared to move.

People come and go with one hell of a tempo behind it, and Infiniti (in her film debut) does a worthy job keeping up with the proceedings with patience and a presence to match the growing insanity. The sequence with her and Penn meeting for the first time to basically size each other up is especially enthralling in the display of two people displaying just how much hatred (and, dark humor) can be found in a test of DNA. As a whole, the movie finds one thing above all in its chase of the frontier (namely with one hell of a car sequence): there are many battles to be had in life, but the ideal one to really, madly, deeply want to win is to raise a good person to walk in your footsteps. You are not your parents, you are the choices that come from what you learn from the people around you, for better or worse. The dueling groups of people that seek to fight for a different future (whether by bomb or incinerating false hopes) will come and go, but the plight of people around us will be clear as day to those who actually take the time to look and listen with their own eyes and ears. Basically, it is a movie that moves with enough of a jolt to remind you what love can be about in the face of bubbling dread for what the world might look like for the next people. In that sense, it is a timely movie to check out and see for yourself what the fuss is about.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.
*Is it a bias against Netflix? Meh, who knows I just hate the idea of streaming anything new.
*I do kind of wonder for the record about one little plot thing, so scroll at your risk: how exactly do Bob and Willa get back home with the safety of having a cell phone now? Did the government just say "fuck it, these guys aren't worth the trouble". Does him having a phone mean that he is less paranoid, and how does one get to that point when you basically went through hell? Also I totally wonder if it was picked at random that the person presented to be gender neutral is the one that ends up ratting to the troops that Willa does in fact have a phone to track.

January 16, 2021

Ghost.

Review #1626: Ghost.

Cast: 
Patrick Swayze (Sam Wheat), Demi Moore (Molly Jensen), Whoopi Goldberg (Oda Mae Brown), Tony Goldwyn (Carl Bruner), Rick Aviles (Willie Lopez), Vincent Schiavelli (Subway Ghost), Gail Boggs (Louise), Armelia McQueen (Clara), and Phil Leeds (Emergency Room Ghost)  Directed by Jerry Zucker (#585 - Top Secret!, #664 - Airplane!, and #1274 - First Knight)

Review: 
"You have an idea of where you want to get, but you have to experiment your way through it, and it might take a long time to get there.”

It's easy to say a movie is a ride before you actually see it. One that tries to balance romance and comedy within a mystery that certainly has endured for itself after three decades as a romance for the spirits. I suppose romances always had a big appeal with audiences, so it shouldn't be a surprise that this was actually the highest grossing film of its year (beating out films with their own notable reputations like Home Alone and Pretty Woman). The film began its script life through an idea Bruce Joel Rubin (whose two previous writing credits involved death with Brainstorm (1983) and Deadly Friend (1986)) had involving inspiration taken from Hamlet, in which the ghost desired for someone to take avenge him. Years of approaching studios for the script (written in 1984) led to Jerry Zucker being approached by Paramount Pictures to do the film; Rubin reportedly cried when he heard the news, thinking that it would be turned into a comedy, owing to the success that the Wisconsin native Zucker had with films like Airplane! (1980) with his brother David and Jim Abrahams. Discussions with the director over quibbles with the script to improve its structure led to better confidence in Zucker, who had expressed interest in the film not so much to break out of comedy but instead to just make a good film. This was the fourth film that Zucker directed, and it is one of just two that did not fall into comedy (the other was First Knight) - he wanted to make a "roller-coaster ride" that would make you laugh and cry. 

Rubin believes the film taps into some sort of primal thing with audiences, since it deals with death and closure within romance in fantasy. There is certainly a bit of truth to that argument, since what we have is a fairly interesting film with some spiritual interest that will soothe those searching for something pleasing in entertainment without too many quibbles. Others might bristle at its 128 minutes as perhaps being a bit too labored in pace, and its reach for thriller tropes that could be thought of as contrived when leading to its drawn out ending. In other words, it is the kind of entertainment that could be thought of as either sweet or corny depending on one's patience for such material (i.e. something like Titanic, albeit with more/less hokum). Is it one of the best films of its year? Not exactly but being a good film with some staying power isn't exactly a bad thing either, being one that proved rewarding for everyone who did the film, particularly with Rubin and Goldberg. Believe it or not, the lead role was actually a hard one to cast, since I suppose playing a ghostly observer isn't something easy to peg to one actor, with even Paul Hogan rejecting the role because he thought it wasn't funny enough (he would star in a film involving ghosts with Almost an Angel the same year). A showing of Road House (1989) furthered Rubin's belief in Swayze for the lead while conversely not convincing Zucker, and it was an audition with Swayze (who wanted to break from action fare) that convinced the director. Swayze has the charm required in someone tasked to observe and find one's place without the one needed most, balancing that line between chilled and confident that naturally sells his time spent with Moore for all the tissues needed in curiosity. Moore does well enough with chilled mourning that plays the other side of the romantic coin with great interest, as the pottery sequence allows them to move with grace that dazzles in crisp romantic charm, and it repeats itself with soothing closure for the end. The film kicks itself into the next gear of interest when Goldberg shows up around the forty-minute mark. Who would've have believed that a comedian could play a charlatan so well? Her and Swayze do quite well with keeping the film on its toes in amusement without it turning into a bit just for ghostly giggles. This seems most apparent with the sequence spent in the bank, as one guides the other with conniving chuckles that keeps the plot rolling; if The Color Purple (1985) was her breakout role, this only proves to confirm her obvious talent within humor and soothing truth. Not to be forgotten in all of this is Goldwyn (in his fourth film role), walking that tight rope of assured and sniveling that does quite well with what is needed in balance, while Aviles (a stand-up comedian) plays the heavy to useful effect. Schiavelli may only have two scenes, but he makes them count for what it is worth in rough advisory that nevertheless sticks in your mind. As a whole, it is the passion of the film that keeps things going on as decently as they go, for better or worse - it has a neat cast and a stirring music score from Maurice Jarre that makes for a serviceable effort. It has a range of memorable moments that keep it on the level more so than the aspects that could have sunk a lesser effort that drives this film to three decades (and counting) of endurance for all the right reasons.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

July 2, 2012

Movie Night: The 6th Day.

Review #191: The 6th Day.

Cast
Arnold Schwarzenegger (Adam Gibson), Michael Rapaport (Hank Morgan), Tony Goldwyn (Michael Drucker), Michael Rooker (Robert Marshall), Sarah Wynter (Talia Elsworth), Wendy Crewson (Natalie Gibson), Rodney Rowland (P. Wiley), Terry Crews (Vincent Bansworth), Ken Pogue (Speaker Day), Colin Cunningham (Tripp),and Robert Duvall (Griffin Weir) Directed by Roger Spottiswoode (#171 - Tomorrow Never Dies)

Review
Schwarzenegger has been in films ever since the 70's (unless you count that Hercules in New York film in 1969...). In the 2000's, he was in a few of them, which...wasn't as stellar (Collateral Damage, Terminator 3 - #089). This...is...yea, let me explain. The acting is decent, Schwarzenegger does his decent performance given his ability. The film has a science-fiction theme to it that is present through some of his other films (#001, #063, #067), but it doesn't feel as well as the others. I feel the film skims over the supposed message to get to the action, which given out actor makes sense. It can have some good action, but it isn't as memorable as his other films. Countdown to 200: 10, 9...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.