“Again With The Wormholes!” Richard Kelly’s The Box Might Have Been Audacious (If It Wasn’t From Him!).

The Good: Mood, Dreamlike quality, Decent acting
The Bad: Character development ends pretty early, Incomprehensible plot events, Repetitive from Richard Kelly’s other works
The Basics: Destined to become another cult favorite for science fiction fans, The Box has serious issues on its own and in the context of Richard Kelly’s other films.


I’m not sure why I didn’t go see The Box when it was out in theaters; I certainly knew it existed at the time. I suspect, however, I saw it as a pretty obvious moral study from the previews and could not get excited about a “what would you do for $1,000,000” type psychological study. Now, having just seen it, I am pleased that that is not at all what The Box is.

Unfortunately, in the intervening years, I have come to enjoy the works of Richard Kelly. Writer and director Richard Kelly, who hit it big with Donnie Darko (reviewed here!) and had a creative triumph with Southland Tales (reviewed here!), returned to the big screen (and now DVD and Blu-Ray) with The Box. Regrettably, Kelly is turning into a one-trick pony and I am reminded of the gag, early on in The Simpsons with footage from Star Trek XII: So Very Tired, when the Enterprise encounters Klingons and Kirk’s response is an exasperated, “Again with the Klingons!” Rooted firmly in the middle, as a bit of a left turn for the film, Richard Kelly’s usual wormholes make their appearance in The Box and, by that point, the film has become just about weird enough that his fans will have come to expect them, as opposed to be surprised by them.

In 1976, the Lewis’s are woken early with the appearance on their doorstep of a package. They open it and find inside a box with a button locked beneath a glass dome. There is also a note that tells them that at 5 P.M., they will be visited by Mr. Steward. After a humiliating day of teaching (wherein an obnoxious student gets her to expose her disfigured foot and she learns her son’s tuition at the school will no longer be comped because she is teacher there), Norma Lewis returns home and soon after, she is visited by Arlington Steward. Steward tells her the conditions of the box, providing her with a key. The key unlocks the dome and gives her 24 hours to press the button or not. Pressing the button will kill someone she does not know and give her $1,000,000. After debate with her husband, Arthur, who has been working on a prosthetic foot for Norma, learns he has failed the psychological tests to be an astronaut and he begins to look ahead at a bleak future.

But, when Norma pushes the button and the family gets their $1,000,000, Arthur becomes obsessed with discovering who Steward is and what is actually going on with the “experiment.” He, Norma, and their son Walter, become embroiled in a conspiracy that stretches from Mars exploration to hive minds and existential questions made manifest in literally choosing the pathways Arthur’s life will go. With their lives and potentially the fate of the world resting on their shoulders – as it seems Steward is a harbinger of an alien invasion – Arthur and Norma resist the conditions established by Steward and the people around them to try to fight for humanity.

Or maybe not, who the hell knows? The Box is a film that, like Mulholland Drive (reviewed here!) trades on surrealism and seems to want, more than anything else, to portray a dream in the film medium. When viewed in that way, The Box is brilliant, though perhaps not quite as compelling as David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive. What The Box does exceptionally well is begin the “dream” rooted very much in the rational, ordinary and detail-filled close to reality and progressively introduce elements that make it more extraordinary, weird, and imaginative. If that is the attempt, then Richard Kelly does a decent job of presenting his dream (whatwith the presence of the wormholes, that seems to be his obsession, possibly one shared by the author of the short story upon which The Box is based) and rational analysis of the film should be suspended.

If, on the other hand, The Box is supposed to be a smart psychologically thrilling science fiction film, then Kelly fails utterly with it. The Box is virtually incomprehensible by the end with the sheer number of possibilities for what is going on. Is Steward an alien harbinger experimenting upon humans with moralistic questions while enslaving entire communities around his experiments by turning them into mindless drones that he can use for fodder in teleportation experiments? Or, is Arthur trapped in an existential nightmare? Or are women just evil (in the film, we only see women hit the button) or weak? The Box, if not a dream on film, straddles the hard science and theological moral questions that have the potential to make for great science fiction, but is executed in an unfocused way that seems to trade much more on surrealism than sensibility.

Moreover, what could have been an engaging character question is quickly sublimated to a somewhat convoluted series of plot twists that keeps the protagonists engaged in figuring out exactly what the hell is going on, as opposed to actually growing, developing, or having their moral centers challenged. No, The Box quickly devolves from anything engaging on the character front into a film that has the characters struggling to figure out the plot and explain it to the audience.

On the acting front, Frank Langella is wonderful – cold and brilliant – as Steward. Cameron Diaz, unfortunately, cannot seem to decide what she wants her character’s accent to be and how much of a limp she wants to give her character. James Marsden, on the other hand, holds together The Box very well by portraying a guy who desperately wants to figure out just what is being done to him and his family.

Ultimately, though, The Box is a flop. On its own, it might be engaging, but Richard Kelly has done it before and if he’s trying a slightly different tact, he ran right into David Lynch territory. Either way, The Box is interesting, but entirely derivative.

For other works with James Marsden, be sure to visit my reviews of:
30 Rock - Season 6
Sex Drive
27 Dresses
Superman Returns
X-Men: The Last Stand
X2: X-Men United
Ally McBeal
Zoolander
X-Men

6/10 (Not Recommended)

For other film reviews, please be sure to check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of the film reviews I have written!

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

Kitchen Confidential: A Pretty Standard Sitcom In A Different Setting!

The Good: Moments of humor, Generally interesting protagonist, Moments of acting
The Bad: Pretty obvious, Does not stand up over multiple viewings, Perfectly average
The Basics: Kitchen Confidential is amusing enough – probably because it was well cast – but does not hold up over multiple viewings and thus is not worth the buy.


It seems lately I have managed to find some of the more obscure television shows on DVD to review. As it stands, my DVD collection has seen The Loop (reviewed here!) and the boxed set for It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia (reviewed here!) come and go. I recalled enjoying Kitchen Confidential when I watched its few episodes on Fox back in the day, so I was reasonably excited to find it on DVD and I picked it up to watch, review and enjoy it. Hey, two out of three is not bad!

The truth is, this series probably would not have garnered as much attention by me if it weren’t for three members of the cast that I truly like. As it is, sitting down and watching all thirteen half-hour episodes made me more ambivalent to the series; it was not as audacious or interesting as I remembered it and truth be told it seemed remarkably standard.

Kitchen Confidential is a sitcom set in the upscale restaurant Nolita. Nolita’s owner wants former partier and problem chef Jack Bourdain to take over the kitchen and help change the restaurant for the better. After some debate, Jack agrees and he assembles a crew of chefs and chef helpers to work with him in the kitchen, including a pastry chef, a seafood expert, and a sous-chef. Surrounded by familiars, Jack sets to keeping Nolita afloat amid problems with ex-girlfriends, the waitstaff, the owner, and the help he hired to watch his back.

Jack runs into several problems while running Nolita, like his mentor returning and requesting that Jack kill him with the most unhealthy food imaginable, a war with a neighboring restaurant, and a shipment of bunnies that needs to be slaughtered for a specialty with no one in the building willing to kill them. Jack dates – or sleeps with – many women, mocks relentlessly his help and works to avoid the temptations of alcohol and debauchery that got him into the proverbial hot water on his previous attempt to be a successful chef.

The thing about Kitchen Confidential is, it’s funny. It was funny the first time around and a few of the episodes held up through a second go around, but much after that I found myself bored. Honestly, I was bored by the time I hit the end of the series when I sat down and watched it all at once. The episodes held up a little better when spread out, but they did not survive the simple act of repetition.

In other words, outside the setting, this feels like a remarkably standard sitcom. Still, the characters have some interesting bits to them and the primary characters in the series include:

Jack Bourdain – Head chef. He is formerly a partier, alcoholic and master chef whose lifestyle cost him everything before he was given a new chance at Nolita by the owner, Pino. Jack works hard to stay sober, but he soon gets back into the womanizing and takes great joy in socializing with the patrons of Nolita,

Seth – The pastry chef, possibly Jack’s closest friend in the kichen, he is jealous and enjoys hazing. He often competes with Jim, Stephen, and Teddy,

Teddy – The seafood expert and much abused in the kitchen, usually by Seth and Stephen. He illustrates his importance by leaving Nolita, which causes Jack to chase him down and beg for him back,

Stephen – A former criminal and sous-chef, he is Jack’s biggest risk in the kitchen. He delights in tormenting Jim and making life difficult for everyone at Nolita while always trying to get himself (or Jack) laid,

Mimi – Pino’s daughter, who loathes Jack being given control of the kitchen. She and Jack have a combative relationship that revolves around running Nolita, which Mimi sees as her birthright,

And Jim – The prep worker, he is often hazed by the more experienced kitchen staff and works to find his place in Jack’s kitchen.

The acting in Kitchen Confidential is decent, though many of the characters end up as sidekicks or appendages for Jack, so it is more that the series is well cast. While most of the cast is mediocre, I was drawn in by the presence of John Francis Daley, who had starred in the wonderful Freaks And Geeks (reviewed here!) and had a recurring role on Boston Public and Nicholas Brandon, who I enjoyed on Buffy The Vampire Slayer (reviewed here!). Both actors stretch out from where we’ve seen them before in their roles here.

Bradley Cooper, who stars as Jack Bourdain was the key selling point for Kitchen Confidential for me. He starred in Alias and truly came into his own in the second season of the series (reviewed here!). Since he left Alias, I had been eager to see him in other works and while he had a bit part in Failure To Launch (reviewed here!), I was psyched about the prospect of him getting his own series, especially as a lead character!

In Kitchen Confidential, Cooper proves his acting abilities. On Alias, he portrayed a simple guy who was very nice and very real, perhaps the most human and normal character on the show. In this, he is arrogant, brash, and egotistical and he sells it convincingly. Moreover, Cooper holds his own with guest stars like John Laroquette and Frank Langella. And here Cooper reveals he has a decent sense of comic timing and a looseness to him that Alias was not presenting.

On DVD, Kitchen Confidential suffers some because it is not terribly long (only one season, thirteen episodes) and it feels very much like something we have seen before, even though the setting is fairly unique in sitcoms. The show looks good, and bonus features include five commentary tracks featuring Cooper and the show’s producers, featurettes about the making of the series and the restaurant featured in the show. The bonus features are good, but they aren’t going to entice anyone to keep the boxed set unless they enjoyed the programming.

Sadly, I don’t know who would enjoy it enough to keep it. It is thoroughly average and ends up feeling rather generic, especially after watching the whole series only twice. While it might be worth a viewing, the DVD features are not truly enough to sell it; it can be found on some of the cable channels being rerun and that might be the better way to go, unless, of course, you have a ton of money to spend on DVDs you’re unlikely to watch more than twice!

That is certainly not me!

For other shows that originally aired on FOX, please check out my reviews of:
Family Guy Presents: It’s A Trap!
Glee - Season Three
Fringe - Season Three
Arrested Development
Wonderfalls
Firefly
The Lone Gunmen
Millennium
Ally McBeal
VR.5
The X-Files
Ned And Stacey - Season 1
The Adventures Of Brisco County Jr.

5.5/10

For other television reviews, be sure to check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

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

History With No Punches Pulled: Frost/Nixon Succeeds Admirably!

The Good: Great acting, Wonderful direction and character work
The Bad: Pacing at the beginning
The Basics: Despite some pacing issues that distract viewers from the emotional resonance, Frost/Nixon is a smart, powerful political interrogation film.


Sometimes, I am amused to do things out of order. It surprised me to find that I had not actually reviewed Frost/Nixon, despite loving it. So, there is some amusement to me that I end up posting my review of it after Michael Sheen's more recent film Underworld: Rise Of The Lycans (reviewed here!), though having seen that film allows me to truly gush on the acting quality of Sheen. Having returned now from my second viewing of the film, I find myself eager to recommend that viewers catch it while they can. Frost/Nixon might not be a big budget effect film that seems to demand the big screen, but it is a solid film and it does more than a play does.

Indeed, while I often argue for the use of the medium - railing against such things as excessive voice-overs - I find I have no argument with Frost/Nixon. Instead, Frost/Nixon might well be the Ron Howard film that illustrates Howard lives up to the hype. In this film, Ron Howard captures perfectly the human emotion, the nuances and the subtle body language of two people who have gone to verbal war with one another.

Having resigned the presidency in disgrace, Richard M. Nixon has been pardoned yet America exists in a state of a crisis of conscience in its politics. In a self-exile from Washington and the Eastern states and their politics, Nixon seeks a way to make a comeback. David Frost, a television interviewer, is seeking a comeback as well. Having lost his television show in the United States, he now finds himself interviewing celebrities in Australia. Watching the numbers surrounding the collapse of the Nixon presidency and the potential viewership around Richard Nixon's post-presidency interviews, Frost concocts a plan to win that first interview.

Struggling to pull financiers together - because he is best known for far less serious interviews - Frost teams with James Reston Jr., Bob Zelnick and biographer John Birt to try to create a series of interviews that will allow Frost to give Nixon a public trial he never had. Nixon, defended by Jack Brennan and a small quintillion including Diane Sawyer, prepare to use the interviews to launch their return to Washington. And as the interviews begin, Frost finds himself deeply shaken and slow to counter the former President's verbal deflections and jabs. But as the lone day Watergate will be the subject approaches, Frost begins to marshal all his personal and financial resources to save the show.

Frost/Nixon has been said by many to be analogous to a chess match and in some ways, that is true. Equally true is that the film Frost/Nixon mirrors the interviews that are the subject of the movie in their form and pacing. The film and the interviews get off to something of a false start as both begin with an anticlimax: Nixon's resignation in the film and Frost's ambush of a question and realization that he may have gotten in over his head with the way he approached the former president. Then, as his friends research how to go after Nixon and Frost struggles to get funding for the program, the movie leaps ahead, much as the more nebulous middle interviews are omitted from the movie; this film is not telling that story. Then, like the movie's final half hour, the final Nixon/Frost interview is a rapid, no holds barred barrage between the two principles.

The chess match analogy works as well as the film takes quite a bit of time to establish the characters and the situation. Unfortunately, this is mostly preparing the board and moving the pieces into alignment; the real game does not start until the second half of the film. This does not work so well for the film as it meanders and is a bit slower as the mechanics of the arrangements behind the interviews are delved into much to the neglect of the characters, save David Frost who simply appears single-minded to an extreme that is possibly the best characterization he could get.

Indeed, while James, John and Bob fret about the specific questions, the early days on the film project and the money, Frost is concerned mostly with the money and making sure the project is completed. As a result, Frost is shown to be a character who is single-minded and truly has all of his livelihood running on the one project. While John Birt is obsessed with getting a confession and arranging a cathartic experience for the public, Frost is just trying to get a show made and he is content to leave the hardest parts for the end. But when forced to rise to the occasion, David Frost does and the impressive thing is that he is magnanimous in his victory, for what it is.

But for every bit that Frost is cunning and desperate, Nixon is cold and calculating. He strategizes well and it is easy to see why - despite the pre-interview attempt to block extensive inquiries by him - Jack Brennan is behind him once the cameras get rolling. Brennan is a military man and he handles Nixon after the fall and it is clear he has a lot riding emotionally on the status of Richard Nixon. And for his part, Nixon plays the game, unsettling David Frost early on and he has an easy quality to him that makes it seem at moments like he is not playing as deep of a game as he is.

It is director Ron Howard who makes sure the audience knows that Nixon is actually on his game and he does it subtly, by directing and editing the film to capture the small details. Panning slowly off Nixon to a dumfounded Frost early in one of the interviews, for example, Howard shows the viewer what is truly important - and it is not what Nixon is talking about then, it is the way he is talking and the effect it is having on David Frost. In the integral, climactic scenes of the film - which I shall not ruin for those who have not seen the previews - Howard captures the details, the looks in Nixon's eyes, the way Frost bites his tongue at the right moment and the patience to capture moments with silence in them. This is what makes the movie truly great.

This is not to say the film is flawless; far from it. Frost/Nixon takes a bit to get going and in its uncertain beginning, the viewer begins to wonder if this will be more like Charlie Wilson's War (reviewed here!) where the film is not about the events or the effects, but rather the behind-the-scenes exclusively. The difference, of course, is the difference between the show and the show behind the show. Frost/Nixon dallies in both stories, but it is definitely heavier in the process story for the bulk of the film, the fight to get the interviews made and aired. The actual interviews only comprise a small part of the film. As well, after the defining blows, the significant pieces are cleared from the board (in the chess metaphor for the movie), the movie goes on. The denouement is somewhat drawn out, but it does not feel extraneous.

But when the movie gets to them, the actors are given a huge chance to shine and explore their characters. Indeed, before the interviews actually begin within the film, the best acting arguably comes from actor Kevin Bacon. As Jack Brennan, Bacon is given to a very reserved array of facial expressions and on-screen emotions. Bacon has the ability to deliver his lines coldly and with a minimal amount of revelation and that plays perfectly to this type of character, the loyal bodyman. Bacon steals his scenes by not stealing them, by providing a subtle, constant presence that feels integral.

Frank Langella lives up to all of his hype as Richard Nixon. Classically trained and looking very little like the former president, Howard does not insult the viewer by pressing a fake nose on the actor and setting him before us. Instead, Langella hunches over, lowers his voice even more than usual and he, quite simply, sells it. There is not a moment he is on the screen that the viewer is pulled out to any of the many other roles that Langella has played. He is solidly and completely Richard Nixon in this film.

But it is hard not to rave over Michael Sheen in Frost/Nixon, despite all of the deserving praise being heaped upon Langella. Sheen, after all, is utterly convincing as the pasty-faced British journalist in this, with equal credibility as the werewolf slave-turned-king in the utterly dissimilar Underworld: Rise Of The Lycans. But this is the true essence of great acting; those who have seen the Underworld films would never guess that this is the same actor who played Lucien. That ability to so completely convince viewers of the reality of the character under both extremes is what defines an actor's range and Sheen has it. He plays this role with a deep, underlying sense of quiet seriousness and he illustrates he is exceptional.

On DVD, the film is impressively presented with decent sound and visual quality. As well, Ron Howard provides a full commentary and there is a behind-the-scenes featurette and deleted scenes. The bonus features are decent and pretty much what one expects from a drama of this caliber.

More than just great performances, Frost/Nixon has a multi-generational sense of sadness to it. I, for example, was too young to have seen the original Nixon interviews with David Frost air and my catharsis in watching this film is more vicarious. It is also a hopeful one, despite my feeling of once again being cheated by history. After all, it is hard for those of us who have become adults within the last decade and a half to not feel somewhat cheated watching Frost/Nixon; where is our David Frost to go after our generation's Nixon?

For other political works, please check out my reviews of:
The West Wing
All The King's Men
Elizabeth

8.5/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my movie review index page by clicking here!

© 2012, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

The Closing Of The Circle's Arc Comes In "The Siege!"

The Good: Consistent characterization as well as sufficient character growth, acting
The Bad: Attempts at humor, ultimate ease of resolution of complicated events in the story arc.
The Basics: An unremarkable finish to a well arranged Bajoran Civil War arc. Best when viewed with its preceding episodes.


Every now and then, the Star Trek franchise attempts to do something ambitious. As a foreshadowing to the direction Star Trek Deep Space Nine would ultimately progress in, that is, a completely serialized storyline, the series did essentially a four-part Bajoran Civil War arc. Along with "In The Hands Of The Prophets," "Homecoming," and "The Circle," the divisions of the Bajoran people are explored in "The Siege."

In one of the most action-oriented episodes of the entire series, "The Siege" concludes the plot arc of The Circle and brings resolution to the Bajoran Civil War. Ordered to leave Deep Space Nine, Sisko instead evacuates the station of civilians and remains with several loyal officers to run interference for the new Bajoran forces. The purpose? To buy time for Kira and Dax to bring evidence of Cardassian involvement in The Circle to the Bajoran Provisional Government.

"The Siege" is a remarkably straightforward episode - when the Bajoran military forces take command of the station, Sisko et al. discreetly sabotage everything they can. The strength is in the acting and the characterization. The ambitious Colonel who takes over Deep Space Nine is young and arrogant, while General Krimm, being older is more conservative. He's also correct. Colonel Day is played by Steven Weber who appears even more young than in his Wings days with his straight blond hair and Bajoran haircut. He brings a great deal to the role and it works for him. Richard Beymer returns as well as Li Nalis, Bajoran freedom fighter and he lends his dignity to the continuing role of the ambiguous martyr.

The failures in this episode are pretty middle of the road. Too often the episode attempts unwarranted humor; notably by using Quark. Quark's part in this episode are distinctly not funny and they try too hard to be humorous. It's not a terribly amusing concept: there's a Civil War, lives are at stake and civilians are in jeopardy. Why crack jokes during that?

The episode does, however, mark the first successful attempts to use Dax for something other than a dispassionate scientist. There are at least two instances where she is funny in the episode and it's the start of the Dax as trickster aspect of her personality. Her use of humor works because it is gallows humor and it is removed from the direct conflict of the actual siege of the space station.

The episode is unsurprising and largely unremarkable, putting an end to The Circle and its relevant characters. We know that Li Nalis is too large a political icon to simply stick around the station and we know Frank Langella, who portrays the misguided Minister Jaro is too expensive an actor to sustain more than a guest shot. Fortunately, the political abandonment of Jaro by Vedek Winn assures the return of the amazing actress Louise Fletcher to the series. We're lucky for that.

While not disappointing, per se, it does not live up to the quality or promise of the other two - three episodes in this arc. In some ways, that's simply the nature of a concluding episode. The purpose is to tie up loose ends. I think I come from a generation of people who far prefer being in the mire of the worst situation possible to the actual resolution. Part of the essential "Deep Space Nine" and not a good standalone episode.

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

6/10

Why not check out how this episode stacks up against other Star Trek episodes by visiting the index page that has the reviews organized by the rating! That is available by clicking here!


© 2011, 2007, 2002 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

"The Circle" Comes Around On Star Trek: Deep Space Nine!

The Good: Interesting Characters, Good plot continuity
The Bad: Unsurprising (predictable plot)
The Basics: Part of the essential Star Trek Deep Space Nine, this is pretty much the ultimate in setups - a clear transitional episode, a firm middle act.


With Major Kira removed as Deep Space Nine's liaison officer by Minister Jaro, the station is in an awkward transition time. In easily one of the top five funniest Star Trek Deep Space Nine scenes, Kira cleans out her quarters while her friends try to convince her otherwise, sort of, and the enigmatic Vedek Bareil returns to offer her refuge in the monastery. It's a wonderful scene that one must watch a few times to actually hear everything that is being said.

Picking up where "The Homecoming" (reviewed here!) left off, "The Circle" continues by illustrating all sides of the current political conflict: Sisko appeals to the Bajoran military which is strangely complacent about the terrorist attacks, Minister Jaro attempts to persuade Vedek Winn to preach that the Prophets support him, Vedek Bareil and Kira learn more about each other at the monastery, Odo uncovers evidence - via Quark - of Cardassian involvement in The Circle and the new first officer attempts to get used to the position.

It's an excellent use of the ensemble cast, the plot is pretty tight. More than that, the characters are drawn out quite a bit in this episode. Sisko seems more alive and less bland, especially when compared to the sedate Vedek Bareil. The nice thing about this episode is that we learn things that come up throughout the rest of the series. One detail, for instance, is Kira's lack of imagination.

This is also one of those episodes that uses the full ensemble cast rather well. With Kira gone from the station, the other characters fill in more and some of the characters who almost never get airtime, like Dr. Bashir, get some choice scenes and see some action.

In "The Circle," we also come to learn who the leader of the terrorist organization is and it leaves us remarkably unsurprised, though it does set up the final episode of the arc well. This is an episode that has strong use of secondary characters, like Vedek Bareil and Vedek Winn, which makes it a little confusing for those not familiar with the cast of characters. That's alleviated quite a bit when one watches the first of the three parts to this set.

"The Circle" works best when viewed with "The Homecoming" and then "The Siege" and being the middle act is rather bound to the other two parts. Part of the essential Star Trek Deep Space Nine but pleasant to view - with the other two - by anyone.

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

7.5/10

For other Star Trek reviews, please check out my index page!

© 2011, 2007, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Returning Home To Deep Space Nine With "The Homecoming"

The Good: Plot, Character, Acting
The Bad: Some technical implausibilities
The Basics: Part of the essential Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, there's a lot to enjoy in "The Homecoming," a character-driven, action packed, politically intriguing episode.


Opening the second season of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine with Quark makes "The Homecoming" feel like a homecoming to the fan of the series. When a show has ratings like Star Trek: Deep Space Nine did its first season it has a dangerous possibility of being retooled. And the moment Quark spouts out his first Rule of Acquisition for the season, we know that it hasn't been.

Quark acquires an earring by a legendary Bajoran freedom fighter and, upon presenting it to Kira,the Major becomes convinced that Li Nalas is still alive. Managing to convince Sisko, who is being plagued by an extremist Bajoran faction called "The Circle" bent on evicting the Federation, O'Brien and Kira head to one of Cardassia's moons to find Li Nalas.

The episode introduces Minister Jaro (played by famed actor Frank Langella), a slick member of the Bajoran Provisional Government and a politician in every sense of the word. Jaro immediately leaps upon the discovery of Li Nalas for his own political agenda and even personally forgives Kira for her political misconduct throughout the episode.

The characters are interesting, but the episode has the feel of being a first part. That is, by the second act the attentive viewer knows that this is not going to be resolved by the end of the episode. It's a nice change from the cliffhanger season enders of Star Trek The Next Generation.

One of the bothersome things is the implausibility of certain action-oriented events. During the jailbreak (yes, Li Nalas is, in fact, alive), things go a little too smoothly. That and the idea that a Runabout would be able to outrun a Cardassian warship seems incongruent with other episodes.

In addition to a strong supporting cast, "The Homecoming" gives the chance for some of the regulars to truly stretch their acting muscles. Colm Meany has a wonderfully understated role in the episode as his character, O'Brien, tries to aid Major Kira. Meany emotes heavily with his cheerful smile and the contrast between that in one scene and his quiet, serious demeanor in the subsequent scenes vividly creates his character.

The real gem of the episode is Nana Visitor as Major Kira. Visitor is strong-willed and determined throughout the episode and maintaining that is an impressive feat that she seems fully up for. The demands of Kira's character in this episode are achieved by Visitor, suggesting to those watching the show that there is nothing this actress cannot be asked to do.

It's a good first part and watching this arc in one sitting makes for a nice movie. It is followed up by "The Circle."

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

For other works with Frank Langella, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Unknown
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Superman Returns
Lolita

8/10

For other Star Trek franchise reviews, please check out my index page!

© 2011, 2007, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Lolita: Nothing So Mysterious Or Sensual

The Good: Early tone, Moments of acting
The Bad: Inconsistent characterization, Execution of plot, Resolution
The Basics: Lolita is a clearly sub-par film fails to be interesting in that it is too inconsistent.


If you're expecting Lolita to be an enjoyable sexual thriller, you're in for a big disappointment. In fact, if you're some righteous pervert, hoping to see some young flesh like all of those e-mails your Hotmail account keeps getting then this, too, is the wrong film for you. After all, there are international laws and this is not Holland. Thus, the fifteen year old girl playing Dolores (Lolita) is never seen in any real state of undress. In fact, up until the last ten minutes, there's so little actually on screen that outside the theme and the tension, a PG rating is more appropriate. No kidding. And in the last ten minutes, all the nudity is male.

So, Lolita is about a writer/professor who has basically aged while searching for the deceased love of his life. That process has led Humbert Humbert to view girls (not women) as sexually accessible and more desirable than their older counterparts because they more closely resemble his lost love. To that end, he is summering with Charlotte Haze and Humbert encounters her daughter, Dolores. Dolores is a rambunctious child, spontaneous, annoying. She's thirteen and she's being sent to summer camp, though she clearly has an attraction to Humbert. As a necessity to keep Dolores in his life, Humbert marries Charlotte and things are going well until Charlotte dies in a freak accident leaving Humbert and Dolores thrown together.

What follows is an hour and a half of Dolores and Humbert driving around. Dolores is tedious and annoying, Humbert goes from being compassionate and lusty to obsessive and brooding. The characters don't so much as follow sensible arcs either as they change abruptly. Dolores is clearly disturbed going one moment from being fun to screaming to bratty. She seems to accept and enjoy things, then wigs out on a hairtrigger. Humbert goes from having a reasonable story (man in love) to simple flat-charactered pedophile quicker than you can say "not only 'statutory' rape."

The plot could have been good, but the characters make it impossible to execute well. Humbert turns out to be rather an idiot, reaching the obvious conclusion for one of the main plot points only when it is told to him. This leads directly to the ending and it's pretty sad because of the time lapses that occur between the plot event and its resolution. I refuse to ruin the surprise of what that is.

The resolution, though is unsatisfying. Going from Humbert having to be told the obvious to his action and then an ending that stops about two minutes too early, leaving the final resolution to be told rather than shown.

In the end, Lolita isn't titillating, it's not entertaining. It's not even terribly disturbing. Well, it is, but not for the reasons the filmmakers want it to be. It's disturbing because it's inconsistent, poorly executed and often confused. This is a film not worth your time. Were it not for the directing and occasional moments in Jeremy Irons (Humbert) and Swain's (Dolores) acting, I'd say avoid it entirely.

For other movies that explore sexuality, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Love And Other Drugs
American Beauty
Friends With Benefits

3/10

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

© 2011, 2002 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Why Does Superman Bother To Return? Superman Returns Flops.

The Good: Moments of homage to Christopher Reeve, Kevin Spacey's acting
The Bad: Lack of plot, Strained character development, Unremarkable acting
The Basics: When Superman returns to Metropolis, Lex Luthor's latest plan for world domination yields big special effects without a story, character or superlative acting.


The world is not split into two camps: people are not Batman fans or Superman fans. We are not defined simply by whether we like our superheroes as ambiguous anti-heroes or if we prefer wholly good, almost flawless . . . well, supermen. If we were, I'd definitely fall into the Batman camp; I choose Star Trek Deep Space Nine any day of the week over Star Trek The Next Generation, Babylon 5 over Alias, Blackadder over, well, there is no antithesis to Blackadder, but perhaps you get the picture. We can't all be Jedi Knights, so it's refreshing to watch a Boba Fett. Superman Returns is no The Usual Suspects.

Following a pretty incredible opening title sequence, Lex Luthor, now freed from prison, swindles an incredibly rich woman out of her fortune in order to finance his latest scheme, which appears to involve crystals. Shortly after he breaks into Superman's Fortress of Solitude, Clark Kent returns to the Daily Planet and into the lives of Jimmy Olsen and Lois Lane. Lois is engaged to be married, soon to accept her Pulitzer Prize and caring for a child that looks suspiciously like Lex Luthor. Luthor's new plan is diabolic and can only seem to be stopped by Superman himself and thus, Superman returns.

This is not The Usual Suspects. I LOVED The Usual Suspects. It's smart, it's occasionally funny, it's clever and it holds up over multiple viewings because excellent actors are portraying intriguing characters, doing interesting things. Superman Returns is none of those things. Well, almost.

Brandon Routh is decent as Clark Kent, but wooden as Superman. There are moments where he acts as Christopher Reeve's Superman or Clark Kent and those moments are sweet and poignant. Conversely, Kate Bosworth has none of the charm or screen appeal of Margot Kidder's Lois Lane. Bosworth's time on screen is time taken up with someone who just seems so . . . young. Never does Bosworth bring any gravitas to the role, no true sense of loss over Superman's time away from her, never actually delving into anything true or real.

James Marsden is wooden as ever as Richard White, Lois' fiance. It's sad when the blurred images of a man years dead - Marlon Brando, in this case - has more on-screen charisma than a real actor, but Brando's performances do trump Marsden. Parker Posey plays the fairly generic sidekick/love interest for Spacey's Luthor and while she's believable, perhaps it was seeing her play such a similar role in the last few episodes of Boston Legal that made me feel she was underutilizing her acting talents.

Kevin Spacey is the only one who owns his role in this movie. Spacey reinvents Lex Luthor, without playing to the previously established notions of who the character is. Unfortunately for him, he is not able to develop the character and the portrayal is thus flawed. After all, Luthor inherits an incredible fortune. So why, truly, does he want more? What drives him toward world domination?

It is the failure to address this problem that leads to one of the two critical flaws of this movie. Without having a character reason, the answer is simply, "it needs to be big." And in that way, everything in the movie is answered in the same way. Luthor's plan is big, Superman is forced to lift something exceptionally gigantic, Superman falls a tremendous distance, EVERYTHING is big. It leaves nowhere for this franchise to go. When Superman flies a continent off the planet, where do you go from there?

And thus, everything is big, except the story. What happens in Superman Returns? Well, Superman returns. And some crystals grow real big and Superman is forced to deal with them. That's it. That's the plot of the movie. Wow, watch crystals grow. Sigh.

Bryan Singer never gets the chance to do anything truly daring in this story, save create a thread with Superman and Lois that is questionable in its wisdom. And when Singer and the writers of the piece introduce the element, the movie is over. Nothing incredible happens. Instead, it's all mediocre.

But it's hugely mediocre. And that is, I suppose, all a summer blockbuster truly needs.

For other DC superhero films, please check out my reviews of:
Batman Begins
Green Lantern
Jonah Hex
Wonder Woman

3.5/10

For other film reviews, please be sure to check out my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2006 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Academically Better Than It Is Entertaining, Unknown Is Still Worth Watching!

The Good: Decent acting, Interesting plot, Cool characters
The Bad: Predictable, Seems overly familiar
The Basics: Unknown is a surprisingly good thriller that might not keep viewers guessing, but uses the conceits of the genre well.


Last night, I had a brief excursion to the movies. The comic book store I now work in is in a mall that features a movie theater and my wife gave me leave to take in a few films last night. She actually recommended Unknown to me, based upon the previews she had seen. That is a rare enough thing for me; both to be sent to the movies for fun without my wife and to have her making recommendations to me on what to see. Still, I took her advice and saw Unknown first. I am generally pleased that I did.

But the truth is, Unknown is stuck in February for a reason. February, like late August through the end of September, is a dumping ground for films that are not going to be huge blockbusters and aren't going to win the big awards. Oscar Pandering Season is over, the March Relaunch hasn't happened and Summer Blockbuster Season is months away - but being heavily advertised now - so Unknown is stuck in a placefiller release slot and the most disappointing aspect of the film is that it feels like it is in that slot. Without ruining anything from the movie, Unknown is a very typical thriller, so much so that within five minutes of the movie's opening, the seasoned film viewer will have the film narrowed down to a medical conspiracy film or a death dream film - like Jacob's Ladder or Passengers (reviewed here!). And, it pretty much follows that mold until a scene in the last half hour when the truth becomes self-evident and then the movie rushes to its end.

The most serious issue with Unknown, then, is that it does not do anything that the viewer feels they have not seen before. The film is academically interesting, but throughout the movie, I continually felt like I was watching something I had seen before or I did not believe would do anything truly new. And it didn't. But it was not unenjoyable, either.

Dr. Martin Harris and his wife, Elizabeth Harris, are traveling to Berlin for a biotech conference where Harris will be presenting his research. While Elizabeth attempts to check into their hotel, Martin realizes that an important briefcase that was left behind by the taxi driver at the airport is missing and he flags down another cab to return him to the airport. En route, the cab is in an accident which results in Martin suffering a severe head trauma and his life is saved by the cab driver. Martin awakens in a hospital four days later and goes in search of his wife.

Unfortunately for Martin, when he finds Elizabeth at a conference social event, she does not know who he is and there is another man at the party who claims to be Martin Harris whom she treats as if he were him. Talking his way out of an arrest to return to the hospital, Martin spies on Elizabeth and sees that she does appear to believe that the Other Martin is him. Trying to piece together what is going on, Martin tracks down Gina, the cab driver who saved his life, and he enlists the aid of a former East German secret police officer, Jurgen. Jurgen believes something is amiss and asks Martin to bring Gina to him as he begins to investigate the aspects of the case that make no sense. But recovering Gina again, puts Martin's life in danger and Gina in the crosshairs of killers who seem to want Martin dead!

Unknown shines out of being perfectly mundane only in its characters and in the performances that create them. Jurgen is an especially interesting character and what is so refreshing about him is that he is as smart as a character in his position is supposed to be. He is a former spy master and he asks the key questions. It is Jergen who accepts the premise that Martin is who he says he is and challenges Martin's neglect of the Other Martin. It is Jergen who asks what the benefit of having a (any!) Martin Harris at the biotech conference is and he is the one who seeks out the loose ends and pulls on the right strings. Jergen is the one who solves the mystery while Harris is running around for his life, fleeing killers.

It is in the killers hunting Martin Harris that the movie feels most familiar. Starting with Harris walking toward a subway and sensing he is being followed, Unknown plays off information received late in the film to make such intuition actually make sense. In other words, a research doctor has no real reason to suspect that someone walking in a hallway is after him and in Unknown when that happens it feels contrived . . . until the final act.

Similarly, Unknown suffers some from the fact that the dialogue is strangely fractured in places. More than any movie I have seen of late, I felt like there were deleted scenes in key points and the editor might not have compensated for them. So, for example, when Gina finds one of her friends dead at an assassin's hands, she rushes back to her own apartment where Martin is fighting another assassin. Gina does not tell Martin her friend is dead or that she is being pursued, but Martin responds to her as if he has that information and the viewer who is attentive is left feeling like something is missing. Between that and moments where the score was instantly evocative of the score from Inception (reviewed here!) in the distinct moment when the train is bursting down the city street, Unknown feels both repetitive and like it is incomplete.

That said, the acting is wonderful in Unknown, even if it largely falls within the realms of predictable greatness. While Diane Kruger's Russian accent slips as Gina, Frank Langella's late entry into the film makes up for it. He plays Rodney Cole with a cold detachment that is well within his range and he is easily as good as Liam Neeson is throughout. Neeson embodies Martin Harris well and Aidan Quinn makes the most out of Martin B with the two playing off one another like well-trained musicians in key scenes they are together. January Jones, Elizabeth, gives a more memorable performance with her bare back than some actors make with pages of dialogue.

But it is Bruno Ganz who steals the film. If Unknown had been released during Oscar Pandering Season, he would have been nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar. Ganz plays Jergen with a precision that appears effortless and his character's decrepit body is painful to watch during most of his time on screen. When Ganz coughs as Jergen, the viewer feels like he is well into the twilight of his life and his character's chances of survival are slim. One feels like he might topple over just researching for Martin Harris, but when he listens, Jergen is clearly formulating thoughts and Ganz makes that interesting to watch. Ganz does what great supporting performances ought to, which is to elevate a minor role to one that is memorable. Ganz outshines the leads because his character is so apparently minor and he makes it profound.

Ultimately, though, Unknown is a little better than average, but it looks better on the page than it does on the screen. The idea is an average one and it is only the players and a few of the details that make it worth watching. Generally, viewers can do better - at least this weekend - but I suspect the film will do better on DVD. . . which begs the question of why they bothered to release it for the big screen first.

For other films featuring Liam Neeson, please check out my reviews of:
The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader
The Next Three Days
The A-Team
Clash Of The Titans
The Chronicles Of Narnia: Prince Caspian
The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe
Love Actually
Star Wars - Episode 1: The Phantom Menace
Schindler's List

7/10

For other film reviews, please be sure to visit my index page by clicking here!

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



| | |

A Sequel Too Smart For Summer Starts Fall Movie Season With Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

The Good: Good story, Good acting, Good characters
The Bad: Pacing, Some jargon.
The Basics: While a little slow in parts, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps returns Gordon Gekko to freedom and he sets his sights on reconciling his broken relationship with his daughter.


As summer winds to a close with inane comedies and dramas that would not hold their own during the spectacle times of Summer Blockbuster Season, I find myself - like many movie reviewers - in a lull until the Christmas Blockbuster push and Oscar Pandering Season. Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps promises to buck the trend of the September Slump.

When I first saw the movie poster for Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, I thought, "That's an odd choice for a sequel" and "I can't wait for Shia LaBeouf's bubble to pop!" But as inane comedies hit theaters alongside back-to-school date movies, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps offers a very different option for movie viewers and it is an option moviegoers ought to exercise. It has been years since I watched Wall Street, but the film catches the viewer right up with the important aspects of that film in order to watch this blind. However, for those who want to be surprised by Wall Street (click here for my review!), they must stop reading now. It is impossible to discuss Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps without referencing the consequences of the end of Wall Street. That said . . .

After years in prison, white collar criminal Gordon Gekko is paroled for his abuses of Wall Street trading and he finds himself unable to work in the financial markets again. Even so, by 2008, he sees a the bloated market and attempts to warn those still in financial power that a downturn is coming, but is ostracized at virtually every turn. He sees his “in,” however, with Jacob. Jacob is a young investment banker who is working his way up at Keller Zabel. Idealistic, he is troubled because he begins to suspect rival investment banker Brenton James of corrupt activities, but is unable to prove it. Gordon enters his life when Jake introduces himself at a lecture, as Gordon's daughter's fiancé. Winnie, Gordon's daughter, still loathes Gordon and the ever-calculating Gordon sees helping Jake as a step on the road to redemption with his daughter.

But soon, Brenton James – the manager of  Churchill-Schwartz, where Jake goes to work after Keller Zabel collapses – begins covering his tracks well and he reveals himself to be a virtual disciple of Gordon’s “greed is good” ideals. With Gordon pulling the strings, Jacob works to prove just how corrupt James truly is.

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is the movie Oliver Stone’s other film, W. should have been. W. was a character study that failed to truly explore or extrapolate the consequences of one man’s actions. By contrast, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is almost entirely about consequences and Stone beats the viewer over the head with that idea. James is suffering the consequences of (allegedly) driving Lewis Zabel to his death, Gordon is suffering the consequences of his manipulations of the market and Bud Fox, Winnie is suffering the consequences of lacking a father figure for so many years. But even as Jacob works to prove Bretton James’ crimes, he moralizes about what getting in bed with Gordon actually means and he, arguably, is the one most aware of the potential negative consequences of his actions.

The brilliance of Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is not that director Oliver Stone and writers Allan Loeb and Stephen Schiff keep one guessing about whether or not prison has truly reformed Gordon Gekko or not. Gordon is Gordon and manipulation is what he does. From almost his first scene, the viewer knows he is up to something and it does not take long for that to start to be made explicit in ways that are enjoyable to watch. The initial confrontation between Gordon and Winnie gives Gordon a wonderful goal: to try to get back in his daughter’s good graces. From the moment Gordon sets his mind to that, the brilliance of Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is not that Gordon is reformed, it is how he uses the same influences and manipulations to achieve a personal goal that he used to achieve his professional goals. In other words, no matter how bad Bretton James is supposed to be, Gordon Gekko’s manipulations always have at least as seedy a sensibility to them.

And, because of the Jacob/Bretton plot, there is plenty of money changing hands and financial information being spewed about. And this, naturally, puts Gordon Gekko close to the field that he is legally prevented from entering.  It also leaves many viewers confused by the jargon. It is unsurprising how Gordon manipulates Jake in the same arena and one of the saving graces of the movie is that even while it is bogged down with exploring the idea of consequences, it also explores the basic human desire for revenge. When Jake loses Zabel, something in him does snap to the irrational and the exploration of the drive to right the wrong makes his character interesting, even when the viewer feels he is just a puppet to Gordon.

Michael Douglas reprises his role of Gordon Gekko for Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps and he is able to humanize the character some by playing off his own charm, especially in early scenes between Jake and Gordon. But during key monologues, Douglas re-establishes the charisma and coldness that made Gordon such a great villain in Wall Street and there is an unbroken strength to the character and the performance that resonates quite strongly.

As for Shia LaBeouf, this is arguably his best work since he played Richie Lupone as a kid on The X-Files. Yes, I go that far back for a time I liked LaBeouf’s performance, but as Jacob he brings a detachment and stiffness that actually works wonderfully for making him seem to be a credible member of the financial community. In fact, his weakest moments are those when he has to be credibly in love with Carey Mulligan’s Winnie Gekko. LaBeouf may not sell the basic human love connection, but he performs well with the jargon surrounding both money and revenge. And the movie does have a lot of jargon to it.

Carey Mulligan is arguably the human heart of Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps. She plays an adult level of hurt beautifully and she holds her own for screen presence against Michael Douglas. Josh Brolin, Charlie Sheen and Frank Langella give memorable supporting or cameo performances (Sheen’s appearance is rather minor) that tie together the world of the Wall Street films quite well.

Ultimately, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is a split movie that only truly comes together in the final scenes. It is half a revenge story with a wounded young man pairing with a master manipulator, it is half a financial story of the consequences of rampant greed. But ultimately, the film is about the dehumanizing nature of unrestrained capitalism and that is as poignant today as it was twenty-plus years ago.

For other movies featuring Michael Douglas, please check out my reviews of:
Wonder Boys
The Game

7/10

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

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


<><><><>| | |