Jersey Girl, Part II - Mike Binder's Recreation Of Kevin Smith's Character And Mood In Man About Town

The Good: Decent acting, Good plot, Interesting characters, Excellent pace
The Bad: Not an original performance by Affleck, Most of the other actors not given enough room
The Basics: With a strong, if underused, cast and a good, if derivative, performance by Ben Affleck, Man About Town still surprises as a smart drama about introspection and extortion.


I'm a fan of the films of Kevin Smith and I have no real objection to Ben Affleck in some of the movies that actor has been in. My experiences with watching Affleck is that writer-director Kevin Smith is able to bring out the best in the actor who might not otherwise be anything remarkable as far as acting talent goes. Two of the best performances Affleck gives in his career are in Dogma (reviewed here!) and Smith's underrated Jersey Girl (reviewed here!). When I found Man About Town on the shelf, I was surprised I had never even heard of the movie and I picked it up.

Jack Giamoro is a talent agent who sits down in a journal-writing class to grow as an individual. At a place where he can no longer deny the realities of his life, he begins to write his confessions under the understated guidance of the class's professor, Dr. Primkin. Jack's life soon falls apart as the affair he suspects his wife is having is revealed, he is mugged by a wannabe client, and his journal is stolen by a vindictive would-be client at his agency. Jack's life spirals out of control as he falls into cycles of hate and potential violence and he is forced to depend on others to try to recover the journal and restore his life to what he wants it to be.

Man About Town is a pretty solid drama with moments that are amusing, though this is by no means a comedy. The reason I deny that this is a comedy is that the primary emphasis of the story and the storytelling is not funny, nor is it supposed to be. Jack's struggle is in some ways horrifying; what happens when your quest for personal growth ends up being exploited by those who would simply use your words for their own personal gain? This is the central question of this movie.

The execution of the concept is very well done. When Jack opens himself up to the questions that his marriage and life pose to him, he finds himself digging deeper and finding himself in very uncomfortable places - like admitting he cannot remember loving his wife. There are certainly realms more than could have been explored, but for a 96 minute movie, this packs in a lot of heavier concepts than are usually dealt with in such a movie.

The central character, Jack Giamoro, is empathetic and this is clearly his story. This is so much his story, in fact, that the other characters are only truly presented in ways that interact with his character. So, for example, it's hard to see what Jack is returning to when he contemplates his marriage to Nina. We have snippets of them happy together, we have flashbacks that show they were once happy, but we also see him very tired with the relationship and the trauma her affair brings to him. This is his story and all of the other characters are peripheral to him.

This leads to two real problems with Man About Town; one plot, one acting. The central plot problem is the pace and idiocy of the adversary here. Jack is locking wits with someone who has stolen his journal. Barbi Ling, this is not a surprise and comes out rather early in the film, so it's not a spoiler, is the one who orchestrates the mugging and theft of Jack's journal. Once Jack begins to attempt to get it back, Barbi's character becomes ridiculous and lacking in any sense. First, after the first attempt to recover the journal, she does not make a copy of the document. Second, she seems to be taking her sweet time in reading it - i.e. several days. These two things seem like common sense under the circumstances; make the artifact useless by replicating it and/or getting what you need from it.

More serious is that Man About Town is populated by a wonderful cast that is largely underused. John Cleese, who received third billing, is essentially a cameo role as Dr. Primkin. Jerry O'Connell, Kal Penn, Adam Goldberg, Howard Hessman, and Ling Bai serve only to interact with Ben Affleck's Jack, which gives them almost no screentime to develop their characters beyond the flat interpretations Jack might have of them. Especially sad is how Gina Gershon is neglected. Gershon plays Arlene, Jack's coworker at the agency. She has almost no screentime and her acting talents are wasted in a role that is never truly fleshed out.

Rebecca Romijn is surprisingly good as Nina Giamoro. I believe I've only seen Romijn in the X-Men films, so seeing her in a starkly dramatic role was wonderful. While the movie trades on her looks - her character begins as a model - she is forced to bring some dramatic heft to scenes where she is interacting with Affleck and essentially pleading for her character's marriage. And she is believable and interesting to watch.

The movie rests on Ben Affleck, though. Affleck gives a truly wonderful performance. The problem is, it's nothing new. Affleck is essentially playing the character he had in Jersey Girl (certainly the beginning of that movie) and as such there's nothing extraordinary about the heft with which he is portraying Jack. Affleck creates nothing unique or different about Jack to make him distinct and all through the film, I found myself feeling like I wanted more from Affleck, even while acknowledging he was doing a good (if derivative) job.

This is my first experience with a work by writer-director Mike Binder and I have to say I'm fairly impressed. The movie is well-presented and well directed. Despite the inherent problems with the acting and the plot, this is still better than most movies out there and I'm likely to check out more works by him.

Either way, this is a good use of your time and a movie that could open up some decent discussions.

For other works with Bai Ling, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Angel - Season 1
Star Wars: Revenge Of The Sith
Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow
Southland Tales
Lost - Season 3

7/10

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

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

Dreams Die In The Desert In Dreamland: The Best Film Of 2006 That No One Heard Of!

The Good: Excellent acting, Intriguing characters, Decent pacing, Tone
The Bad: Nothing happens!
The Basics: In an understated and underrated drama, Dreamland satisfies, even if the DVD has no significant extras. :(


2006 was not the best year for movies. Looking at the nominees for Best Picture was just an argument for making the Oscars every two or three years. And while the mainstream movies may have been uninspired, the art films had one or two gems. Dreamland, which I was introduced to via a trailer on DVD to a much worse film, caught my attention. While it might not stack up in other years as a contender, it should have been last year. My instant vote would have been to replace Little Miss Sunshine (panned, er, reviewed here!) with Dreamland in the big categories.

Audrey has just graduated high school and returned to her trailer park to tend to her alcoholic father and dying friend when in drives a truck carrying the shirtless Mookie. Mookie is a creative young man who is training to return to playing college basketball and he instantly captures Audrey's attention. Unfortunately for Audrey, when she pushes Mookie toward her friend Calista, both Mookie and Calista take her up on it and Audrey watches as the two fall in young love. As Audrey watches Calista no longer needing her, she begins to dream that her poetry can be her way out of the trailer park and for the first time she seriously considers leaving.

What's good about Dreamland are the characters. It's important to say right off the bat that nothing happens in this movie. This is not a big "things happen" movie. Instead, nothing happens. If you're waiting for things to happen, it'll be a long wait (though the movie is only 88 minutes). This is a movie filled with quiet moments, waiting, and a whole lot of no action. In fact, there's not even a lot of movement in the film. There are a lot of static shots where the sky moves around Dreamland, the trailer park, where days fade and begin and nothing happens.

Which is why the characters have to be pretty extraordinary to sell Dreamland and they are interesting enough to fit the bill. Why? They are complex and multifaceted. A perfect example is Audrey's father, Henry. Henry is portrayed as an alcoholic who has lost his wife and is completely broken by it, so much so that he never leaves the trailer park. But he's not an idiot, as many drunks are portrayed as in films and television, and he's not inhuman. Instead, he's perceptive and watching Audrey struggle allows him to reach out of his own problems. There's a wonderful moment when Audrey reads him a poem about Mookie and he just quietly says, "Your narrator's not Calista." It's the moment that we realize that this is not a guy who has always been lost and that it's unfortunate that he is lost now.

Calista is a lot of fun, from the beginning. Calista, we learn quickly, is dying slowly of MS and in the opening scenes, Calista changes her name ostensibly because "Calista" sounds more like a porn star. The dialogue between Calista and Audrey as they sit in bikinis in their hot tub in the desert instantly gets the viewer into the place and mood of the characters. Calista is dying, so she dreams big, wanting mostly to be Miss America and win for being beautiful, having a strong social agenda and getting the pity vote. She's weird and fun and tragic.

Mookie is pretty generic, though it's refreshing to see a young person with dreams and ambitions. Mookie's defining moment, more than in the love he shares with Calista and longs for with Audrey, is as he practices basketball without a ball at night because he does not want to wake any of the trailer park residents up. It's cute and pulled off well.

Audrey is the central character, though and she is easily one of the most kind, giving young people portrayed in film in the last decade. Audrey is prepared to stay in Dreamland to tend to her father and Calista and keep her dead-end job in the convenience store nearby so she can be near those who need her. Audrey is faced with a very real choice and she pulls it off well. The story works in part because she is not perfect; she's having fairly meaningless sex with her coworker, she tries smoking because Calista cannot and she gets into a drug situation that puts her in danger.

On that note, I've been awfully critical of movies where youth are portrayed as idiot drug users fairly homogeneously (I believe I was most scathing about it in my review of Garden State, available here!). In Dreamland, Audrey does not go into her experimentation blindly and she certainly seems to learn from it. Moreover, there are consequences for her actions and I like that. That's the element too often missing from such films where every kid does it.

And what makes Audrey so believable is the acting. Portrayed by Agnes Bruckner, Audrey is an introverted enabler who quietly lurches through her life. Bruckner plays her with an expert awkwardness most like Clea Duvall. Bruckner has a subtle delivery that is excellently timed for realism. Lines do not come out of her mouth with the precision of a writer, but instead with the agony of a young woman caught in a genuine dilemma day after day.

Similarly, Kelli Garner is wonderful as Calista. Garner's real talent comes in her physical acting. She portrays weakness amazingly and as her condition gets worse at various points, her face actually becomes puffier. I was impressed. Justin Long proves he can do more than run around without a shirt or sell Macs as Mookie. Long, the Mac persona on the recently popular commercials, is understated here and he sells the idea of Mookie quite well.

Bit roles by Gina Gershon and Chris Mulkey are decently presented as well.

It is John Corbett who is amazing beyond the others in Dreamland. Corbett creates Henry almost exclusively through body language and he's phenomenal in the role. He slouches and sticks out his stomach to become the drunk Henry, perspiring profusely. And as the character transforms, Corbett transforms his whole body and persona. It's impressive.

Dreamland is a great drama and a wonderful character study and it works in part because of the static shots of director Jason Matzner. Matzner is a minimalist of movement here and that powerfully creates the mood. The viewer feels as trapped as Audrey and the sense of confinement works expertly. The script by Tom Willett is strong, giving him a lot of field to play in emotionally.

Anyone who likes a good drama and intriguing, distinct characters will find something to enjoy in Dreamland. Just don't expect a lot to happen. It's still a better choice where things happen, but they add up to nothing. Here, nothing happens and the cumulative effect is vivid and worth your time and attention.

For other works with Justin Long, check out:
New Girl - Season 1
Going The Distance
Old Dogs
Planet 51
He’s Just Not That Into You
Zack And Miri Make A Porno
Waiting . . .
Galaxy Quest

8/10

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

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

| | |

Another Inane Comedy With A Simple Premise: The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard Stinks.

The Good: It’s always nice to seek David Koechner getting work…
The Bad: Not funny, Not clever, Predictable plot, Universally unlikable characters
The Basics: Not funny, not clever and utterly predictable, The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard, is another dumb comedy with sex-crazed men who are unethical idiots learning lessons most people get in first grade.


One knows they must seriously be in love when they go to see what their partner wants regardless of how little they themselves want to see it. For me, that is the realm of inane comedies which I’ve pretty much had my fill of in this life. And yet, my partner loves the comedies and when we see a preview that I groan over or a movie poster that leaves me feeling no real sense of intrigue, these are the films I know almost instantly my partner will want me to take her to. In this case, it was The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard and we didn’t even see a preview of it. Instead, we just saw the movie poster and after our disastrous screening of District 9 (reviewed here!), she wanted me to take her to it.

In the case of The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard, I actually had a selling point; Jeremy Piven. Piven is a man whose work I’ve enjoyed since pretty much the moment he first popped up in the third season of Ellen as cousin Spence. He was funny with a cold wit and a strong knack for irony. While he seems to have achieved a lot of recognition now on Entourage, I’ll always think of him as Spence because the role was so very distinctive. Unfortunately, as he returns to films – he has never truly left, but it has been a while (if ever) since he has been top billed – he comes with a role that is so much less distinguished as to have the opposite effect. I suspect an entire franchise of films could be made out of Don Ready, but Piven would never truly be associated with this role.

When used car salesman Dick Lewiston goes off the deep end with some customers at Selleck Motors, lot owner Ben Selleck grudgingly admits to his staff that they need to bring in a gun-for-hire to turn things around or else the showroom will go bust. Don Ready, known in such circles as “The Goods” is given a call by Ben and he goes from Arizona to Temecula (CA) to help turn things around for Selleck Motors. Don and his team of mercenary car salesmen – Brent, Jibby, and Babs – arrive to try to sell as many cars as they can for Ben over a single weekend. The goal is two hundred cars over the Fourth Of July weekend and Don and his team seem up for the challenge.

Complications almost immediately ensue when “The Goods” (Don) begins to fall for Ivy, Ben’s daughter who is predictably smoking hot. Can Don give up the lifestyle of drinking, casual sex and fast talking to become an actualized adult who might be worthy of her attention? Well . . . who cares?

The fundamental problem with The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard is that none of the characters are terribly likable and most of the humor is so generic as to be either overdone or have nothing to do with the somewhat unique setting the film is set in. Sure, there are plenty of jokes that can come out of being a used car salesman, but when the movie opens with jokes about “coloreds” and a man randomly punching a customer and is followed by a less-than-clever bit about a car being bought using stolen funds, the chance to capitalize on the setting is almost immediately lost. Instead, the humor treads toward the drunken fratboy type humor that characterizes many adult comedies aimed at men these days. Here is yet another posse of smarmy men who have no emotional depth and take no responsibility for their actions.

So, Don is more of an archetype than an actual character and the lines that come out of his mouth are just that; lines. Don is less a cohesive being than he is a series of one-liners which flop out of his lips and garner a smile at their best. Add to that, there is no real resonance between him and his associates. So, why Brent and Jibby hang out with Don is as much a mystery at the end as it is at the beginning. They work together, but given their individual strengths at swindling potential customers, the need for a team effort is minimal and one suspects that they are only together because it is that type of buddy comedy and they are the buddies.

As far as the plot goes, there are no real surprises there. After the set-up and the arrival of Don and his men, the film quickly takes a turn into foul-mouthed humor and coke snorting, like some demented Kevin Smith film absent the social commentary or the charm. So when Ivy enters and Don becomes almost instantly attracted to her, there are no surprises. It is That Kind Of Movie where what we think might happen does. And the obvious plot questions like “Does Don save Selleck Motors?” and “Does Don get the girl?” become inconsequential amid the rapid-fire of jokes. We don’t even care about the plot – though this is a remarkably predictable film in that regard – because the plot is almost an accessory to the cinematic murder we are witnessing where random lines are thrown around.

Truth be told, there are some funny moments in the movie, but they are the non sequitors, like the cameo appearance by Will Ferrell. The humor that comes from the random elements is good, but the bulk of it could have been done in virtually any other comedy. Still, the movie has a few moments that garner laughs (sadly almost none of them involve Piven speaking).

In this way, The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard makes good use of its setting. Like some vastly superior comedies, this film utilizes the parade of new faces on screen – in this case the potential customers who come looking at cars – as a medium to make jokes. The humor is largely comprised of jokes spoken to whomever is passing through and they are non sequitors that have little to do with the rest of the film and only serve to show how funny Andy Stock and Rick Stempson are (or imagine themselves to be). But what the writers fail to do is string together an even remotely interesting narrative in the process and as a result, the movie seems more like a visual jokebook than anything else and it falls flat.

In addition to the pathetic lack of original plot, The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard suffers because the characters are generic as well and the acting is mostly typecasting of the performers. Jeremy Piven plays Don like a smarmy version of Spence with much of the same banter-like delivery of dialogue as his Entourage character. Having just recently seen Anchorman: The Legend Of Ron Burgundy, it is easy to see how David Koechner ended up in this cinematic trainwreck; his character is remarkably similar to the one he played in the other film and he is used almost identically in this as he was in that (and other movies). It is one thing for an actor to be used well for his comic sensibilities, but Koechner is used to deliver his lines with a strange combination of dryness and over-the-top with the occasional bugging out of his eyes and we get that that is within his range. Give us something new. Unfortunately, this movie does not do that with any frequency.

Similarly, Ving Rhames, Craig Robinson, and Tony Hale are all similarly misused as simply thrust into their roles with little other than prior performances respected. Most of the performers here are simply performing “The Best Of ” as opposed to showing us something new from their repertoire. But given that most of the jokes are centered around the supposed shock value of swearing and the idea of matching people with cars – most of which are defective in one way or another – instead of anything specific or interesting having to do with anything new, simply recycling their performances works.

The result is one of the last summer comedies that may be safely avoided by all adults looking for something – anything – interesting to watch on screen this year and another film that can still be avoided on DVD.

For other works with Kathryn Hahn, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Step Brothers
Anchorman: The Legend Of Ron Burgundy

3/10

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

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

Nothing As It Seems For Those Bound To Perfection!

The Good: Good acting, EXCELLENT Characters, Well-written, Engaging plot
The Bad: Light on DVD features
The Basics: Bound is an engaging film that rightly won the Wachowski brothers a chance to write and direct The Matrix


It's easy to look at a film like Bound on the shelves and say "Hmm . . . I don't want to be caught leaving the store with THAT!" That could be the attitude that kept the film from doing well at the box office. Shame on you all with that attitude! Two strong-willed women tied up with rope on the cover of a video box is no reason not to pick up a film.

Bound follows Violet and Corky, one a girl Friday for a mobster, the other a rough and tumble handywoman. Violet works for Caesar, a petty thug for the local Mafia. Corky, fresh out of prison, is working next door working for the landlord who is also connected. When a rat in the organization is sniffed out, Caesar discovers one of his operatives behind it and his conflict with Johnnie, the son of the Don reaches a historic peak. Unfortunately, Caesar is ruled by his temper where Corky and Violet are ruled by cunning and intellect and the story goes from there! In the balance are a couple million dollars that Caesar must recover to the mob and Corky and Violet see their chance to take.

It's rare in this day in age that you can say you watched an artistic film that was great. In fact, the moment you say, "artistic film" you've lost a good chunk of the population. But Bound is an artist's solution to the brain dead action film blockbuster. That is to say, outside the protagonists being both women and lesbian, the characters could be in your average Schwarzenegger or Stallone action flick. That is, if Stallone and Schwarzenegger appeared in films using dialogue. Bound has the gravitas of other classic gangster films like The Godfather and GoodFella's.

What's the difference here, between Bound and your typical action-adventure or suspense film? Nothing is gratuitous, nothing is senseless. It's an irony that disappears with the second viewing, considering that Violet (Jennifer Tilly) comes across as senseless. Released in close proximity to the amazing The Usual Suspects, Bound makes similar leaps with narration and character. So, the first major difference is that Bound is not told in a linear fashion.

The simple plot is that two women fall in love and take the Mob for 2.17. . . million dollars. The first few minutes take the time to establish Corky and Violet, a pretty stereotypical dyke/fem lesbian combination who fall for one another when Violet becomes surprisingly sexually aggressive with Corky. The scenes of their lovemaking are actually erotic, unlike a lot of theatrical sex scenes which come across as choreographed and/or cheap. Filmed with a wonderful sense of shadow, light and movement, the lovemaking in Bound is not extraneous or simply sex for sex. Indeed, the line from Corky that immediately follows the lovemaking is a wonderful expression of what the experience means!

Populated by characters who have depth and extensive backstory - which comes into play without an added "this here is backstory" feel - the film is an artistic vision in cinematography, plot and scope. Indeed, the last scene Joe Pantoliano's Caesar appears in is one of the most beautifully shot scenes of any movie ever! Seriously: EVER!

Directors Andy and Larry Wachowski (yes, the same pair that made The Matrix and V For Vendetta) have an amazing eye for framing shots and camera movements, using the cinematography to tell the story, never letting it overwhelm the meaning or significance of the film's actions, but rather accenting what best defines the characters and moves the plot along. The Wachowski Brothers used Bound as a directoral audition to get funds for The Matrix and within moments of beginning this movie, the viewer will see why that deal could be sealed by this work. The style is distinctive, engaging and interesting.

In fact, Bound is more than an artistic film noir movie. It's shot with a keen eye for detail and written with a great appreciation for how a story may be told. It's the antidote to today's fast-paced, hard to watch movies that are visually stunning, but intellectually devoid. Bound has meaning.

The principle actors in the film are all amazing, playing at the top of their game. Christopher Meloni (tv's Law & Order: SVU) appears as the menacing psychopathic gangster Johnnie Marzzone. He is dark and edgy and the few scenes he is in he is unpredictable and connoting danger for every moment. Joe Pantoliano plays Caesar, the gangster who embodies the arrogance and assumed power of organized crime. Pantoliano plays Caesar with an ease and casual body language and slurred accented speech that makes it obvious why he would end up as a staple in gangster movies from this point forward in his career.

Gina Gershon plays Corky and it's astonishing how well such a beautiful woman is able to transform herself into someone who is so . . . well, diesel. Gershon's Corky is more than simply a stereotype for powerful, somewhat masculine lesbians, she plays Corky with an intelligence and cunning that comes through in her eyes, her catlike movements while prowling and in her clenching of her jaw when interacting with the violent Caesar. Gershon lights up ever scene she is in this movie with a sense of physical power as she roams the halls in a tanktop, moving with lighting speed and quite simply acting like I've never seen Gershon perform before.

The lead is Jennifer Tilly as Violet. Tilly uses her high, girlish voice to seduce the viewer into believing her innocence. She plays the audience, just as Violet plays Caesar and her role is juicy. It's hard not to watch Tilly play in Bound and drool a little, so sensual are all her movements and so convincing is the faceted way she presents Violet.

Finally, in addition to being an intelligent film, it's nice to see some characters - even criminals - acting with intelligence. No one here is particularly stupid (though the police might be considered somewhat ignorant) and that's reassuring after slews of boring films with cardboard villains. Despite the emotions that overcome everyone once the chase for the money begins, most of the actions are guided by reason and character as opposed to simply instinct. Violet negotiates with Caesar, just as she plays the prominent mobsters Johnnie and Micky. It's clever.

This is a must see for anyone who likes drama. It's definitely intended for an adult audience.

For other films by the Wachowski brothers, please be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Matrix
The Matrix Reloaded
The Matrix Revolutions

10/10

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

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


| | |