Predictable And Funny, Ted Helps Seth MacFarlane Make The Leap To (Almost) Live-Action Films!

The Good: Very funny, Decent acting, Excellent effects.
The Bad: Painfully predictable plot, Reused jokes.
The Basics: Ted is funny, but remarkably predictable, especially for fans of Seth MacFarlane’s wildly popular Family Guy.


When Seth MacFarlane alluded to a movie project in the opening scrawl to It’s A Trap! (reviewed here!) to a movie project he wanted to get released to pursue, I was a bit skeptical. After all, outside the three main animated projects MacFarlane has created and executive produced, the only other work of his I’d seen was Seth MacFarlane’s Cavalcade Of Cartoon Comedy (reviewed here!) and it was atrocious. In fact, the idea that MacFarlane could be a one-trick pony or might not be able to create sustained larger projects is not a particularly audacious one. Unfortunately, despite how entertaining Ted is, it only helps to reinforce the idea that the career of Seth MacFarlane may well have jumped the shark.

Fans of Family Guy, the very fans Seth MacFarlane is counting on to support Ted will recognize several jokes – like Ted complaining about the way pop singers sang vowels in the 1990s – from Family Guy. That there is an explicit reference to MacFarlane’s breakout animated series in the movie is similarly unfortunate, as is Seth MacFarlane voicing the title character. MacFarlane is a talented vocal actor, but the truth is he has pretty much shot his wad through Family Guy and American Dad!. With the distinctly different voices of Brian, Peter and Stewie Griffin and Quagmire coming from the same source (along with the similar voice of Carter Pewtershmidt and others), Ted might have worked better had Seth MacFarlane let someone else voice Ted.

All of that aside, Ted is a fairly innovative and fun concept for a comedy film. And Seth MacFarlane directed Ted at the right time in movie history; computer generated effects make the extraordinary premise look and feel entirely plausible. The basic premise is ridiculously simple: the main human character (John Bennett) has a sentient teddy bear (Ted) as a best friend. The film hinges entirely upon the virtual character interacting with the live-action characters absolutely seamlessly. In many ways, Ted is the film that Robert Zemeckis wanted to make with Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Any other issues with the writing and characters aside, Ted is arguably the best use of a computer-generated character in years. The effects are flawless and Mark Wahlberg, who does the lion’s share of acting opposite the virtual character, performs incredibly well, interacting with Ted as if the bear was actually there. As simplistic as it might seem, the ability to act well with entities that are not present and get things like eyelines and comedic timing right is a skill that very few performers get right, but Wahlberg does!

Opening with a childhood wish, John Bennett as a child is granted a talking teddy bear who becomes a real friend who will never leave him. John reveal Ted to his parents and overnight, the talking teddy bear becomes an instant celebrity. Years later, though, Ted is just a burnout who lives with John, who struggles at the rental car place where he hopes to become manager someday. John has been in a relationship with Lori for four years and when John fails to propose to her, she gives him an ultimatum. She wants Ted to move out so they can begin their life together for real.

John tries to push Ted away, which he has a vested interest in as Lori’s boss, Rex, hits on her relentlessly, but even as Ted gets a job at a grocery store, he pulls at John to continue their symbiotic relationship. On an important date night, Ted calls John to come visit him to meet their childhood hero, Sam Jones (who played Flash Gordon). That night effectively trashes the relationship between John and Lori, but in the ensuing fall-out, John pushes Ted away. On his own, Ted falls to the mercy of a man for whom Ted was a childhood hero and when Ted is kidnapped, he desperately calls upon John and Lori to save him.

Ted is basically a long collection of drug, poop, and sex jokes delivered during a fairly uncomplicated relationship struggle. The plot is very much a typical romantic comedy plot where the romantic interest does not like the best friend. Outside the CG character, there is nothing more sophisticated to Ted than that. As such, the plot progression is painfully predictable and MacFarlane telegraphs all of his moves, from having Giovanni Ribisi’s creepy Donny showing up early in the movie and John folding up his contact information to Frank responding to Ted being aggressively honest. That does not make Ted bad, it is just unsophisticated and more obvious than it is audacious.

Seth MacFarlane assembles what would otherwise be an impressive cast for Ted. For fans of MacFarlane’s other works, this is just an assemblage of the usual suspects. Mila Kunis, Alex Borstein, John Viener, and Patrick Warburton are instantly recognizable to fans of Family Guy who have watched all the many hours of DVD bonus features from the series. In fact, Ted makes tongue-in-cheek references to doing just that by presenting a fake DVD commentary from Ted Danson for the Cheers DVD set in the film (“Are there dicks in gay porn?” has become a pretty much instantaneous catch phrase around my house since my wife and I watched the film). The less-obvious performers from Family Guy are joined by Mark Wahlberg who joins the ensemble exceptionally well. Wahlberg is funny as John and he and Mila Kunis have great on-screen chemistry as Kunis plays Lori.

Ultimately, Ted is good geek date night material, but it is not much more than entertaining. It does what it sets out to do very well, but nothing more.

For other works with Giovanni Ribisi, please check out my reviews of:
Avatar
Public Enemies
Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow
Friends
Lost In Translation

7/10

For other film reviews, please check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Fear The Government Of Yore: Thirteen Days

The Good: Documents well the history, Good acting
The Bad: Little character development, Awkward pacing, Lack of consequences at the end.
The Basics: Despite Kevin Costner's excellent portrayal of Kenny O'Donnell, Thirteen Days fails to convincingly portray the Cuban Missile Crisis.


When Thirteen Days came out, it was right around the time George W. Bush was being considered for the job. When one of my friends saw the film, her opinion was. "I hope nothing like that ever happens if he becomes president, because we would all be dead." Having now seen Thirteen Days, I'm convinced as well that had anything like the Cuban Missile Crisis occurred during the Bush Administration, the United States of America would have initiated World War 3.

Thirteen Days opens with a U.S. spy plane flying over Cuba and photographing medium-range nuclear missiles being transported on the island. When news of this reaches President Kennedy, he and his brother are aided in preventing World War Three with the Soviet Union by Kenny O'Donnell, the president's special assistant. What follows is a chess match between the United States and the Soviet Union where the topic of the missile deployment forces each side to make their moves. As the U.S. gets closer and closer to war, the military applies pressure on Kennedy to go to war while cooler - and more intelligent - heads prevail on John F. Kennedy for a diplomatic solution.

One of the nice things about Thirteen Days is that it illustrates well the power of the intellect over military might. In Thirteen Days, the best minds in the nation are put in a room together and told to come up with solutions and they do. The brothers Kennedy and O'Donnell make for compelling intellectual characters who innovate when they need to.

John F. Kennedy is painted as a man thrust into responsibilities he never anticipated or wanted and is getting an ulcer as a result. Robert Kennedy is painted as an intellectual savior of the nation and watching Thirteen Days, it is impossible to not feel sorry for the assassination of this leader. He could have done amazing things and this film makes it clear that he had the mettle for it.

But the surprise character many of us do not know about from our history classes is Kenny O'Donnell. O'Donnell is a nice balance to the Kennedy's, offering practical more emotional - instinct-driven - opinions and theories. Moreover, his handling of military officers is a masterful work of political intelligence. By preventing such things as information about U.S. planes being shot at, he preempts the rules of engagement and prevents war from being a tactical necessity.

Unfortunately, the characters are caught mid-stream. If one hasn't taken US history courses or lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis, the characters make little sense. That is, the film takes place while the Kennedy Administration is in progress, so their historical significance up to the Cuban Missile Crisis is not explored or even alluded to in a way that is significant.

Fortunately, the acting makes up for it. In some ways. Kevin Costner leads the cast as O'Donnell. He makes O'Donnell human in ways that many of the other characters are not. They tend to be monolithic, with Bill Smitrovich portraying the Joint Chief of Staff as a hard military man and Steven Culp as Robert Kennedy with almost no emotion. That is, Costner plays a more well rounded character with actual depth while the others play their characters as archetypes, as symbols more than viable individuals.

So, often it becomes difficult to tell if the acting is good for the writing or the writing is simply a study in caricatures as opposed to individuals. Notably, Bruce Greenwood plays John F. Kennedy with mixed convincibility. Some moments, he seems exactly like Kennedy does in historical broadcasts both televised and radio. But never does Greenwood get quite to the point of being the clever politician who stumped Nixon in the debates.

Unfortunately, that's indicative of the film. First, the tension never actually seems high. We all know how the Cuban Missile Crisis ended, so it's no surprise that we're not all nuked. But the film never captures the entire dread potential of nuclear war.

As well, the film never seems to get going. It has an excruciatingly slow build-up. If one were to walk in after the first half hour, they would not have lost any of the attempt to create a mood.

Finally, the lasting consequences of the incident are lacking from the film. The red telephone between the U.S. and the USSR is not brought in to conclude the film.

Add to that the direction uses very annoying black and white moments where the color simply disappears. There's no sensibility to the changes between color and black and white and it serves only to confuse the film's purpose.

A film on the Cuban Missile Crisis that doesn't grab the viewer in the first few minutes is death for the film; it's a major crisis in U.S. history that was tense for all those involved and if it fails to evoke a mood, then it fails. Ultimately, Thirteen Days fails to evoke a tense mood instead miring itself in pointless details like an encounter between Kenny O'Donnell and Jackie Kennedy, and ultimately fails as a film.

For other works with Bruce Greenwood, check out:
Super 8
Star Trek
Capote

5/10

For other films, be sure to check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all the movies I have reviewed!

© 2012, 2002 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Coming Late To The Party; I Get Around To Watching And Reviewing ID4

The Good: Moments of character, Judd Hirsch, Concept
The Bad: Special effects underwhelmed, Much of the acting, character and plot, One too many character groups
The Basics: In an overall disappointing science fiction summer blockbuster extravaganza, aliens arrive at Earth to blow everything up and it's up to Americans to come together to stop them.


The first time I encountered Independence Day, it was still known as ID4. I was at a Star Trek convention and the trailer was being shown and the audience got it. Apparently, our mass culture couldn't fathom a number at the end of the title unless it was a sequel and in the weeks before the film was theatrically released in 1996 the title was changed to Independence Day. At the time, I opted against it. I "got" the concept, but even at the time, the special effects did not look all that great to me and I avoided it. I was given the opportunity to see the special edition DVD and I decided it was time. The shortest version of this review I can possibly give is: I could have gone to my grave just fine having never seen this movie.

On July second, aliens arrive in giant motherships over major world cities. There are approximately fifteen of these giant, disc-shaped starships that break off the true mothership which is stationed near the moon and has about a quarter the mass of the moon. Scientist David Levinson soon realizes that these aliens are neither funloving nor here for our planet's cuisine when he discovers they are using our satellite network to communicate around planet a countdown. He rushes to the side of the american president, Thomas Whitmore, a possibility because his ex-wife works for him, with his findings. Whitmore, Levinson and the highest members of the government take off moments before the aliens let loose a barrage that utterly destroy's the world's major cities.

Over the course of the ensuing days, the military strikes back and fails, including marine pilot Steven Hiller. As Whitmore and Levinson work to outsmart the invaders with a trip to Area 51, which is as real as every conspiracy theorist in existence would hope, Hiller journeys with an alien pilot from a downed enemy craft to the same location. As humanity is looking at extinction, all of the main characters converge and, working together, work to thwart the invading armada.

The thing is, from the very first moments of Independence Day, this feels like something we've seen before. I watched the special edition with 9 minutes of restored footage, putting this movie at the 153 minute (2 1/2 hours) mark. It felt much longer. And while alien invasion movies are not new, this rendition felt especially canned, felt like something very specific the viewer had seen before. Pacing, story structure and sheer number of characters is almost identical to the mid-80s masterpiece mini-series V (reviewed here!). This is more than just nitpicky; ID4 was so derivative of V that the ships hovering over the major cities look almost identical, save that in this newer incarnation they are black as opposed to gray.

Now, I'm someone who likes epics, but Independence Day is more sloppy than grand in scale. There are no less than 5 groups that have stories that need to be resolved: Whitmore and his wife (who is stranded out in Los Angeles), Hiller and his stripper girlfriend, David and his ex-wife (and we'll throw his father in here, too, so as not to make it look ridiculously overwhelming), Russell and his family, and the relationship between the President and the intelligence community. The thing is, the movie only works as well as it does with all of these various elements because it is constructed to work so well with them. What I mean by that is that this movie could have used at least one less of these threads (I'd opt for ridding the movie of alien-abductee Russell Casse and his ridiculous subplot wherein his children need medicine) and used that time to develop some of the other threads more fully. This would have resulted in some of the plot points needing different resolution, but I could have lived with that.

The other annoying factor of ID4 is that for an epic, it's awfully limited, terribly ethnocentric. Even in the belabored Signs (reviewed here!) it's not just the Americans that are fighting the aliens. As a result, other places in the world learn how to thwart the aliens quicker than the Americans. In Independence Day, the U.S. is leading the charge and it just feels forced. A movie that is trying to put the entire world in peril could use more of a multiethnic cast. For something that was supposed to be so big and devastating, this movie seems very insulated within the confines and prejudices of the United States. A perfect example of this prejudice comes in the listing of cities around the world that are being attacked. Three are in the U.S. None are in China. If the point of the invasion is to wipe out humanity, I'd go for where there are a lot of humans!

Outside the weird dichotomy of smallness of scope combined with having far too many characters working out relationships, ID4 suffers because as a special effects movie, it's not terribly special or sensible. In fact, there's dark humor in viewing it for the first time here in 2007; when New York City has been leveled two of the only buildings still standing are the World Trade Center buildings. And with that in mind, the silliness of the attack pattern of the aliens is revealed. If you want to cripple the world, attacking the halls of power, industry and economy is a great strategy. The aliens center on the Empire State Building (not the WTCs), the White House (not Congress or K Street), and downtown Los Angeles (no complaints with that choice). We are told they attack Moscow, London, Bangladesh as well. Leveling major cities makes a great deal of sense, but in order to make the special effects aspect of the movie work, the film sacrifices any sense of realism or substance. Alien ships hover over New York City and the people there wait for the President to ask them to leave in an orderly fashion?! That's b.s.! Sure, blowing up the White House looks great for movie trailers and posters, but it's not the most sensible target.

There are any number of technical aspects to make this movie problematic, but in the long run, special effects are only one point in the scale. As for the numerous plot problems, they count for more, but the cumulative effect is that the plot is usually used to serve the effects and the story elements that are most troublesome come in the character front.

None of the characters works in a completely believable fashion, save perhaps Area 51 denizens Dr. Brackish Okun and Major Mitchell. General Grey essentially turns over the military directly to the President, which I can live with up until the moment the President decides he's hopping in a plane. Whitmore tells Grey, "I'm a fighter pilot . . ." and Grey accepts that based on Whitmore's prior military experience in the Gulf War. The thing is, Grey's responsibility there was to note that Whitmore was no longer a fighter pilot, he's the President and there's no way such a general would let the last surviving world leader into a combat position for the simple fact that if he falls, there is no one left to lead.

Captain Hiller works for the most part, but his relationship with Jasmine is rushed and seems forced with the pace of the apocalypse on him. Moreover, his character is one who exerts himself the most physically over the course of the movie, yet we never see him sleeping. He's always doing something. Military or not, that's hard to buy. Even harder is David Levinson, who might well be a genius, but he goes from being fall-down drunk to solving the crisis before dawn on July 4. His relationship with ex-wife Constance is completely canned and simply drags the movie down. The only purpose it serves is to get Levinson to the President. Once that is done, it simply becomes another annoying thread to be resolved.

ID4 has a pretty impressive cast, though that too is not without its serious problems. There are wonderful actors and actresses who get juicy and/or fun parts, including Brent Spiner as Dr. Okun, Adam Baldwin as Major Mitchell, Harvey Fierstein as Marty, James Rebhorn as Albert, May McDonnell as the first lady, and Vivica A. Fox as Jasmine. They are all wonderful and they are generally playing roles that they might not usually be associated with (with the obvious exception of Fierstein). Will Smith does fine as Captain Hiller and Jeff Goldblum does quite well at convincing the viewer he is a computer genius as David Levinson.

The two big acting problems come in the forms of Robert Loggia and Bill Pullman. Loggia spends the film acting like Gene Hackman - in one of his understated roles - as General Grey. Loggia does a great and unflinching Hackman impression throughout the entirety of the movie, but he adds nothing of his own unique zest to the role.

Bill Pullman is the dealbreaker as President Thomas Whitmore. Bill Pullman could pull off the role of President now, perhaps. In ID4, he fails to do that, not because of his age but because of his bearing. Watching Pullman in this movie suggests nothing of how the man could have possibly gotten to his position. In short, trying to imagine Whitmore running a campaign and actually winning an election stymies even those of us with an extensive political imagination.

The less said about Randy Quaid as Russell, the better, though one wonders if he gets tired of playing dumb hicks.

The shining acting gem in this movie is Judd Hirsch. Yes, in a film with acting sensations of the younger variety like Fox, Goldblum, Pullman and Smith, it is Hirsch who dominates every scene he is in. He's phenomenal as David's father Julius, slouching around with his heavy Jewish accent as a parody of the elderly Jew who may be annoying, but is always right. Hirsch is amazing in the role, though it doesn't take long for his character to start popping up in scenes that he has no legitimate business being in.

It may be longer, it may be older and it may be less violent and spectacle-filled, but V tops this movie and is much worthier of one's time and attention. It is smart, menacing and clever in all the ways that this movie should have been, but was not.

For other alien invasion films, please be sure to check out my reviews of:
Battle Los Angeles
The X-Files: Fight The Future
Robert A. Heinlein's The Puppet Masters


5/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all the films I have reviewed!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Technically Flawless, Seven Pounds With Will Smith Is Still Painfully Boring

The Good: Great theme, Adequate acting and plot revelation
The Bad: Obvious characters and story, PACING, Formulaic execution
The Basics: An unfortunately obvious film, Seven Pounds is formulaic in the execution of its plot and characters and use of its substantial acting talent.


Will Smith is regularly regarded as a great actor, a significant box office draw and a generally decent guy. Fans of movies can count on Will Smith for two things nowadays: a summer blockbuster and a Christmas drama. We had Hancock (reviewed here!) earlier this year and now Will Smith greets us at the theaters with Seven Pounds, yet another film ruined by the previews this year. Man, I wish I could see Will Smith in a tight drama where he played a psychopathic moviegoer who was killing studio execs in the ad departments for movies that had trailers that showed everything. That would be an acting challenge for Smith and I'd probably pay to see that.

So, to any movie executives reading this: We, the moviegoers, are not stupid! Stop showing us the whole movie! And to writer Grant Nieporte and director Gabriele Muccino, I reiterate: we are not stupid! The moment viewers recognize that the film is playing with time as part of the narrative technique, we essentially realize the entire movie and are just waiting for Will Smith to show up on screen with a salmon colored shirt on. Yeah, that's where the movie begins, right near its end, with Smith as "Ben" Thomas in a salmon colored shirt calling in his own suicide.

At a point before he calls in his own suicide, Ben Thomas, an employee at the IRS calls up Ezra Turner, a blind, Vegan musician who works as a telemarketer for a meat company. Antagonizing him more and more yields nothing as Ezra plays it cool before diplomatically getting off the phone. Ben's brother contacts Ben, looking for something that Ben took from him during a past visit, an accusation that Ben merely deflects. Ben, then goes in search of Stuart Goodman, who is in financial trouble, works at a nursing home and needs bone marrow. Interviewing a patient at the nursing home, Ben discovers Stuart is not a good person and it neglecting and abusing patients.

Interspersed throughout these trips to people who have need of one form or another, Ben recalls his wife and an accident with a bus. As he attempts to change the life of Emily Posa, a greeting card and invitation publisher, he finds his life gaining even greater purpose as Emily needs a new heart. As Ben evaluates her worthiness to receive the ultimate gift he can give, he grows closer to her, which makes him conflicted.

Seven Pounds is boring. There, I've said it. It deserves to be said. Seven Pounds has a great theme in the greatness of those who are organ donors. I love organ donation, I am an organ farm the moment I'm dead. But Seven Pounds is poorly paced making it tedious, obvious and more unpleasant than it needed to be. As this movie dragged on and on and on, I began to think about what was separating it from greatness. I had, seriously, held off doing my "Ten Best Films Of 2008" because I figured this one might deserve a slot. It did not.

So, what keeps Seven Pounds from greatness, other than the fact that the movement of the film is almost universally slow? Narrative technique for one. I recall the first time I watched The Usual Suspects and the friend I was with at the time and I walked out talking about it. She just scoffed and said, "You know there are people who didn't get it, right?" I laughed. I was shocked that when the screening I was at tonight finished there were still people trying to put the film back in order. It made perfect sense to me; in fact, only the details kept me at all interested. The previews showed the entire plot, the depth of the characters and played out almost the entire motivation theme of guilt. In fact, there was not much that one couldn't figure by the previews, so when people were trying to figure it out after seeing Seven Pounds, I was just shocked.

The thing is, Seven Pounds is essentially like American Beauty (reviewed here!). At the beginning of American Beauty, we know Lester Burnham is going to die, so it's the fun and excitement of watching him build up to it. Seven Pounds teases us with the information that Ben is going to die as well and the problem is, the moment the audience figures out what his antagonizing people is all about, the film is essentially over. Yes, Ben Thomas is hunting people who have needs of organs and he is judging them worthy of getting the transplants they need to live their lives better. We get it. The "why" becomes clear at the beginning and the moment the viewer realizes that Ben had a love interest, but she is no longer alive.

The problem, then, becomes motivation and either way, writer Grant Nieporte is pretty much in the dog house. If Ben is motivated by guilt - which based on the content of the film is the most probable interpretation - then the romantic subplot between Ben and Emily is especially problematic because moving on would only increase his feelings of guilt. Moreover, the level of guilt that might motivate one to suicide makes it improbable that they would be so slow in their method.

The other possibility for the character motivation is that Ben wants to die to be reunited with his dead wife in some form of the afterdeath. This would make the Ben and Emily relationship entirely gratuitous and emotionally gut the movie. Moreover, the speed at which Ben kills himself would also be problematic. Which makes the viewer ask, do suicidal people truly need to be given the idea that their deaths might be altruistic? Speaking as an organ donor and former depressive, I'd say "no."

Seven Pounds is not supposed to be a happy movie, but the fundamental problem with it is that it is entirely by the book. So, for example, if one were to make a diagram and description of a foliate narrative technique story (i.e. one that does not follow linear time, but rather follows arcs, jumping around in time) Seven Pounds might well be the perfect example of the proper execution. So, for example, early in the movie, Ben and his brother have a conversation and the brother asks him if he took something when he stayed and Ben replies that he gave his brother something. By the end of the movie, the viewer has to know what was taken, what was given and how it fits into the larger arc of what Ben is doing now. The thing is, we learn this truth in one of the final scenes of the movie and as a result, we are satisfied (the setup was paid off) and deeply bothered (the biggest answer to the motivation question always is revealed last) by the sheer formulaic nature of it. Everything spirals around and the problem is that it does not take long for viewers to figure out what is going on, what has happened and therefore exactly where the movie is going.

But, for those looking for a well-assembled movie, there are few complaints here. Seven Pounds makes several promises, and it lives up to each and every one of them. The problem is, it is dull while doing that. From a lack of soundtrack through much of the movie (which usually, I would have liked but in this case only added to the painful way the movie crept along) to the utter lack of sexual chemistry between Ben and Emily in their early meetings, Seven Pounds creeps along. And given that we know where it is going, it is obligated to be interesting in getting there and it is not. Instead, it covers an otherwise straightforward and depressing idea by mixing the scenes up.

It's not all bad, even if the characters are more "types" than individuals. Ben is surrounded by those he helps and those who help him, like his brother and lawyer friend Dan. The acting follows the trend of "mediocre greatness" that has been plaguing films with high-caliber actors lately. Woody Harrelson gives a decent performance as Ezra that would have been great right after Cheers. But by now, we know Harrelson has dramatic chops and can pull off a heavier, dramatic role. Similarly, Michael Ealy is of a certain caliber that we expect him to be good and he makes the bit part of Ben's brother work. In fact, of the standout of the supporting cast is (almost of the movie) is Barry Pepper, who gives an emotionally stirring performance as Dan.

Rosario Dawson plays Emily and she is completely convincing up until the director allowed the make-up department to sex her up. Emily is dying of congenital heart failure and looks weak and scraggly and that works. Dawson hunches some, lets her eyes fall tired and plays the part with intended force that is seldom actualized. In other words, Dawson is smart enough to play the character as punchy, but still limited by her ailments. But for the big romantic connection, Dawson looks . . . like Rosario Dawson and it guts the resonance established, especially if her health is supposed to be getting worse.

But much of the film falls to Will Smith to make or break and there is something sadly familiar about the way he plays Ben Thomas. Ben is serious, driven and generally good. Sound like any other recent characters Smith has played? This is not to say Will Smith is not good in Seven Pounds, he is, especially at restraining his famous smile. Smith almost never smiles as Ben and that is unsettling and good. The problem is, this is the level of acting we expect from Will Smith, given what we've seen before. He lives up to our expectations, but does not offer anything new or powerful that is in any way unexpected (FYI, I'm voting for Smith or Cheadle to play Obama in a biopic in eight years). Will Smith is only as good as anticipated.

The result is a film that closes well. The last ten minutes of the movie are great and they are high in very real and intense emotion, not the least of which is gratitude, for by that point we are ready for it to be over. If the journey were in any way more interesting, those last few minutes would have been worth it. As it is, the only catharsis we get is being able to leave the theater.

On DVD, Seven Pounds is no better. There are deleted scenes which are not terribly impressive and add little to the rest of the film. There are making-of featurettes and a commentary track from the director, which is not terribly impressive either. All in all, the DVD does not bring up the overall film in any meaningful way and leaves one without a good reason to buy it.

For other works with Woody Harrelson, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Friends With Benefits
2012
Zombieland
No Country For Old Men
Frasier - Season 6

4/10

For other movie reviews, be sure to visit my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all my film reviews!

© 2012, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Fixing The Social Problems Of Tomorrow . . . Today, Via Yesterday: "Past Tense, Part 2"

The Good: Tension, Pacing, Acting, Character, Message
The Bad: Very obvious ending
The Basics: Even better than the first part, "Past Tense, Part II" resolves a hostage situation and restores the timeline in one of the most interesting ways done.


If you have not already read the reviews for "Past Tense," (reviewed here!) it is fairly important to read a review of that before reading this one. After all, if one doesn't know where one has been, how can they know where they are now? This is especially important in this case where the episode is the second part of a two-parter. That need is enhanced by "Past Tense, Part 2" being a time travel story.

"Past Tense, Part II" finds Sisko, impersonating Gabriel Bell, in 2024 in San Francisco trapped in one of the most violent uprisings of that era. In the Sanctuary District's administrative building, Bashir works on keeping the hostages that have been taken by B.C. and other "ghosts" alive while "Bell" and Webb work on talking their way out of the situation and making the government realize how wrong the Sanctuary Districts are. As the incredibly tense (no pun intended) episode progresses and the hostage situation worsens, it is broken up by Major Kira and O'Brien and Dax's attempts to locate Sisko and Bashir in the past.

"Past Tense, Part II" is a triumph for Star Trek Deep Space Nine and a notable way that this series is superior to the other "Trek" series; "Past Tense, Part 1" is a good set up, but "Past Tense, Part II" is better. So often in Star Trek The Next Generation, the first part sets up the conflicts so well and leave us hanging and the second part just lets the viewer down. Here, the series delivers and it is consistent with how Star Trek Deep Space Nine delivers.

While we know how this episode is going to end, how it gets there is classic. It's sharp and the dialog is tight and more than anything, this is an episode where mood dominates. This is a tight episode and throughout the episode, we know that violence is likely to break out and who will live and who will die is largely up in the air. More than anything, that mystery, the feeling of tension surrounding the unstable mind of B.C., the primary hostage taker, is saturating the episode with a level of fear for the viewer.

Like the first part, "Past Tense, Part II" has an important social message and while it incorporates the need for understanding, compassion and help for those who are victims of poverty, under education and mental illness, it progresses that along to the next level. Much of "Past Tense, Part II" is about the need for responsibility of the downtrodden. Here we see how important it is for the victims of such things to rise up. The importance of rebellion and the responsibilities of the rebels is highlighted here.

The mood and morals are perfectly presented here by the various characters. Sisko, as Bell, makes a great character and essentially acts as an ego for the episode. The Id in the hostage situation is clearly B.C. and the super ego would seem to be Michael Webb. Together the three characters act like a human mind and an entire essay might be written on that alone. Far more interesting is watching this episode and seeing how they interact to solve a problem together using their various talents.

None of the characters would be viable without the actors behind them. Avery Brooks proves he is able to act here by very realistically portraying Sisko playing another person. He quite convincingly makes it Avery Brooks as Sisko as Bell as opposed to simply Brooks as Bell. This is what the episode needs and his portrayal sells us on this essential point. While cast regulars Siddig El Fadil and Terry Farrell give wonderful supporting performances infusing the episode with compassion and determination.

The episode hinges, however, on the performances of Frank Military and Bill Smitrovich. Military makes B.C. dangerous and clever and ultimately delightful to watch. Had he not been so convincing as a loose cannon, a rogue element, the mood would never have been maintained and the episode would have fallen flat. However, Military does not deliver a single line unconvincingly and the episode is strengthened immeasurably. Smitrovich, playing Webb, balances Military perfectly, mostly through a suppression of his facial expressions. Smitrovich recognizes quickly how to enhance the tension of the episode by contrasting Military's performance with his own and it works. Perfectly.

"Past Tense, Part II" also features a delightful cameo from Clint Howard, who Star Trek fans will know from the episode "The Corbomite Maneuver." This is a great episode and can easily be enjoyed by anyone who has seen the first part. More than classic science fiction, this is drama and it is doing all the important things good drama must: selling the viewer on important issues via compelling characters.

[Knowing that VHS is essentially a dead medium, it's worth looking into Star Trek: Deep Space Nine - The Complete Third Season on DVD, which is also a better economical choice than buying the VHS. Read my review of the breakout season by clicking here!
Thanks!]

8/10

For other Star Trek episode, movie and DVD set reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2007, 2003 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

A Rare Temporal Tampering On Star Trek Deep Space Nine: "Past Tense, Part I."

The Good: Good message, Good acting, Interesting character development, Costuming
The Bad: Very predictable in structure, Occasionally heavy-handed
The Basics: When a transporter accident puts Sisko and Bashir in Earth's past, social messages come to the forefront and hook the viewer.


In the Star Trek universe, a recurring theme is time travel, where key events in human or Federation history are influenced by people from the future, usually members of whichever intrepid crew is highlighted. Star Trek Deep Space Nine uses the time travel crutch the least of the four series'. When it does, however, it produces some truly worthwhile episodes. One such outing is "Past Tense."

"Past Tense" finds the Defiant in orbit around Earth where Sisko, Bashir and Dax beam down for a meeting at StarFleet Headquarters only to go missing. As the Defiant crew searches for them, Sisko and Bashir wake up in San Francisco in the past, in what were called Sanctuary Districts. In the twenty-first century, the poor, mentally ill and simply unemployed were herded up into Sanctuary Districts where society forgot about them. Sisko calculates the date to be mere days before a violent uprising known as the Bell Riots, a historical event which brought the public to the understanding about the true nature and horror of the Districts. Dax fares somewhat better, arriving in the hospitality of a wealthy intellectual who takes a fancy to her. As Dax works to find Sisko and Bashir, the Bell Riots begin, trapping the pair inside the Sanctuary District . . .

"Past Tense," it becomes quickly obvious, is the first of two parts and as the end of the first part comes closer, it becomes equally obvious to anyone familiar with television where the episode is going. Still, it is not a bad episode.

"Past Tense" has many worthy messages. This is an episode that openly speaks out against the prejudices against poverty, mental illness and unemployment. Here is a bold episode that illustrates how one person may change the course of history. Here is an episode that even as it touts such lofty ideals presents another side, by creating a compassionate wealthy businessman. This balance eliminates the ridiculous and easy argument that all businesses and businesspeople are to blame for the conditions that give rise to the Sanctuary Districts (or in more practical terms for modern day, not all businesses are faceless and evil trying to keep the masses down).

Part of what makes the episode work as well as it does is the character development. Here Ben Sisko is forced to take a very active role in the place he finds himself. This is different from how he has been, for the most part, until now in the series. It does, however, make his more physical roles in the future quite a bit more realistic. Similarly, Dr. Bashir is able to illustrate his compassion as opposed to his simple, cool professional brilliance. Bashir here is essentially human and humane and that's an appropriate aspect to be showing off here. Similarly, Dax is able to highlight her scientific abilities.

Bringing the characters to life is a powerful cast joined by an impressive guest cast. While Avery Brooks is giving one of his best, grittiest and most human performances of the series, he is joined by actor Bill Smitrovich, who portrays a simple father, Michael Webb, who is down on his luck. Smitrovich makes us believe in circumstances beyond our control, in good, intelligent people who sometimes fail to get good work. We know they exist; Smitrovich has a "common man" feel to him that illustrates the universal sentiment of such people.

As well, Siddig El Fadil and Terry Farrell provide supporting performances that are vital to both progressing the plot and maintaining a balanced and humanistic story. Instead of simply focusing on the time travel element, they help immerse us in the issues that they find there. Frank Military convincingly plays a psychotic counterpart to Webb which progresses us to the Bell Riots and the end of the episode. Military wonderfully portrays an unstable element, using his eyes especially to create a true sense of menace to the episode.

"Past Tense" is not all preachy, though. There's humor in it as Dax muddles through 21st century Earth and O'Brien and Kira aboard the Defiant search for the Captain. More than that, there is a lot here to be enjoyed by people who are not traditionally fans of Star Trek Deep Space Nine. Everything one needs to know is adequately explained in the episode and in an entertaining way. Moreover, it sets up the second part in a way that makes one want to see it.

[Knowing that VHS is essentially a dead medium, it's worth looking into Star Trek: Deep Space Nine - The Complete Third Season on DVD, which is also a better economical choice than buying the VHS. Read my review of the breakout season by clicking here!
Thanks!]

For other works with Bill Smitrovich, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Flash Of Genius
Iron Man

Millennium - Season 1

7.5/10

For other Star Trek episode, DVD set or movie reviews, please be sure to visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2007, 2003 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Millennium Season 1: Chris Carter's Scary Growth Into Adulthood

The Good: Genuinely horrific moments, Excellent acting, Great characters, Amazing opening credits
The Bad: One or two conceptually far-fetched plots
The Basics: In the adult horror show Millennium's first season, Frank Black uses his gift to see in the minds of the evil to try to keep his family (and the world) safe.


When Millennium first aired, it was easily the edgiest show on network television. Seeing it now on DVD, it's easy to be amazed with how much horror, gore and even near-nudity the show got away with. This is an adult show from the get go and it's very successful at being an adult exploration of the horrors people inflict upon others.

Frank Black, having recovered from a mental breakdown as a result of his work, moves to Seattle with his wife and daughter. There, working as a consultant for the mysterious Millennium Group, he finds himself getting more and more back into the life he thought he left behind as he chases down serial killers and other villains against society.

Frank Black is no ordinary investigator, though. He possesses a freakish talent to understand the mind of evildoers so well that he can see what they see. He catches glimpses into the minds of those who do evil and is thus able to track them down with a high degree of success. Over the course of the first season, Frank is put in situations where he must confront serial killers, mind-controlling cults, bombers, molesters, and zealots.

Frank's professional life is balanced by his family life. After a day of encountering evil, he returns to his bright yellow house to the woman he loves and the daughter who is growing up in the world Frank is desperate to make for her.

Like all great dramas, the stories revolve around characters and Millennium is no exception. The principles for the first year (though only Lance Henriksen and Megan Gallagher are credited every episode) are:

Frank Black - This is mostly his story. Frank tries desperately to keep evil at bay by catching the worst elements of society. But his gift comes with a soul crushing price as he comes to realize that the world is too big to be saved by one man,

Katherine Black - Is a social worker who loves and supports Frank and keeps him grounded. She is a pragmatist, but as Frank's association with the Millennium Group progresses, she begins to feel more and more distance from him and more fear for what he is doing,

Bob Bletcher - the Chief of Detectives in Seattle and an old friend of Frank's, he helps Frank whenever possible and acts as a friend to both Frank and Katherine. Unsure the depth of Frank's ability or ability to stay grounded, Bletcher lives in the real world, but accepts Frank's help when the case is unspeakably bad,

Peter Watts - Frank's coworker at the Millennium Group. A forensic expert, Peter represents the Group which is otherwise nebulous. He is efficient and calculating,

and Jordan Black - the daughter of Frank and Katherine, she is almost completely innocent. Her innocence is challenged when Katherine begins to suspect that she may share in Frank's abilities, making her a target of evil.

Millennium is a show where pretty much anything can happen. Unlike some shows that will take the viewer to the edge of terror and then everything turns out all right, Millennium is a show grounded in some measure of the worst aspects of reality. Good people suffer, evil occasionally gets away, relationships get strained. It has a gritty feel to it that makes it quite compelling.

A great deal of credit must be given to the cast and the writers. Series creator, Chris Carter, has a talent for casting and for picking writers and directors who know how to scare the bejesus out of their viewers. And it is not all gore. In "The Well-Worn Lock," one of the series' only Katherine Black stories, the horror of the episode is done all in the writing, the acting, and the insinuations. This is easily the most creepy hour of television done without envoking the supernatural.

The actors must get some serious credit. Megan Gallagher is wonderful as Katherine Black. She lends a realism to the supernatural show by embodying a strong, intelligent woman who expresses so much through her body language. She was perfectly cast as a foil to Lance Henriksen.

Terry O'Quinn is not given as much to do in the first season as he is in subsequent seasons, but he establishes Peter Watts as an intriguing character. O'Quinn has a gravitas to him that lends well to a character like Watts who clearly has more knowledge than we ever see in this season. O'Quinn is balanced well by Bill Smitrovich, who plays Bletcher. Smitrovich's everyman quality works perfectly to portray a less guarded associate of Franks. Smitrovich is likable and his ability to balance an air of integrity with good natured smiles makes him a pleasure to watch.

Lance Henriksen is amazing as Frank Black. First of all, it is refreshing to see someone who looks more like a real person than most anyone else on television. Henriksen does not possess a Hollywood face or bearing. Instead, he and his gravely voice make Frank into a believable entity. Henriksen plays confused, confident, and stricken without ever leaving the conflicted character of Frank Black. He is a pleasure to watch and a force of his own on screen.

Who would enjoy Millennium? Anyone who likes a good, intelligent horror. This is not about people jumping out of the dark, it's about people who go to open houses and wait in the closets until the home's owner comes back. It's not about cheap gore, it's about the sliding of the lock on a child's bedroom door and the understanding of the terrible thing going on on the other side. This is a great show for those who understand that the world is mostly good, but there is evil in it.

And it's refreshing to see someone else fighting for us.

For a little more information on what is in this boxed set, please check out my more detailed review of the first two episodes, "Pilot" and "Gehenna" by clicking here!

For other works featuring Lance Henriksen, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Alien Vs. Predator
Alien 3
Aliens
The Terminator

7.5/10

For other television works, please visit my index page on the subject by clicking here!

© 2011, 2008, 2004 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

An Unfortunately Erratic Series, Millennium The Complete Series Is Shaky.

The Good: Genuinely horrific moments, Excellent acting, Great characters, Space-saving boxed set.
The Bad: It's all over after the second season finale . . .
The Basics: Chris Carter's most successful (to date) non-The X-Files project is Millennium, a series that is erratic with real hints of greatness that didn't quit while it was ahead.


There are few television series' that I truly consider as examples of a poor overall work where there is something to love. But with Millennium, Chris Carter's project while The X-Files (reviewed here!) was at its peak, it is hard to discuss the series with love and feel like one is being truthful. With Millennium The Complete Series, this becomes very evident. The show had three seasons, but the first is radically different from the second and the third struggled to reinvent itself and, coming on the heels of a powerful season finale, failed horribly. The result is a creative, but terribly erratic series which does not hold together very well at all.

Millennium is a forensic crime drama that precedes the C.S.I. craze. The boxed set of Millennium The Complete Series features the same discs from:
Millennium Season One
Millennium Season Two
Millennium Season Three without any additional bonus features or discs, but in a slimmer DVD case. Millennium focuses on Frank Black and is a deep, very dark psychological horror series that has a former F.B.I. Agent working for a group of consultants as the year 2000 approaches.

Season one finds Frank Black, having recovered from a mental breakdown as a result of his work, moving to Seattle with his wife and daughter. There, working as a consultant for the mysterious Millennium Group, he finds himself getting more and more back into the life he thought he left behind as he chases down serial killers and other villains against society. Frank Black is no ordinary investigator, though. He possesses a freakish talent to understand the mind of evildoers so well that he can see what they see. He catches glimpses into the minds of those who do evil and is thus able to track them down with a high degree of success. Over the course of the first season, Frank is put in situations where he must confront serial killers, mind-controlling cults, bombers, molesters, and zealots. Frank's professional life is balanced by his family life. After a day of encountering evil, he returns to his bright yellow house to the woman he loves and the daughter who is growing up in the world Frank is desperate to make for her.

In the second season, Frank and his wife Katherine are estranged as a result of the extreme lengths Frank went to to save Katherine's life at the climax of the prior season. On his own and with Peter Watts, Frank struggles to understand serial killers, torture artists and actual devils and angels who cross his path while attempting to reconcile with his wife and see his daughter.

And the third season has Frank reuniting with the F.B.I. when it appears the Millennium Group is actually a sinister organization.

The problem here is that the seasons do not truly relate to one another. Season one has the Millennium Group working to save humanity and treasuring Frank's gifts while ridding the Seattle area of all sorts of darkness. Season two has quirky stories that exposes the supernatural and insinuates the Millennium Group is not all it initially seemed. And the final season pairs Frank Black with a rookie investigating surprisingly mundane cases.

Like all great dramas, the stories revolve around characters and "Millennium" is no exception. The principles for the first year (though only Lance Henriksen and Megan Gallagher are credited every episode) are:

Frank Black - This is mostly his story. Frank tries desperately to keep evil at bay by catching the worst elements of society. But his gift comes with a soul crushing price as he comes to realize that the world is too big to be saved by one man,

Katherine Black - Is a social worker who loves and supports Frank and keeps him grounded. She is a pragmatist, but as Frank's association with the Millennium Group progresses, she begins to feel more and more distance from him and more fear for what he is doing,

Bob Bletcher - the Chief of Detectives in Seattle and an old friend of Frank's, he helps Frank whenever possible and acts as a friend to both Frank and Katherine. Unsure the depth of Frank's ability or ability to stay grounded, Bletcher lives in the real world, but accepts Frank's help when the case is unspeakably bad,

Peter Watts - Frank's coworker at the Millennium Group. A forensic expert, Peter represents the Group which is otherwise nebulous. He is efficient and calculating,

and Jordan Black - the daughter of Frank and Katherine, she is almost completely innocent. Her innocence is challenged when Katherine begins to suspect that she may share in Frank's abilities, making her a target of evil.

Millennium is a show where pretty much anything can happen. Unlike some shows that will take the viewer to the edge of terror and then everything turns out all right, Millennium is a show grounded in some measure of the worst aspects of reality. Good people suffer, evil occasionally gets away, relationships get strained. It has a gritty feel to it that makes it quite compelling.

The actors must get some serious credit. Megan Gallagher is wonderful as Katherine Black. She lends a realism to the supernatural show by embodying a strong, intelligent woman who expresses so much through her body language. She was perfectly cast as a foil to Lance Henriksen. Similarly, Terry O'Quinn establishes Peter Watts as an intriguing character. O'Quinn has a gravitas to him that lends well to a character like Watts who clearly has more knowledge than we ever see in this season. O'Quinn is balanced well by Bill Smitrovich, who plays Bletcher. Smitrovich's everyman quality works perfectly to portray a less guarded associate of Franks. Smitrovich is likable and his ability to balance an air of integrity with good natured smiles makes him a pleasure to watch.

Lance Henriksen is amazing as Frank Black. First of all, it is refreshing to see someone who looks more like a real person than most anyone else on television. Henriksen does not possess a Hollywood face or bearing. Instead, he and his gravely voice make Frank into a believable entity. Henriksen plays confused, confident, and stricken without ever leaving the conflicted character of Frank Black. He is a pleasure to watch and a force of his own on screen.

But the entire series is erratic and viewers might do better with the first and second season without the third to weigh it down. Even though the first and second are radically different, they are both good. The third is deadweight on a creative series.

For other shows that originally aired on FOX, please check out my reviews of:
Family Guy Presents: It’s A Trap!
Glee - Season Two, Volume One
Fringe - Season Two
Arrested Development
Wonderfalls
VR.5
The Adventures Of Brisco County Jr.

5/10

For other television series reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

After A Dreadfully Dull Start, Flash Of Genius Takes Off In The Last Third.

The Good: Excellent characters, Interesting idea, Excellent casting, Resolution
The Bad: Tough idea to make cinematically interesting, Serious pacing issues, Generally unimpressive acting.
The Basics: A good cast and the story of a good fight cannot save Flash Of Genius, which is - too early - dragged into a slow and virtually unwatchable movie.


While watching The Social Network (click here for my review!) I realized that there are remarkably few films which deal with the real workings behind inventing and creating, at least of products. I recalled being at the Mall Of America when I saw the obscure film Swing Vote and, as obscure movies tend to do, the preview for the small film Flash Of Genius. So, last night, as I was looking for new material to watch, I decided to get Flash Of Genius out of the library. The movie had a lot of elements I was predisposed toward. Unfortunately, it took quite a bit of time before the film took off and I cared enough about all of those elements that had brought me to the movie.

In addition to being intrigued by the basic premise of Flash Of Genius, I was actually surprised by how long it took me to watch the movie because it had Lauren Graham and Alan Alda in the film, both of whom I like quite a bit in other projects. I am not predisposed against Greg Kinnear, but with Flash Of Genius, it did not take long at all before I found his performance to be derivative of other works of his that I had seen. Unfortunately, because the first half of the movie is so slow and painfully paced, Flash Of Genius is hardly the great work it could have been and is more easy to pass by than I would have liked.

Bob Kearns is a teacher and an inventor who is driving along one day, getting tired of turning his windshield wipers on and off, when he has an idea. He walks out on his wife, Phyllis, one night to experiment and shortly thereafter he invents the intermittent windshield wiper. Despite being cautious and working with his business-driven friend, Gil Previck, Bob Kearns is given an audience with Ford Motors wherein he installs and tests his intermittent wiper on one of their cars before Ford backs out of the business arrangement they began with Kearns. That year, at their car show, Ford includes the intermittent wiper on their new model car.

This betrayal sets Kearns off on an obsessive quest to right the wrong that lasts over a decade. As Phyllis leaves him and lawyers abandon him, Kearns works to get Ford Motors to admit they stole his idea. Alone and determined, Kearns studies the law and when a new law looks to push pending lawsuits through the courts, Kearns and his son represent him against Ford Motors, despite Ford trying to keep the business quite by throwing obscene amounts of money at the inventor.

Flash Of Genius is a movie that is pretty much the classic good guy fighting the good fight and, unfortunately, it doesn't bring anything new to the table. The ending is predictable, though it doesn't go for the most cheesy or obvious Hollywood resolution, which is refreshing. This is, sadly, the issue with the movie. By the time Flash Of Genius becomes engaging or worth watching, the viewer is so bored that they can hardly muster up the energy to care about the characters who are finally (finally!) doing something interesting. Instead, the movie is belabored by a beginning which illustrates more how dire Bob's life becomes while waiting for the lawsuit to actually be presented and it is visually uninteresting.

Moreover, because it is based upon a true story, Flash Of Genius is almost entirely devoid of snappy dialogue or pep that makes the piece resonate. The comparison right off the bat to The Social Network is not a bad one. Both films have characters who have invented something, trapped in the middle of legal debates over their ownership of that invention. The significant difference is that The Social Network pops with fast-paced dialogue and quick turns of phrase that make the movie almost instantly engaging. Flash Of Genius does not have that and as a result, it is slow for far too long before the movie becomes engaging.

What brings the movie up into the range that is just below average is the acting and the way Kearns' obsession finally becomes interesting. Gregory Lawson, played by Alan Alda, calls Bob out near the middle of the film about how unlikable his character is and after that point, Kearns' obsession, his desire to just have Ford acknowledge that they stole his work, becomes much more interesting. The viewer is not just watching a good guy go for what he deserves, we are watching a jerk fight even though he'll never win any popularity contests.

As for the acting, Greg Kinnear does fine as Bob Kearns. Kinnear must balance the brilliance of the character with the obsessive nature which expresses a deeply human, essentially human, sense of wronging. While Kinnear is credible in both parts, he never seems to make both halves gel as effectively as he ought to to make the two halves of the character come together as a serious person. Even when it doesn't quite work, Kinnear's performance does not feel fresh or different to those who have followed his career. We know Kinnear can pull of perfectly serious and even hurt, but he doesn't do it in any new way in Flash Of Genius.

The supporting cast, however, is pretty wonderful. Lauren Graham, who is masterful at playing upset and hurt when her Phyllis must play strained off Kinnear, goes to exactly that place in Flash Of Genius. Similarly, she has enough chemistry with Kinnear early on in the film to make the relationship work believably. Supporting players like Dermot Mulroney (Gil Previck) and Alan Alda and genre favorites like Daniel Roebuck, Mitch Pileggi, and Bill Smitrovich round out the cast to give the world of the film a very real sense of depth.

On DVD, Flash Of Genius comes only with a commentary track and 7 deleted scenes, which are pretty much the standard features for this type of serious drama.

Ultimately, there is not quite enough to recommend Flash Of Genius, though I write that with a weird sense that I was glad I stuck it out because what flounders in the first half is brought to a masterful resolution in the second half. Good for a rainy day, but not a permanent collection, Flash Of Genius is a real mixed boat which will not sail for most cinephiles.

For other works which illustrate behind-the-scenes elements of professional environments, please check out my reviews of:
Sports Night
Bowfinger
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Glengarry Glen Ross

4.5/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my index page!

© 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Iron Man: A Surprisingly Substantive Superhero Blockbuster!

The Good: Acting, Character, Surprisingly decent effects, Moments of soundtrack
The Bad: Very basic plot, Pacing
The Basics: Following Tony Stark's abduction and return to the United States, the billionaire weapons developer reforms into a vigilante determined to destroy the weapons he once produced.


[As today finds the 2010 summer blockbuster Iron Man 2 (click here for my review!) hitting shelves on DVD and Blu-Ray, I thought it might be fun to check out the first Iron Man. This review was originally published on opening day and I found it was pretty true still, so I opted not to change the language of the review; it’s fun to see the enthusiasm from the first present in the review! Enjoy!]

Iron Man opens the summer blockbuster season and it starts it off with a surprisingly substantive superhero film that makes one sit up and remember that there are still stories to be told about heroic people making changes in their lives. Iron Man largely follows Tony Stark on his redemptive journey through the creation of an alter ego used to right some of the biggest wrongs in the world; mostly ones perpetrated by him. Stark is not a superhero through any special ability, rather his ingenuity and financial resources allow him to excel and that makes for one of the more interesting superheroes; for he has his weaknesses and flaws.

Tony Stark, having won a meaningless award and had an equally meaningless sexual encounter with a reporter, visits Afghanistan to illustrate the power of his latest missile system. After arrogantly blowing up a hillside for the U.S. military, Stark and his convoy are ambushed and Stark is taken captive by Raza, a dissident who wants Stark's newest weapon for his own arsenal. Raza, in possession of a pretty significant Stark Industry arsenal as it is, provides Tony with the materials and an English-speaking assistant he will need in order to accomplish the goal. Plugged into a car battery to keep shrapnel from hitting his heart, Tony first creates a tiny arc reactor - a power source of significant capacity - and embeds that in his chest. While keeping up the appearance of working on the missile system, Stark instead designs a suit of armor which ought to allow him to repel attacks long enough to escape and after three months in captivity, he succeeds.

Returning to the United States and Stark Industries, Tony is something of a changed man. Having watched U.S. soldiers slaughtered by his weapons and witnessing Raza's local reign of terror in Afghanistan, Stark wants to divest Stark Industries of the weapon's manufacturing and he sets about rededicating his life to undoing much of what he has done in the past, namely hunting down weapons from Stark Industries that may have fallen into the hands of undesirable elements and destroying them. This greatly upsets his business partner and mentor, Obadiah Stane, who works to keep the company viable and stop Stark from gutting the empire they had created together.

What sets Iron Man apart from a lot of superhero origin films is that it takes its time to develop. Director Jon Favreau develops the story with an awkward slowness wherein he includes scene after scene of Stark working on the prototype suit of armor and the process is experimental and disastrous. The suit that Stark is building uses repulsors on the feet and hands to allow Stark to fly and attack using - essentially - force fields. Getting them to work properly is a matter of adjusting thrust, power and that sort of thing. Iron Man illustrates the trial and error process Tony Stark goes through in ironing out the kinks in his ultimate defensive system. This is especially smart, intellectually necessary, and yet tiresome to watch. It drags the pace of the film down some and the viewer is left feeling that this is a bit longer than the two hours, six minutes it actually is.

That said, most of the film works. Wonderfully. Sure, the plot has been done ad nauseam and Iron Man is best likened in its structure and concept to the recent Batman Begins. Tony Stark, like Bruce Wayne, is a man whose only advantages are intelligence and billions of dollars at his disposal. He does not possess mutant abilities or any biological difference to most any other human being. He is a hero based on his actions. Moreover, the villains are pretty obvious and somewhat generic villains who will be obvious to anyone who is a fan of super hero films. It also ought to be noted that I've never read an Iron Man comic in my life, so my take on this film is just on the movie.

Iron Man plays out the heroic man who changes his life brilliantly on the character front. Tony Stark is characterized initially as a fairly carefree and careless cad who does what he wants when he wants it with whomever he wants to. He is enabled personally by his assistant Pepper Potts and professionally by his military liaison, Jim Rhodes. When he has his epiphany, that as a leader of Stark Industries he has created chaos and bloodshed, he works to reform and his resolve in aiding the world in disarmament seems as ingrained as his freespirited nature was before. This plays out well in that it leads to natural skepticism from Potts and disappointment from Rhodes.

It is worth mentioning that Stark and Potts have a rather dynamic relationship, based in no small part on their sublimated sexual chemistry. They have an easy style between them that allows one to trust the other in a very loving and real way, despite the many problems that plague both of their lives. Potts is not a simpleton, nor a damsel in distress and her ability to keep Stark leashed in when she wants makes for an interesting dynamic to watch in the film.

But at least as significant is the idea that Stark actually has changed. He has his wisecracking moments, but for the most part, he is a man that was broken by the experience of being captured and tormented. He grows attached to his fellow captive, Yinsen, and that relationship seems to cement his desire to reform himself. He sincerely seeks to change the world for the better as a result and that commitment - from the moment he declares it - does not diminish. That level of character is admirable and compelling, especially because it is a choice he makes rather than any innate ability he possesses.

This would have been impossible to pull off convincingly were it not for the strength of the cast. Gwyneth Paltrow embodies Pepper with a strength not seen in many of her characters. She lends a quiet elegance to the role and a sense of grace in her bearing, establishing Potts as a woman who clearly disapproves of some of her employers' decisions, but accepts the man regardless. She has a wonderful ability throughout the film to alter her body language to speak in nuance what too many films would clutter up with dialogue.

Terrence Howard and Jeff Bridges give memorable supporting performances as Rhodes and Obadiah Stane. Clark Gregg, apparently typecast from his appearances as Agent Casper on The West Wing, is also notable for his role as Agent Coulson in this film, though he plays more to the type he is familiar with than establishes anything new here. Similarly, Faran Tahir plays Raza with a fairly generic villainous quality that fits the story but does not do anything extraordinary for the character.

But the one to watch is Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. Downey comes to the film after a pretty long and public series of attempts to reform himself (after winning awards for his work on Ally McBeal, for example, he had an unfortunate relapse and it was hard not to feel for him at that point) and there is little to say other than he was perfectly cast as Tony Stark. Downey has the ability to play wry and sardonic opposite moments of deep humanity and he does that in Iron Man convincingly. From the freewheeling attitude he takes with soldiers prior to his capture to delighting in a cheeseburger after being freed to explaining to Potts why he feels he must do what he is going, Downey employs the full range of his abilities to embody and enhance the dual playboy and serious industrialist roles of his character.

Downey finds an intriguing balance in the latter half of the film balancing comments delivered with a sense of wit with the longer bits of dialogue where he implores those around him to accept that he truly has reformed. It is his performance, watching the intensity with which Downey works with objects that are clearly not real - or functional - to reach his character's goals that sell us on the reality of the character and the world he occupies. Given how many superhero films manage to establish a truly just cause for their characters, this is refreshing and worth sacrificing some moments of speed for. The film makes sense because the character comes to make a great deal of sense to the viewer.

And for a big-budget special effects summer blockbuster, the effects are reasonably good. It is only late in the film when Iron Man takes on his ultimate villain that the effects tread toward the cartoonish and unreal. But prior to that, the film takes care to keep the suit of metal a real and practical-looking effect and they are largely successful with that.

On DVD and Blu-Ray, Iron Man comes loaded with deleted scenes, featurettes on the special effects and casting and a commentary track.
Iron Man will satisfy anyone looking for a decent action-adventure story and anyone who wants it to be smarter than the average with character development and quality acting. This has both. It also has a little bonus after the closing credits, making it worth it to stay in your seat! It's not the most high brow movie and the plot has been done before, of course, but it is decent and worth watching. And at the end of the day, it's fun. Sometimes, we need summer to remind us that that ought to be a priority, too.

For other superhero or action-adventure movies, please check out my reviews of:
The Dark Knight
Robert A. Heinlein's The Puppet Masters
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

7.5/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my index page!

© 2010, 2008 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |