The Intern Fails To Sell.

The Good: Decent acting, Good direction, Good casting choices
The Bad: Painfully troubling plot and character moments, Pacing
The Basics: Anyone hoping for a one-two punch of Robert De Niro and Anne Hathaway is likely to be disappointed by how they are utilized in The Intern.


Whenever I review a film that stars Anne Hathaway, I worry that I am being too soft on the film based on my appreciation of Anne Hathaway as an actress and activist. There are few actors who sell me on a project simply by their presence in it (writers and directors tend to impress me more; without quality in their departments, it doesn't matter who the players are!), but Anne Hathaway is definitely one who I shell out money to see whenever she opens a movie. In the case of The Intern, I actually considered spending the $1500 (plus travel expenses) that it would have cost to get into the New York Premiere for the film on the hopes of rubbing elbows with Hathaway. After spending the day out at the nearest theater playing it, 40 miles away, I'm glad that I did not spend more on The Intern.

The Intern is the latest dramedy by Nancy Meyers, whose last film It's Complicated (reviewed here!) was brilliant and incredibly well-executed. At this point in her career, Nancy Meyers can do whatever she wants and it is easy to see why Robert De Niro, Anne Hathaway, Rene Russo and the rest of the cast was excited to work with her. Nancy Meyers is a legend, but The Intern makes the argument well that when some people get to "legendary" status, people do not have the heart to tell them when their projects are dramatically less-than what they have produced before.

The Intern does not suck, but watching it was a joyless experience, one packed with so much "stuff," and one that confounds the viewer with its glaring plot and character problems. Or, perhaps, Nancy Meyers really is writing for all the stupid people out there; I was somewhat surprised when Jules's (the character played by Hathaway) husband appeared on screen and the people in the theater I was in gasped - Meyers showed Jules's ringed left hand prominently on screen at least three times before Matt appeared. But, given that Meyers has a history of writing smart, complicated characters and situations, I think it is reasonable to expect that The Intern would be smart. Alas, it is not.

Ben Whittaker is a widower who has been on his own for years and at age 70 feels like he has done everything. Searching for a purpose in life, he applies to be a Senior Intern at About The Fit, an online clothing store. Despite her protestations, the head of the company, Jules Ostin, takes Whittaker on as her own intern. After spending a time at ATF not being utilized, Ben starts to pick up random slack around the crowded office and make an impression on his coworkers. When he sees Mike, Jules's driver, drinking during the work day, he replaces Mike and begins to integrate himself more and more into Jules's life.

Jules is under a tremendous amount of stress. Cameron, who initiated the Senior Intern Program, has advised Jules that the investors in ATF are getting wary at the pace at which the company is moving and they want Jules to bring on a CEO. Not eager to make someone else her boss, Jules very reluctantly begins to take interviews for the CEO position. At the same time, Jules's marriage to Matt - who was in a similar field and was more successful, but became a stay-at-home-dad when Jules gave birth to Paige - is strained. While Jules tries to juggle her personal and professional lives, she comes to rely on Ben more and more for guidance, while he finds purpose as her trusted adviser.

First, what's good. Nancy Meyers captures very well the sense of discontent and loss for a man who was happily married for forty-two years and then lost both his wife and his career (Whittaker was in the phone book publication business!). The Intern begins with an almost crushing sense of mood and when Whittaker is put off on his first day until 3:55 to meet the person he is interning with, the sense that his life has become useless is pounded home. Meyers does a decent job of instantly characterizing Whittaker as a man who truly has a need to be back in the workforce to derive a sense of purpose. And Robert De Niro does a fine job of portraying that. Similarly, Anne Hathaway manages to find the right balance for Jules between strong and efficient and vulnerable and human.

The problem is that the film tries to pack so much more in and one has to neglect some pretty huge problems to make the characters truly seem realistic or workable. At the top of the list is Jules. To buy Jules and the radical take-off of ATF one has to buy the vastly understated premise that eighteen months before the film began, Jules was not throwing all of the energy and focus she had into raising Paige. What?! Jules is devoted, focused, and a micromanager. Her company is relatively new and while I am not at all an expert on children, Paige is ridiculously young - like Pre-school age. While The Intern pays lip service to the idea that Matt was immensely successful in his field and gave it up so Jules could follow her dream and that Jules had the whole idea that women coming home to a bottle of wine each night could be a goldmine for online shopping . . . the film never lands the idea that shortly after getting Paige acclimated to life, Jules abandons her routine and launches a company. So, there's no mention of what Jules was doing before Paige, but somehow she became - essentially - a CEO of a start-up at a time when her husband was rocking the field and their daughter was at a pretty vulnerable age. Jules's motivation is unclear; she clearly cares about her business, but it's not clear why she had a child or, having had the child, why she ever started the business (she's a micromanager and having not been a business manager prior to Paige's birth, it seems like she would have just micromanaged the hell out of her daughter).

Jules is not the CEO, but she is running her own start-up. Cameron is introduced as, essentially, her consigliere and the assumption is that he is her CFO. But Cameron is way too familiar with Jules. Jules is a woman in authority and the way Cameron puts his hands on her in one of their first scenes was tremendously inappropriate for an employee. There might be some subtext that Cameron is supposed to be gay, but that doesn't actually excuse the familiarity he shows her.

That leads to the big conceptual problem with The Intern. Jules is not a very good business manager and Cameron is not a very good consigliere. Jules clearly wants to do right by her employees, but she micromanages every aspect of the business. The unseen investors are absolutely right to fear the way Jules is running ATF; she is on a trajectory to burn out because she does not delegate. But Cameron gives her terrible advice in asking her to take interviews for a potential CEO. Writer and director Nancy Meyers is working under a very old paradigm and does not understand well how the tech start-ups have changed the landscape of the business world. Tech start-ups have made a lot of people very powerful and put them in positions from which they will not advance - there are a number of company Founders and CEOs that have incredible staffs that, by the sheer fact of numbers, cannot all advance to the top of the company. Jules, who is supposed to be strong and independent and smart, takes the advice by Cameron to take the most passive possible approach on hiring a CEO; take interviews from interested people (I believe all of the referenced candidates were men). Jules resents having to do this and her character is gutted as a result.

Meyers set up a very realistic problem and then pursued the least character-driven solution for it. Strong, independent, and smart businesspeople in Jules's position do not wait for the phone to ring; they find people they admire and woo them to their company. Jules would have been so much stronger and not a pouty wuss had she looked around at The Industry and found someone whose accomplishments she admired and then wooed them to become the CEO. Or, on par with that, she would have approached them to mentor her to become the CEO the company needed to assuage the investors.

In this way, Robert De Niro's Ben Whittaker is dramatically misused in The Intern. Whittaker has a wealth of experience in business and Jules quickly comes to rely on him. . . to drive her around, to clean up a junk desk, and to listen to her problems without really judging them. Outside a charming scene near the film's end where Whittaker reveals just how intimately he knows the ATF building, Jules fails to grasp just what an asset Whittaker could be to grooming her to be a CEO. Perhaps, The Intern would have been more obviously a woman-empowering story had De Niro's part been cast by a woman. Then, of course, the structural problem would have existed; how did Jules fail to recognize such an experienced talent (sad to say there are only so many seventy year-old women who had the profound level of executive experience Whittaker had).

As it is, Whittaker is plagued by other structural character problems that make it hard to buy his character. The audience is supposed to instantly love how classic he is and how mature . . . but he doesn't have the wherewithal to tell Patty he is not interested in her?! How up front is that? Moreover, Whittaker has not truly moved on from the death of his wife, but that does not stop him from heading into a relationship with Rene Russo's Fiona (the company messeuse). For all the shit male directors take about how women are used in movies, it's not winning Meyers any points that De Niro's Whittaker rejects the nurturing, non-Hollywood beautiful Patty (played by Linda Lavin) in favor of Russo, who by most objective standards is smoking-hot in The Intern. Patty's purpose in the film seems to be to make it clear that someone as great at Robert De Niro's Whittaker is not going unnoticed by his peers, he's just not interested. (Very sarcastically) Kudos to Meyers to having Whittaker show interest in the first woman to give him an erection in years!

Finally, as a trendsetter, it seems odd that Jules would idolize Whittaker and his generation. Jules laments how the current generation is not classy like Harrison Ford . . . but she relies almost entirely upon the talents of a workforce that realized they did not have to look like Ford to be substantive and great. And given how shittastic the economy is now, wouldn't the bulk of Jules's investors be in Whittaker's age bracket?! Shouldn't she resent those who have it all together financially for pushing her in this direction she is loathe to go instead of bemoaning that her employees - who make her dream into a working reality! - do not have the "class" of Harrison Ford?!

Ultimately, after one gets through the oppressive and somewhat overstated beginning, they get into a few gem scenes and a whole vast ocean of plot and character problems that are realized simply by scratching the surface with a critical lens.

For other works with Anders Holmes, please check out my reviews of:
The Interview
Inherent Vice
Neighbors
Arrested Development - Season 4
Workaholics - Season 1

5/10

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

© 2015 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Bound To Be Buried, Grudge Match Is Amusing, But Hardly Essential.

The Good: Funny, Decent acting
The Bad: Predictable plot
The Basics: Grudge Match is a parody of boxing films that focuses a compelling amount on the nature of aging and redemption enough to be smarter than the average parody film.


I’m not sure what it is about the holiday season that makes major studios believe they have the right time to release a boxing movie. In the case of The Fighter, it was ostensibly a release time designed to get the movie award nominations. In the case of Grudge Match, I suspect Warner Brothers is releasing the film to give comedy viewers something other than Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues to go out to theaters for on Christmas day. It’s certainly not for the vicarious thrill of watching other people punch one another while one is frustrated with their family over the holidays; Grudge Match is not a serious boxing film, it is a comedy that pokes fun at the sports movie genre and it utilizes two of the genre’s most recognizable actors to do so.

Somehow I’ve managed never to catch Raging Bull, which was one of the earliest films in which Robert De Niro distinguished himself as a great actor. Sylvester Stallone, of course, made his name in the iconic role he wrote and played in Rocky (reviewed here!). So, in Grudge Match, Stallone is recognizably poking fun at his last few outings as Rocky Balboa and Robert De Niro . . . De Niro has been performing in comedies quite a lot lately, so it’s somewhat unsurprising how he plays the role of Billy McDonnen.

Back in their prime, boxers Razor and The Kid fought two matches. In one, Henry Sharp (“Razor”) won and in the other, Billy (“The Kid”) won. Sharp retired before the pair could establish definitively who was the superior boxer. Thirty years later, Henry is approached by Dante Slate Jr. to provide footage for a new video game. While providing a movement template, Sharp is interrupted by McDonnen and the two throw around angry remarks until a fistfight breaks out. When the video of the fight goes viral online, Slate is inspired to approach the pair with a proposition: the two will fight a grudge match to determine who is the true champion.

Both Sharp and McDonnen are grossly out of shape, so to meet their obligation to the fans they begin training. Sharp turns to the even older former boxer, Louis Conlon, while McDonnen’s trainer has become morbidly obese. McDonnen’s attempt to get in shape gets a boost when he learns he has an illegitimate son, B.J., who he encourages to train with him. Trying to put his life in order, Sharp uses the training to try to work through his feelings for Sally when she pops back up in his life. Sharp still carries anger over an affair Sally had back in the day with McDonnen and he is hesitant to let her be around him as he figures out his life. Motivated more by money, Sharp becomes desperate to win the match while McDonnen is eager to impress his new son and achieve a sense of notoriety that his ego craves.

Grudge Match succeeds, when it does, because it is funny and it has a thematic resonance that is bigger than the comedy. The film, while rich in laughs with almost all of the supporting characters, is smart enough to give the main characters enough dramatic meat to play with. Stallone’s Sharp is moody and bears the weight of consequence for his past decisions and linger anger; De Niro’s McDonnen has an arrogance to him that is shaken by how much his body has changed (which he discovers when he starts seriously training) and by the appearance of his new son. More than being a simple sports movie or a comedy (which never plays for the ridiculous), Grudge Match is the story of two men who have unresolved issues outside the boxing ring that, in the process of coming back into the spotlight, they find themselves plagued by.

That might make the script from Tim Kelleher and Rodney Rothman smarter than the average sports movie, but Grudge Match is still painfully predictable. Dante’s cajoling the aged athletes into the fight itself is set-up in an obvious way and the nature of the romantic mess between Sharp, Sally, and McDonnen seems somewhat contrived.

That said, the acting in Grudge Match is actually impressive. While Stallone growls his way through most of his lines in a way that is instantly familiar to anyone who has seen him in the Rocky movies or . . . well, pretty much anything else he has been in. But Stallone’s mumbling plays well to the character of Razor Sharp and while there are several gags in Grudge Match that mock the iconic moments of Rocky, Stallone never seems out of place or like his off-camera persona. Instead, Sharp is distinctive and presented with a realistic sense of internal conflict that Stallone is able to handle.

Robert De Niro is predictably great as The Kid, though he plays the role with his usual straightfaced sense of comic deliveries that his fans have become accustomed to in recent years. Similarly, Alan Arkin’s delivery of non-sequitors and off-putting lines and Kevin Hart’s exuberant acting plays more to each of the men’s strengths as opposed to revealing anything truly new to the audience. Jon Berenthal gives more emotional range as B.J. than he was allowed to on The Walking Dead (his big season was season two, which is reviewed here!). Berenthal holds his own opposite De Niro and he plays his character’s sense of abandonment well.

Grudge Match might not be going for an Oscar, but it reminds viewers how a satire of an entire genre can work well by aiming for smart. The caliber of the cast and the thematic resonance plays well as entertainment that is not going for giant spectacle this season, though it seems pretty forgettable when it is done. Grudge Match will not be the next Anchorman.

For other works with Kim Basinger, please check out my reviews of:
The Sentinel
L.A. Confidential
Batman

5/10

See how this movie stacks up against every other film I have reviewed by visiting my Movie Review Index Page where films are organized from best to worst!

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

Not The Movie Of The Year, Incredible Acting Saves The Formulaic American Hustle!

The Good: Incredible acting, Some entertaining one-liners, Effects (costumes, soundtrack)
The Bad: Entirely predictable genre plot, Lack of thematic resonance
The Basics: While American Hustle is entertaining and worth watching, it lacks a sense of enduring greatness beyond the performances to make it a reasonable contender during Oscar Pandering Season.


As we reach the end of the year, films being released are designed to pander to the short memory of the Academy voters. While in recent years there have been a few films nominated for Best Picture that were not released in the post-Thanksgiving Oscar Pandering Season, the majority of films nominated for Best Picture still are released in November and December and this year, perhaps the most obvious attempt to bait Oscar voters is American Hustle. American Hustle has the flash of Oscarbait in its direction, costumes, and sense of humor, backed by the substance of a quintet of performers that the Academy has shown quite a bit of love for in recent years (Christian Bale, Jennifer Lawrence, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper, and Jeremy Renner).

Unfortunately, what American Hustle lacks is a larger sense of theme and characters who make a statement. David O. Russell knows how to make a great film with deeper themes and meaning; he did it with Silver Linings Playbook (reviewed here!), which smartly worked its romantic plot to build to a larger statement on healing and the power love has to trump loss. It might seem ironic or contradictory that I, who openly advocated that Argo (reviewed here!) was worthy of the Best Picture Oscar last year and condemn the obvious frontrunner in Oscar Pandering Season this year for lacking themes. But Argo was more than a plot-based film that illustrated the resiliency of humanity; it became an implicit argument on the strength of pacifism and the power of resolve needed to nonviolently execute a nonviolent plan. American Hustle, however, is a con film. If you’ve seen two or three, you’ve seen pretty much all of them and sadly, despite the enjoyable nature of it, American Hustle does not buck that trend.

Irving Rosenfeld is a conman, so invested in his deceitful plans that his first major deception is to completely alter is face and physique. Disguising himself as a younger, more svelte man, Irving scams his marks successfully. Despite being married to Rosalyn, the transformed Irving discovers he has amazing chemistry with Sydney Prosser. Irving and Sydney work their scams together while having an affair. Their scams bring them to the attention of the ambitious Richie DiMaso, an FBI Agent who is looking to advance quickly by building a record of success by catching bigger fish than Irving and Sydney. To that end, DiMaso uses the pair to run a con on his behalf.

As the casino business explodes in Atlantic City, DiMaso decides to go after corrupt politicians in New Jersey. Starting with the mayor of Camden, Carmen Polito, DiMaso uses Irving and Sydney to go after government officials. As aides to “Sheik Abdullah” (an agent who pretends to be a wealthy investor in Atlantic City construction), Irving and Sydney hook Polito and soon they are using him to get access to corrupt Congressmen and Senators. While DiMaso works to nail the corrupt politicians, he does so outside the guidelines laid down by his boss, which puts his career at risk, a risk amplified by the fact that Irving and Sydney are not simply playing by DiMaso’s rules or solely for his goals.

American Hustle is a showcase of amazing performances – Jeremy Renner stands out for having vastly more opportunities to illustrate depth and substance than he was afforded in The Avengers (reviewed here!) – but the characters are almost entirely unlikable. Renner’s Polito seems instantly corruptible, but Renner is given softer moments (usually opposite Polito’s family members) to quietly and subtly illustrate that he is not monolithic. Polito’s motivations might be presented as the most complicated and empathetic (especially when mobsters begin exerting influence in the scam) and Renner rises to the challenges of giving the character layers.

That said, the rest of the characters in American Hustle (and I reference them as characters because this is a review of the film, not the historical incidents upon which the movie’s events are based) are presented more as archetypes than well-rounded individuals. Jennifer Lawrence’s Rosalyn has a manipulative quality to her that is used in the film largely to keep Irving in line and to sell the practicality of the budding relationship between DiMaso and Sydney. While Sydney and Irving seem to have instant and powerful chemistry, the viewer constantly wonders if the attraction Sydney has for DiMaso is just another scam. Amy Adams plays her attraction for Cooper’s DiMaso with an ambiguity that makes the potential for her character to betray him more obvious than surprising. Christian Bale’s best performances are when his character is at his most vulnerable. When he strides around confidently as a con artist, Bale’s Irving seems painfully familiar for anyone who enjoyed Bale in The Dark Knight Trilogy (reviewed here!). But, when Irving is preparing, when he is shaken, Bale is utterly convincing.

Those moments might be impressive moments of performance, but they are all part of the plot conceits one expects from a con film. In that regard, American Hustle has nothing new to offer viewers. Unlike Argo, where the educated viewer knows the resolution to the film before it begins, but the story is so effective that the viewer invests and is excited by the end, American Hustle fails to suck the viewer in so far. Instead, the rising action builds to the genre conceits the viewer expects as opposed to something surprising. Lacking surprise, American Hustle would have worked if the viewer cared about the characters, but the constant deceptions in the film make it hard to invest. That makes American Hustle worth watching and enjoying, but hardly the best film of the year.

For other works with Jennifer Lawrence, check out my reviews of:
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
The Hunger Games
X-Men: First Class
Like Crazy

6/10

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

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

So Many Great Actors Fail To Impress In The Big Wedding!

The Good: Moments of performance
The Bad: Predictable plot, Droll character arcs, Much of the direction and acting, Jokes and dramatic moments alike fall flat.
The Basics: Despite having an Oscarbait cast, The Big Wedding gives women and adults nothing substantial to watch this Summer Blockbuster Season.


I cannot think of a film in recent memory where I was so uninvested in how the film’s characters and plotlines would reach a resolution as with The Big Wedding. The last few years, as Summer Blockbuster Season has loomed, many of the smaller or more substantive production companies try to release counterprogramming to the big special effects-driven movies. They go after a mature audience and women with films like last year’s Hope Springs (reviewed here!). This year, Lionsgate tried to get into that niche right out of the gate with The Big Wedding.

They failed.

The Big Wedding is intended to be a family comedy with the usual tearjerker moments, but the film directed by its co-writer (or co-adapter, as it appears to have been based upon a French film) Justin Zackham is so thoroughly obvious and banal that most of the surprises are anything but and both the humor and dramatic moments fall painfully flat. The Big Wedding reminded me of a limited season television series The Big Day, which was also about a family gathering for a wedding and all of the mayhem that ensues. The difference is that that summer television show had a less well-known cast, but used all the players exceptionally well. The Big Wedding hopes the viewer will be blown away by the presence of Robert De Niro, Diane Keaton, Susan Sarandon, Robin Williams, Amanda Seyfried, and (I suppose) Katherine Heigl and Topher Grace that they won’t notice how poorly those performers are being used. Out of the bunch, only Susan Sarandon is given the chance to truly blow the audience away and she does in a single scene where her character, Bebe, does not say a word, but witnesses Don (her longterm boyfriend) and Ellie (her best friend, from whom she stole Don away years before, breaking up their marriage) having a moment where their chemistry is evident and Sarandon emotes so much with her face that one has to feel sorry for Bebe.

But, alas, one moment and one decent line (which, I swear, I have already forgotten, but it comes near the end of the movie) are not enough to make a flick worth watching and The Big Wedding falls into exactly that trap.

Alejandro, the adopted son of Don and Ellie, is getting married to his virtual nonentity of a girlfriend, Missy. So, the families are converging on Don and Bebe’s, despite there being a lot of tension in the family. Lyla’s marriage is falling apart and she is estrange from her father, Don. Lyla is feeling sick from something entirely obvious that her sexually unfulfilled doctor brother, Jared, investigates for her on their way to their parent’s house. Ellie, arriving early, lets herself in and comes across her good friend and her ex-husband and feels out of place. When Alejandro arrives, he breaks some bad news to his parents; his biological mother, Madonna, who has been invited to the wedding, thinks divorce is the greatest sin imaginable.

Rather than telling her to stuff it, in America we have divorce and the family is not as Super Catholic as she is, everyone decides to bend over backwards for the woman who gave Alejandro up for adoption. This means that Bebe, who has been like a mother to Alejandro, bows out (though she soon resurfaces as part of the catering staff for the wedding) and Don and Ellie pretend for Madonna that they are still married. At the same time, Jared hits very heavily on Alejandro’s biological sister and Lyla whines about the past as Ellie comes to the realizations that she truly is over Don.

The Big Wedding is just, unfortunately, stupid. We’ve seen all the clichés in movies in recent years. The whole “exes hook up” thing was done much better in It’s Complicated (reviewed here!) and the elements of addition featuring prominently at a wedding was Rachel Getting Married (reviewed here!) in a nutshell. But, any film that belabors a woman with marital issues getting queasy constantly and then acts like it is a huge revelation that the character is pregnant is just insulting. I swear, Katherine Heigl’s Lyla is the last one to figure out she’s pregnant.

What The Big Wedding has outside belabored exposition and a painfully ridiculous plot that would be a farce if only it were funny, so it is just mind-numbingly pathetic as it is here as (at best) a dramedy, is an impressive cast. Unfortunately, the cast is not used very well at all. Amanda Seyfried plays Missy (the bride) and she makes so little impression in this role that one wonders why she chose to do it at all. That’s okay because, despite being Latino, Alejandro (played by Ben Barnes) is such a white bread character that the two fit one another perfectly. Robin Williams’ role as the Catholic Priest Father Moinighan would have been audacious . . . if only Justin Zackham had produced the film fifteen years ago. As it stands, though, the ironic casting and usage of Williams as a Priest is a flat retreading of what Kevin Smith did with George Carlin (to much better effect) in Dogma (reviewed here!).

Topher Grace is fine as Jared, Katherine Heigl might as well be going for her Razzie as Lyla (you can always count on Heigl for doing that dumbstruck expression once per film, much like how Ben Affleck used to cry once per movie, and she doesn’t disappoint for the miniscule niche audience that still finds that charming or original), and the powerhouse casting of Robert De Niro, Susan Sarandon and Diane Keaton results in three performers constantly straining to do interesting things with their listless characters. Sarandon gets her moment and De Niro reminds us that he can perform when Don gets drunk, but Keaton’s part is unfortunately interchangeable with so many others she has had over the years . . . except here her character comes to an obvious conclusion she seemed to come into the film with.

The Big Wedding is not worth watching; not on the big screen, not on DVD when it comes out and not even when it is on network television edited for content and bloated with commercials. It is one of the surest racehorses for next year’s Razzies . . . if only the pundits even remember it exists at that time.

For other works with Topher Grace, please check out my reviews of:
Predators
Valentine's Day
Spider-Man 3
In Good Company

2/10

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

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

Sceptics And Scientists, Red Lights Is Engaging!

The Good: Interesting premise, Good acting, Enough character development to be interesting
The Bad: Moments of direction, Change into a thriller
The Basics: Half scientific drama, half horror-thriller, Red Lights explores the process by which an extraordinary young man becomes determined to expose a theatrical psychic as a fraud.


It seems like every few years, film viewers go through an interest in magic and similar paranormal phenomenon, but more than that, the process of explaining magic and debunking paranormal phenomenon. Since The X-Files (and its brilliant episode “War Of The Coprophages,” reviewed here!), exploring paranormal phenomenon with a rationalist approach has become a pretty standard television or cinematic subgenre. A few years ago, the major studios tried to cash in on that and they released The Prestige (reviewed here!) and The Illusionist (reviewed here!) in proximity to one another, effectively strangling the market at the time. The studios seemed to learn their lesson and well in advance of this year’s Now You See Me, the film Red Lights was released in a limited fashion last year.

I saw the trailer for Red Lights before some movie I saw recently on DVD and I put it on my list of movies I wanted to see. Then, I forgot about it until I got to it on the list; I was not so swayed by the preview that I felt I needed to run right out and see it and I did not do any additional research on the movie. In fact, outside knowing Robert De Niro, Sigourney Weaver, and Cillian Murphy were in the film and that it had something to do with refutation of magic, I had really no idea what I was getting into with Red Lights.

Red Lights is actually one of the better films I have seen of late and certainly one of the most engaging from the outset. As a genre fan and very rational person, I actually enjoy films that explore the scientific process and Red Lights works hard to mix a story of scientific methodology with interesting characters. I am not, traditionally, a fan of horror movies and Red Lights, after its first hour, transitions from a rational crime drama into a “we’re going to make you jump” style horror thriller. Accepting that conceit (and the deliberate emotional manipulation that it employs), Red Lights makes a largely successful transition from methodological drama into thriller. In fact, one of the few weaknesses of Red Lights is that writer and director Rodrigo Cortes seems to think the film needs the jumpy moments in order to retain the interest of the viewer. Given how the film opens, that is a fallacy; Red Lights is an engaging-enough story on his own.

Opening with a “séance” that is investigated by Dr. Margaret Matheson, a psychologist, and physicist Tom Buckley, Matheson comes to realize that the house is not so much possessed as the adults there are being manipulated by an upset young woman and a hairdresser who is putting him on. Matheson, who is the mother of a son who remains in a coma, expresses a resistance to Buckley’s suggestion that they investigate renowned blind psychic Simon Silver. Silver, who left the public life decades prior after his biggest detractor died at one of his shows, uses his assistant to intellectually ambush Matheson on television, a move that pushed Buckley to demand that she and the Scientific Paranormal Research Center investigate Silver to definitively denounce him and his so-called abilities. After putting away a former disciple of Silver’s, Buckley chases down Silver and is away from the lab when Matheson collapses.

Following the untimely death of his mentor, Buckley becomes obsessed with proving Silver is a fraud. After protecting his girlfriend by pushing her away, he muscles his way onto Paul Shackleton’s (a senior fellow at the SPRC) team of investigators as they try to document all of Silver’s alleged powers using scientific, methodology. As Silver plans his final show, Buckley moves to disprove his abilities once and for all.

Despite the middle section of the film making a determined stab at making the thriller into something more of “jump in your seats” horror movie, Red Lights is a smart, well-conceived character study of a young man struggling with his own sense of loss and the man he blames for the death of his mother. Red Lights tries to hinge on one important conceit, which actor Robert De Niro sells incredibly well, but is so much more than just a simple reversal at the end story.

Instead, Red Lights smartly becomes something more impressive and works fine with or without the end. Genre fans are likely to be thrilled by the resolution, which calls to mind something like a supernatural variation on The Usual Suspects (reviewed here!), but well before that end takes an abrupt left turn, viewers are likely to be much more engaged by the impressive grasp Cortes has on human psychology. Matheson and Buckley are searching for truth based almost entirely on their sense of loss and regardless of how the final monologue might try to change that, the characters are deep enough that their motivations transcend the stylistic reversal.

Red Lights is another decent feather in the cap of Cillian Murphy, who manages to play Buckley without any hint of his prior characters in his performance. Sigourney Weaver is distinguished as Matheson and she makes her role as memorable as possible, especially given that the character does leave surprisingly early in the film. Robert De Niro is his usual wonderful self. He is convincing as Silver, but as I’ve long said, De Niro’s performance abilities in drama are really never going to be challenged or expanded upon. He has had such an impressive and varied career that there is nothing he has really not already done. So, while he is convincing as the blind psychic in Red Lights, it is easy for the determined viewer to draw parallels between his performance in this and Hide And Seek (reviewed here!).

Ultimately, Red Lights is a clever, oft-neglected film of 2012 that remains one of the non-major movies of the year well worth hunting down for its approach, characters, and ultimately engaging plot development.

For other works with Toby Jones, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Snow White And The Huntsman
The Hunger Games
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
My Week With Marilyn
Captain America: The First Avenger
Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows, Part I
W.
Frost/Nixon
Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets
Ever After
Orlando

7/10

Check out how this movie stacks up against others I have reviewed by visiting my Movie Review Index Page where the films are organized from best to worst!

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

Flowers For Algernon Modernized Is Limitless!

The Good: Engaging plot development, Interesting characters, Decent performances, Decent use of voiceovers, Good direction
The Bad: Narrative structure makes it predictable.
The Basics: Limitless holds up as a clever and engaging thriller that develops from a meandering character study into a taut business drama.


There are very few movies that I know about that come out theatrically and I do not end up seeing. In fact, one of the only ones that comes instantly to my mind is Limitless. So, while my wife was sleeping the other day, I decided it was time to rectify that oversight. Much more than a modern rehash of Flowers For Algernon, Limitless is a smart and interesting drama that actually evolves.

Limitless is a good example of a movie that evolves well, despite the fact that the end it foreshadowed in its opening. Going from something that felt remarkably like The Words (reviewed here!) into a film with more in common to Wall Street (reviewed here!), Limitless tells an engaging story that is a more complex version of Flowers For Algernon, updated for today.

Leading up to his suicide, Eddie Morra’s life changes dramatically from loser to successful writer. A chance meeting with his ex-brother-in-law Vernon, gets Eddie access to an experimental pill that is supposed to allow him to use the full potential of his brain. Returning to his crappy apartment after taking the pill, he encounters the landlord’s wife, Valerie, and through observation and half-remembered experiences, he suddenly impresses her and helps her write a law paper. After a night where Eddie experiences a surge of brilliance and writes the beginning to his novel, he falls asleep and discovers the drug’s effects have worn off. Eddie approaches Vernon for some more NZT48, but Vernon is killed and it is only looting his apartment successfully for the last of the drug (and a pile of cash) that allows Eddie to continue living his enhanced life.

Having a new plan that requires a lot of money, Eddie borrows money from unsavory sources, makes a quick killing on Wall Street and even restores his relationship with Lindy. It is then that the fabulously wealthy Carl Van Loon comes into his life. Eddie wows the businessman by seeing the endgame for Carl’s potential merger. Informed by his ex-wife of the consequences of abruptly stopping the drug, Eddie has to wean himself off the NZT48. By that time, given how many important people he is associated with, Eddie’s desire to taper down comes with disastrous consequences for him and Lindy.

Despite the opening which is reminiscent of The Usual Suspects (reviewed here!), Limitless is a smart film with intimate human drama and widerange conspiracy theory elements. The character of Eddie Morra is a good one. He actually evolves in the film from a writer to a businessman to Senator. This is the birth of a superman with more sophistication than Chronicle (reviewed here!).

Limitless is also a film that does not inspire much in the way of analysis. It is good, it has a sophistication to its development and enough intersecting plotlines to be continually engaging. But the acting is stacked deck casting – Robert De Niro as an older, powerful businessman . . . what a stretch! Bradley Cooper as a young, talented individual operating below his potential who suddenly gets a big break, what a shock! – and the peripheral characters are hardly developed.

Still, Limitless is solid, entertaining, and better than most films I have seen of late, making for a decent viewing experience.

For other films with Robert De Niro, please check out:
Silver Linings Playbook
Hide And Seek
Shark Tale
City By The Sea
The Score
15 Minutes
Meet The Parents
Jackie Brown
Awakenings
The Untouchables
The Mission
Brazil
The Deer Hunter
The Godfather, Part II

8/10

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

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

| | |

The Outpatient Version Of It’s Kind Of A Funny Story: Silver Lining Playbook Is Good, But Familiar!

The Good: Interesting characters, Some decent performances, Charm
The Bad: Moments of forced humor, Plot is overly familiar.
The Basics: Silver Lining Playbook is a decent dramedy that teams Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence well.


Earlier this year, I was quite excited to finally have the opportunity to catch It’s Kind Of A Funny Story (reviewed here!) and I was pleased when it was as good as the previews had made it out to be. Recently, I had a similar enthusiasm for The Master (reviewed here!), which just did not pop. Fortunately, coming off that huge cinematic disappointment, my experience with Silver Lining Playbook was more like watching It’s Kind Of A Funny Story than The Master! In fact, more than any other issue within the film, what hampers Silver Lining Playbook is its familiarity and predictability.

Silver Lining Playbook is based upon a novel by the same name. As is my habit in such circumstances, it behooves me to mention that I have not read the novel and as a result, this review is very purely of the film.

Following an angry incident with his wife, Nikki, Pat Solitano goes to the psychiatric hospital. After eight months of in-patient treatment, Pat leaves the hospital and moves in with his parents (his mother signs him out while his father is much more wary of his return). Still dealing with anger issues and obsessing over Nikki, Pat finds life on the outside difficult. He struggles to relate to his parents and visitors who he sees, outside his friend from the hospital, Danny (who pops up periodically more as an escapee than a person with a clean bill of mental health). In trying to win back Nikki, who has a restraining order against him, Pat finds Tiffany, a young widow with impulse control problems useful.

But when Tiffany offers to get a letter Nikki (something no one else in his life is willing to do), Tiffany exacts a price. She loves dancing and needs a partner for an upcoming dance contest. So, the two begin spending real time together, much to the chagrin of Pet's father, who views Pat as a good luck charm and believes his presence is important with him in order for the Eagles to win and for him to win enough money to start a restaurant. In learning to dance with Tiffany, Pat finds the relationship he needs to work his way through his issues with Nikki.

Silver Linings Playbook is a dramedy that is far less funny than the previews made it look, much like Crazy Stupid Love (reviewed here!). Even so, the film is packed with charm and both Pat and Tiffany are quirky enough to make the film pop and feel original more often than it feels familiar. In other words, even though the plot is very predictable, Silver Linings Playbook feels fun because the characters are interesting.

Pat and his father, played by Robert De Niro, have amazing chemistry. De Niro and Bradley Cooper (the junior Pat) play off one another in a way that makes the viewer completely convinced they have a long history between them and that is more than just good casting, that is the very definition of great acting. Both roles are well within the range of each actor, but the interplay they have with one another is what truly sells and lands their relationship.

In a similar fashion, Jennifer Lawrence, whose repertoire is still too small for me to judge does well with the role of Tiffany. Lawrence has the twitchy quality to sell the post traumatic stress aspect of Tiffany and more than that, she exhibits a decent sense of comic timing in Silver Linings Playbook. Jennifer Lawrence has a good balance in defining Tiffany.

The success of Silver Linings Playbook comes in the chemistry between the leads. Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence have more on-screen chemistry than Cooper has had with any of his prior co-stars since Jennifer Garner. Lawrence may be working to establish herself as a serious actress outside the two franchises that assure her box office successes for the near future, and Silver Linings Playbook is successful in that. Lawrence shows that she has more range than the somewhat formulaic roles she has been trapped in before this and her performance and the chemistry she has with Cooper make the film more than the average romantic comedy or contrived formula drama.

Worth seeing, Silver Linings Playbook is good, but might be a tougher sell to add to one’s permanent collection when the time comes.

For other works with Jennifer Lawrence, check out my reviews of:
The Hunger Games
X-Men: First Class
Like Crazy

7/10

For other films, be sure to visit my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

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

Robin Williams Has A Beard, So You Know Awakenings Must Be A Serious Movie!

The Good: Great performances, Engaging story, Interesting characters
The Bad: No DVD bonus features
The Basics: Smart, heartwarming and enduring over multiple viewings, Awakenings is a great Robin Williams/Robert De Niro film that was underrated when it was first released.


Sometimes, my wife sits me down for a movie with the words “This is a movie I think you're really going to like” and I smile politely and set my jaw and hope at the end she won't ask “What did you think?” In the case of Awakenings, though, I surprised her by enjoying it even more than she thought I would. In the midst of watching Best Picture Oscar winners on a daily basis, we stopped and watch Awakenings and I was not surprised that it was a contender for the Best Picture. In fact, the only real surprise for me was that Robert De Niro’s performance in Awakenings did not win the Academy Award when Dustin Hoffman's similar role in Rain Man (reviewed here!) did. That said, Awakenings is a gem of a film that is far too often overlooked by critics and those looking at great films of the 1990s.

There are two further notes before getting into the meat of the review. The first is that this is an adaptation of a book by Oliver Sachs. This is a review of the film Awakenings, not the book, and as I have not read the book, there shall be no comparisons. I mention this because often in adaptations, there are moments fans will say, "Yes, but in the book . . ." and this is not that. This is just the film. Also, my wife's copy of the DVD was the original DVD release, which featured nothing. Subsequent DVD releases of Awakenings, especially with a Blu Ray release if there is one, are likely to have some bonus features.

Dr. Malcolm Sayer is a research scientist who is both incredibly smart and rather shy. In 1969, he finds himself applying for a job at a hospital, which puts him in contact with people, a condition that makes him much more uncomfortable than dealing with earthworms or doing hard science. Despite being flirted with by the head nurse, Eleanor, he finds himself obliviously running the chronic ward of the hospital where patients are largely comatose and non-responsive. However, as he begins going through the case histories of all of his patients, he discovers a common thread: atypical encephalitis reactions. Reasoning that the symptoms his patients display - some are mobile, but stop moving when the environment changes, most are immobile, but will react to things like pens being dropped or a ball being thrown at them - are like a super-accelerated form of Parkinson's Disease, Sayer lobbies to put the ward on an experimental, but very effective, Parkinson's medication.

With the consent of the aged Mrs. Lowe, Sayer's patient, Leonard Lowe is put on the medication and soon thereafter, he responds, coming out of his comatose state. As Leopard's health improves, Sayer studies the phenomenon and the hospital lobbies for donations to get the rest of the ward freed from their unresponsive bodies. But just as the phenomenon begins to offer Leonard and his companions a real chance at life, a complication ensues and threatens all of Dr. Sayer's work!

Awakenings is one of those touching tear-jerker movies that my partner absolutely hates, so it is something of a surprise that it was in her collection, not mine. The character study puts two dynamic characters on compelling arcs. Leonard Lowe becomes the focus of the question, "What if you lost thirty years of your life and awoke to a whole new world?" But rather than belabor that question (the answer is illustrated from the moment Dr. Sayer brings him out of his near-paralysis) it becomes an arc wherein the patient begins to fight for the inherent rights he believes he should have, including the right to be free from his doting mother. Ironically, one of the film's most heartwrenching moments comes when Leonard asserts his will to spend time with a young woman who keeps visiting the hospital and must ask his doting mother (who has spent her life waiting on Leonard) to leave him alone.

Fortunately, the film is not a melodrama and moments like that resonate well with viewers because they "read" as very real, even if they are difficult to watch. This also helps make the Sayer character arc more palatable. With a reclusive character like Dr. Sayer, viewers have to figure the character arc will either be about the character growing and changing from the experiences or having his seclusion challenged only to return to it (there's pretty much only two arcs for that type character). Awakenings is arguably about Dr. Sayer's awakening to notice the importance of little moments in life and coming to appreciate the people who surround him. As a result, it is That Type Of Film when his relationship with Leonard teaches him to notice and appreciate Eleanor.

What saves Awakenings from falling into a particularly droll category of schmaltz is the caliber of the performances. While Robin Williams is now fairly well known for his ability to pull dramatic roles (usually by growing a beard and not smiling much), Awakenings comes at a point in his career where this was still a departure for him. Previously known almost exclusively for his comedic range, Williams's dramatic ability is tested and there is not a moment when Williams is not playing the stage comedic version of Robin Williams or the more humorous incarnation of him even breaks out. So, he never lets his facade slip into any form of schtick, as he did in, for example, Man Of The Year. Instead, he paints Dr. Sayer as compassionate, nervous, shy and often oblivious and he is convincing in every one of his scenes.

Williams is supported by a notable supporting cast, led by Julie Kavner as Eleanor. Ruth Nelson (whom I am fairly sure I have not seen in anything else) gives a great supporting role as Mrs. Lowe. John Heard and Bradley Whitford have parts as well and Heard has a great presence opposite Williams as Dr. Kaufman.

But from the moment Robert De Niro appears on screen, he rules Awakenings, stealing every scene. A remarkably physical role for De Niro, he presents a fragile and broken body in some of the movie's most difficult moments to watch. At the same time, he has a great portrayal of glee in his character's eyes when he first manages to speak. De Niro earns his paycheck in this film as I can honestly say I've never seen him play a role like this in any other work.

It is also worth noting that the casting is excellent such that the child actor playing the young Leonard actually looks like Robert De Niro! That level of attention to detail makes for a wonderful film. Outside minor issues, like a fairly stagnant sensibility with the camerawork, Awakenings is very close to perfect. Anyone looking for a strong human drama will enjoy it.

For other films with medical issues, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Million Dollar Baby
Philadelphia
i am sam

9.5/10

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

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

Criminally Un-Funny Kills Meet The Parents

The Good: Teri Polo's Acting
The Bad: Characters, Plot, Utter lack of humor
The Basics: A HUGE disappointment for a fun movie as it was horribly unfunny, Meet The Parents is utterly predictable and obviously plotted; only someone who has never seen a film would love this.


I went into Meet The Parents with high expectations: I like Robert De Niro and I've enjoyed Ben Stiller whenever I've seen him talking about his works. Add to that that he was a bright spot in the otherwise disappointing Mystery Men and truly great in his dramatic role in The Royal Tenenbaums (reviewed here!). Well, there's not living up to high expectations and then there's falling so far short that it detracts from my ever wanting to see a film with an actor/director/writer ever again. Meet The Parents is one such film.

Ben Stiller played Greg, a male nurse who wants to propose to Pam. He's on the verge of it when he finds out Pam's father likes being asked for permission. So, two weeks later, Greg and Pam go to visit Jack and his non-entity wife (Pam's mother). From there, Jack and Greg become involved with many capers that lead to the two forming an understanding. That's it, that's the extent of the plot.

It's pathetic. I thought it would be funny, it wasn't. The hijinks are contrived, the humor is forced, the situation isn't even silly funny, it's silly boring. The film isn't outrageous or original, it's dumb. It's not well written, it's not audacious, it's not well executed for what it is. That is, romantic comedies can still be well put together and even surprising. This film was neither. When it cannot be cerebrally funny - i.e. making jokes about Jack's work in the intelligence community - it degenerates quickly into slapstick humor, which I often find to be a low attempt to make people laugh. In this case, it uses the tried and dead jokes about an animal exchange and people on rooftops.

I thought this could be interesting, but no one rises to the occasion. The script is uninspired, so the actors have nowhere to go with the material and the whole film has the feeling that they know this and they've opted not to try. Everything is set up in such a way that the next scene is obvious to anyone who has a memory. From the beginning we know where the film is going and in the process, there are pointless episodes that don't add anything, including humor.

The bright spot was Teri Polo, who did the best job of acting. Her character was likable and actually interesting. Watching her was the single bright spot of this otherwise dreadful film. And it's not like her character is terribly funny, instead she just seems the most "real" of the people we're exposed to here.

The truth is, Meet The Parents is supposed to be a comedy. When I watch a comedy, I expect to laugh. I like comedies, I like laughing. When I go into a comedy with high expectations, I'm ready to laugh. A lot. I laughed twice watching this film and I only smiled one other time. This film is not worth your time; save it and let me be the only one to waste time on it.

For other works with Teri Polo, be sure to visit my reviews of:
The West Wing - Season Seven
The West Wing - Season Six
Sports Night
Northern Exposure - Season Six

1.5/10

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

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

The Tarantino Film Worth Watching: Jackie Brown!

The Good: Excellent acting, Good story, Amusing, Intriguing characters, Good pace
The Bad: Some of the dialog, or more accurately, the diction of criminals.
The Basics: An excellent cast, utilized well and put in an interesting plot makes Jackie Brown a success. Bare with the language.


While nine out of ten reviewers might recommend the drug-filled, openly violent (and bloody), foul-language flick Pulp Fiction, by Quentin Tarantino, Jackie Brown is the best work of his I've yet seen. Well, to be fair to Tarantino, I've been itching to see Reservoir Dogs for years and I enjoyed his guest stint on Alias in that show’s first season.

The film is pretty simple in plot, despite the workings and reworkings of it throughout the film. Quite simply, Jackie Brown is about airline stewardess Jackie Brown who is smuggling money into the country for gun runner Ordell. In the process, Jackie is caught and extorted by the feds as well as aided by a bail bondsman named Cherry. After establishing the characters, Jackie Brown turns into a sting/heist/plan to smuggle in $500,000 and bring down Ordell in the process. As she works that whole angle, she and bail bondsman Cherry come closer and closer together.

What works in the film is not the glorified robber plot. Instead, it's the characters. They are interesting, to say the least. The gun runner surrounds himself with a classy smuggler, a mope of a hitman and a jailbait girl. Strangely, all of those characters have enough to them to watch over and over again.

Equally as good, they are well acted. While Samuel L. Jackson gives his usual great performance as the slick illegal arms dealer Ordell, the film is stolen by Robert Forster, who plays Cherry. His acting is subtle and he plays the part with a number of nuances; a tick of the eyebrow here, a subtle smirk there. His true greatness in this film is in his understated acting. His character is very realistic and he plays the character with a great deal of realistic detail that is often lacking in today's films. Cherry seems like someone any one of us might know, the benevolent friend who wants to see the good in everyone, though experience has taught him the opposite.

I credit that to Tarantino. The film's direction becomes rather important, even to those who don't usually notice direction. Tarantino, to his credit, captures the greatness of the actors at his disposal. Forster may be the best example, but he's not the only one. Pam Grier uses facial expressions well and with expert direction from Tarantino, they come through. Michael Keaton, who plays the federal officer who is hunting Ordell, gives a good performance that seems to be what he's good at, too; simple. His character stands out as one of the few that's flat (the other is Bridget Fonda's jailbait character). Actually, it's hard to tell if their acting is bad or they're playing poorly written characters exceptionally well. Go figure.

As it turns out, Jackie Brown is well paced, and one of the few films I can easily cite where the soundtrack is both noticeable and great. The series of songs - usually r&b by such artists as the Delphonics - is expertly used to enhance the film's visual elements.

Throughout the film there's a wonderful sense of movement, so even while two characters sit around doing drugs for a scene mulling over their options, the viewer feels like they are going somewhere. And the film picks up rapidly during the final sequence wherein Jackie attempts to foil all of her pursuers and get away with the money.

All in all, the movie comes together expertly, as do the machinations of Jackie Brown. My only true objections to the film were in language. Now I'm not usually a prude about language, but the word "nigger" is thrown around a little too often for my taste. I figure, however, that it works and isn't gratuitous here, in that the characters who keep throwing the word around are the same ones who are selling guns and doing drugs and it's pretty obvious language is just another tool being employed to illustrate the caliber of people they are.

For other works with Robert Forster, be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Descendants
Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past
Heroes - Season Three
Mulholland Drive

9/10

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

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

Master Criminals Vie For The Perfect Heist In The Score!

The Good: Excellent acting, Good characters, Generally well-executed plot
The Bad: Disappointing (obvious) twist at the end, Disappointing underuse of Angela Bassett
The Basics: In yet another crime caper, Robert De Niro and Edward Norton give great performances as criminals competing to be masters.


Somewhere along the line in U.S. society, a line became not only blurred, but completely smeared. If you look at early movies, there were a line between good and evil and all of the movies were about how good triumphed over evil. Often, those old movies had the good guys behaving almost identically to the bad guys (punching people out, yelling at innocents to get information, etc.) to triumph, but you always knew who the good guys were and you were always rooting for them. Then, there came movies where the bad guys were more interesting, delicious even, than the good guys and we hated the ends of the movies because it didn't make sense that good could beat such an excellent bad guy. Somewhere in the nineties, continuing through today, movies started to focus on bad guys solely and we started rooting for the most human or likable bad guy without actually judging the quality of how bad they were.

The Score is one such movie, about a loose confederation of career criminals, led by Max. Max owes some serious money, so he hires Nick Wells to perform one last heist for him, a golden scepter stuck in a customs office. Max uses Jack Teller, a young criminal looking to score his first big theft. Jack's angle is that he has access to the customs office as he has been posing for weeks as a mentally retarded janitor there. Nick, eager to escape his life of crime and settle down once and for all as a nightclub owner, reluctantly takes the job and finds himself in a crossfire of lies and deceit.

Yes, it's another bank robber-type movie. Here, though, there's no moralizing over the actions of the characters, outside Diane (played by Angela Bassett), they are all morally corrupt thieves, hackers and liars. Outside the context of the movie, it's hard to like any of them (Diane being difficult to like because she is such a nonentity in the film).

But that's the power of The Score. Watching this movie, we willingly suspend our disbelief and our cultural values of property rights to root for Nick. We want to believe that he wants to make good and we come to see him rather early on as the most benevolent of thieves in a world populated by criminals. In short, he's the one to root for because he seems to have some aspirations of doing right and going legitimate.

Indeed, Nick is likable throughout the movie, played by Robert De Niro as tender and genuine in his scenes with Bassett's Diane. De Niro reminds us how great an actor he can be by making Nick different from his other characters. This is not a loud, angry performance, nor should it be; his character is both cunning and feeling his age. De Niro provides us with a far more reasonable interpretation of an aging person and a criminal who has survived so long without being caught than he would had he played him pretty much any other way.

The person who steals the show (largely because Marlon Brando looks like he's ready to die in every scene he's in in this movie) is Edward Norton. Norton does an amazing job playing a character playing a character. It seems like every ten reviews, I run into a story that requires a character to play another person, but the repetition here is certainly worthwhile; Norton quite adequately plays Jack playing a mentally retarded person without ever making the viewer feel it is Norton playing a mentally retarded person. That's skillful acting. Norton's use of body language and voice create an impressive alter ego that makes us believe in the will of Jack.

The only real problem, then, is in the resolution. There is a surprise twist at the end, but it is not a surprise to those of us who have respect for the way the world works. If we are to believe that Nick has survived so long without being caught, the end is more inevitable than surprising. Still, the reactions he receives are fun to watch and the movie is quite enjoyable.

While not living up to the caliber of The Usual Suspects, The Score easily engages the viewer and makes them root for one criminal over another. Too bad there's not more of a place for the good woman (Angela Bassett, whose part as Diane is miniscule) here.

For other works Frank Oz is involved in, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Monsters Inc.
Bowfinger
The Muppet Christmas Carol
The Star Wars Saga
Labyrinth

7/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Movie Review Index Page by clicking here!

© 2012, 2004 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |