Every Bit The Winner You Might Have Heard, Milk Chronicles An Important American History Struggle!

The Good: Great acting, Decent directing, Engaging story, Good character development.
The Bad: Slight pacing issues
The Basics: Sean Penn's performance as gay right's activist and perennial San Francisco political candidate Harvey Milk lives up to its hype in Milk, now on DVD!


I loathe returning to my home town every year around the winter holidays. Sure, many people may dislike the journey or getting caught up in old roles with family members. I can't stand the newspaper in the city I grew up in. Since they got rid of their regular movie reviewer, the reviews are done by a hodgepodge of syndicated sources and their digest of movie listings (which includes ratings from the critics) is abysmal. Looking at the paper around the holidays is to be forced to consider that perhaps all of the movies out are being rated on a scale of ten (if you didn't read that right, go back and try again. Yes, it's not a scale of one to ten . . .). Around the end of the year, during what I cynically call "Oscar Pandering Season," the reviewers seem to get lazy and rate everything a "10." I can't stand that. Occasionally, that means I'll withhold a review of a great film just to not mistakenly get lumped in with those praising everything.

A couple years back, one of the films I waited to review was Milk and now with it out on DVD and me not wanting to wait for Gay Pride Month, I decided it was a good time to get mine posted. For the bottomline first, the hype surrounding Milk is worth is; Sean Penn is amazing, the film is important, but it is not perfect.

Shortly before his assassination, Harvey Milk sits at his kitchen table and contemplates his life as an activist for gay and lesbian civil rights in San Francisco. Starting then in the early 1970s in New York City, Milk turns forty and picks up Scott Smith. Their relationship takes them rapidly to San Francisco where the two set up a camera shop in the Castro district. Milk soon sees the inequities of how gays are treated in the area, including acts of police brutality. Determined to change things, Harvey Milk runs for one of the trustee positions on the City Council.

Milk loses and he continues fighting the good fight, building a political machine for the primarily gay Castro district for almost a decade. He makes powerful allies and when the time comes, he makes a powerful enemy on the city council in Dan White. As the political fights drive Scott away, Harvey develops a romance with a much less stable man and as change slowly comes, reactionary elements in the United States rise up to menace the progress Milk and his followers make in California.

Milk is a triumph of character and an argument for the inalienable human rights of all Americans, not just white heterosexual males. Sean Penn plays Harvey Milk as an average man in love who is treated poorly for who he loves. He organizes as a businessman would, quickly determining which businesses in the area are gay friendly and which are not and organizing the community around the principle of spending money to promote social justice. FYI, it is still a philosophy that works! Milk evolves from a radical who looks outside the mainstream into a politician who becomes slick and organized without ever losing touch with his base.

What is perhaps most important about Milk is that the film manages to make its statements while still being entertaining. The character struggle and journey of Harvey Milk is a compelling one. Writer Dustin Lance Black and director Gus Van Sant make the journey more than a preachy diatribe on gay rights, instead focusing on the dynamic man Harvey Milk was. As his personal life becomes complicated, his political career takes an upswing, the friendships and relationships offer wonderful contrasts and the viewer feels the tension Milk does as he is pulled in different directions.

As well, there is something entertaining watching Penn as he completely becomes Milk. Harvey Milk's rhetoric quickly becomes a universal call for human rights, not just a cry of "we're here, we're queer, get used to it." In fact, outside the film's earliest moments when those who might be squeamish about two men kissing might become uncomfortable, the film presents a remarkably sexless and surprisingly neutral take on homosexual love. Instead, the film becomes about social movements.

As a result, Milk and Harvey Milk become obsessed with creating infrastructure, improving upon failed attempts and growing to change the institutions of oppression. Milk is likable, utilizing a network of people who come to believe in him and the way the film is shot, we want to believe in him. Indeed, as the film goes along - and there are some slower points that allowed me to detach from the film to consider it - I began become increasingly depressed knowing that Milk was rushing toward his death (a fact revealed in the first two minutes of the movie).

Sean Penn is appropriately brilliant as Harvey Milk, creating a distinctive body language for the character that is looser than anything I've seen Penn in before, until Milk steps into a public setting. There, Penn adds tension to Milk's upper body and he holds himself with dignity and an awkwardness that is palpable. This might well be the performance of Penn's career, rivaling that of his work in I Am Sam (reviewed here!).

As well, Milk utilizes its supporting cast amazingly. Josh Brolin plays White with an unsettling quality that makes him a surprisingly good villain. Indeed, Brolin's performance here illustrates to me that he was woefully miscast as George W. Bush in W. (reviewed here!) because here he is able to throw his body into the performance and make himself appear nervous, uptight and troubled. Alison Pill is charming and realistically efficient at Anne Kronenberg and James Franco gives a performance that is likely to surprise most of the fans of his stoner comedies.

On DVD, Milk includes an insightful commentary track from director Gus Van Sant. As well, there is a tribute to Harvey Milk featuring some of the people who are portrayed in the film. The film is a little light on bonus features, but given that it is a drama and not a big special effects movie, this is understandable. Fans of the film will find a little extra value in the bonus features. Unfortunately, the DVD does not have Sean Penn's acceptance speech from when he won the Best Actor Oscar.

Ultimately, Milk is a socially important film which is unfortunately still teeming with relevancy now. As times change and the United States looks to grow and build, gay and lesbian civil rights continue to come up as an issue and until all people are granted equal rights under the law, the United States fails to live up to its potentials. We don't need Milk to teach us that, but it is refreshing that those of us who believe in the universal promise of the American dream have a film like Milk to remind us that progress can be made and change is inevitable.

For other political movies, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Frost/Nixon
Fahrenheit 9/11
All The King’s Men

9/10

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

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

| | |

Wooden Acting Almost Kills A Political Marvel With All The King’s Men

The Good: Generally good acting, story and character
The Bad: Dilution of main story by focus on Jack Burden, pacing
The Basics: When Jude Law's acting and his character's story begin to dominate All The King’s Men, the film goes from a promising political drama to a murky romantic mystery.


Whenever I write a movie review, I load up the IMDB to be sure I'm getting character and actor names correct. I was somewhat surprised - mostly from not having paid enough attention to the opening credits, I suppose - to see that Kate Winslet and Mark Ruffalo were portraying Anne and Adam Stanton for the latest movie I was watching. Winslet only recently appeared on my radar and my first movie with Mark Ruffalo did not impress me with him. All The King’s Men, which opens to a powerful soundtrack by James Horner, continues my rut where actor Jude Law fails to impress me. Here it is his portrayal of Jack Burden along with writer and director Steven Zaillian and novelist Robert Penn Warren's emphasis on Burden that almost sinks this movie.

Willie Stark is a populist advocate working in county politics in Louisiana when he is opposed by the powers that be in the political world. A government contract is given to a company that makes a schoolhouse that has inadequate fire escapes, leading to the death of three children. This inspires mobster Tiny Duffy to use Stark as a chance to effectively take the Governor's mansion of Louisiana, which in the late 40s, early 50s, is quite a big deal. Stark begins a campaign based on winning over the poor of the state and wins in a landslide. Once in power as Louisiana's governor, he finds himself blocked by the state senate and threatened with impeachment.

Mirroring Stark's rise to power is Jack Burden's journey as a reporter to a spin doctor for the governor. Burden's journey becomes a loop between his past and present as one of the advocates for impeachment is an incredibly powerful judge who happens to be Burden's (non-biological) father. As well, Stark becomes closely involved with the Stanton family, peers of Jack's who have integrity and social standing and who could potentially elevate Stark's political populism and activism to a respectable level.

The problem here is from the beginning the viewer wants this to be Willie Stark's story. Stark is intriguing as a character. The moment he casts off the mob influence and becomes a charismatic politician combining the progressive activism with the evangelical salesmanship by simply telling the truth as he sees it, Stark is a powerful character to watch. Whenever the movie is focused on his quest against the powers that be, All The King’s Men is engaging, intriguing and worthwhile.

The problem is that the film too infrequently focuses on Stark. While the first hour is all about Stark coming to power and his views and ambitions, the last hour plus of All The King’s Men degenerates into a convoluted tale of Jack Burden's trials as he seeks to aid Stark and resolve long unresolved romantic feelings.

As a political story, All The King’s Men succeeds. The problem is, Jack Burden's story is barely political. Burden becomes a detective, digging into the life of Judge Irwin to find any dirt he can to bring Irwin down to alleviate the impeachment pressure on Stark. As this is going on, Stark is busy fighting to get a hospital built for poor people in Louisiana, which needs the appearance of legitimacy. That comes from Dr. Adam Stanton who Stark - via Burden - influences to become a part of the project. The proximity of Adam, a childhood friend of Burden's, and the reappearance of his sister Anne, perhaps his great lost love, cause Burden to relive his past.

And Burden's past is not terribly interesting. Or perhaps it is, but this is not the venue for it. I don't care about Burden's lost love, it's a distraction from the Willie Stark story. Arguably, Burden's story could be all about what a man will do to maintain political power, but it's not nearly as compelling as watching Stark do his thing.

Willie Stark is played with electrifying precision by Sean Penn, one of those actors who suddenly came into legitimacy a few years back and has been a dramatic powerhouse since. Penn is surprisingly charismatic as Stark, manipulating his voice and body language with persuasive movement that make it convincing that Stark could work the crowds we see in the movie. This is one of Penn's best works and he steals every scene he is in.

Conversely, Jude Law is wooden as Jack Burden. "Wooden" describes Law's acting in almost every role and here it is not appropriate for Burden to be so . . . listless, stiff. Law's performance puts Burden at a distance to the viewer, making one care less about his journey and personality and instead causing the viewer to beg for the return of Penn's Stark to the screen.

All The King’s Men is supported by a decent cast including Sir Anthony Hopkins, Kate Winslet, Mark Ruffalo, Patricia Clarkson, and James Gandolfini. Gandolfini seems typecast into the role of Tiny, but otherwise the supporting players are fine and they perform well with what they are given to do in this film.

Who will like All The King's Men? Certainly those frustrated with today's current political state. But they are less likely to enjoy this than The American President (reviewed here!) or reruns of The West Wing (reviewed here!). This movie is more suited to those who like murky romantic mysteries with a political edge. All of the important plot aspects turn on love and that's a fine motivation and makes for a decent story. Unfortunately, this story is not that one, not the way it is set up from the beginning and established in the opening parts of the film.

At least Mark Ruffalo and Kate Winslet did well.

For other works with James Gandolfini, check out my reviews of:
Where The Wild Things Are
In The Loop

6/10

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

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

| | |

Expectations Of Exceptional: Mystic River, The Average Great Film

The Good: Acting, Soundtrack, Moments of plot/character
The Bad: Movie never reaches its emotional potential, Somewhat predictable character arcs
The Basics: In a truly great, though unsurprising film, Mystic River presents a murder mystery centering around three childhood friends who have taken different paths. Does not exceed expectations.


If there were ever an "average great film," it would have to be Mystic River, the Clint Eastwood-directed drama that features one of the most impressive casts in Hollywood. In fact, if there is anything truly wrong with Mystic River, it is that the film is set up to dazzle an audience with such practiced, confirmed actors and themes as to make it almost impossible for the movie to ultimately underwhelm the seasoned moviegoer.

Jimmy, Dave and Sean are growing up together in a neighborhood as close friends, playing the street, planning pranks and writing their names in wet cement, when one day their lives change drastically. Two men approach the kids, scold them and because they are posing as police officers, they convinced Dave to get in their car under the auspices of taking him home to tell his mother about the trouble he's been getting into. Sean and Jimmy immediately inform their parents, but Dave is gone. Dave is held in a cellar for four days before he successfully escapes the tortures of the men who have captured him.

Flash forward twenty-five years. Dave is quietly raising his son, Jimmy is running a business and raising his three daughters and Sean finds himself trying to reconcile with his wife who abandoned him and left him shaken. Sean is a detective and when he and his partner, Whitey Powers, catch an especially brutal homicide, Sean finds himself in an unenviable position. The deceased is Jimmy's oldest daughter, Katie, and the best suspect for the murder is Dave.

Mystic River has all of the markers of a great movie: a wonderful cast, a dense and disturbing plot, phenomenal direction, layered characters and actors who are performing at the top of their game. Mystic River has all of these things. So, why was I so underwhelmed?

The movie is underwhelming because these are the expectations going in. Watching the trailer promises that this is going to be a big, bold movie in all the ways listed above. Are the performances good? Yes. Is the plot disturbing and complicated? Certainly. Does director Clint Eastwood deliver as far as establishing and developing a mood that tells the story well? Yes. But that was the expectation going in. The problem is, it doesn't do anything more. The movie lives up to expectations, but because the expectations are of greatness, when the movie is great in every technical sense, it merely reinforces the expectations.

One of the nice things about Mystic River is that the male characters are all utterly dependent upon the female characters for reassurance and genuine definition, which is why Whitey remains somewhat distant from the spotlight. Jimmy's actions throughout the movie characterize him strongly as a man who will defend his family at all costs. He is a man of love and vengeance, hardened by time in jail and likely criminal behavior since - there's no other good reason for his lackeys who have a parallel murder investigation to the police - and all that humanizes him and allows him to live with himself comes from his wife Annabeth. Annabeth removes his doubts and justifies all of his actions. Similarly, Sean's estranged wife provides him with definition and balance outside the job.

The proof of the value of women in the men's lives is evident in the relationship between Dave and his wife, Celeste. Celeste is suspicious when Dave returns home the morning of Katie's murder with blood on his clothes and a nasty cut on his chest. She listens as he tells other people different reasons for the blood and becomes troubled when his stated reason - taking out a mugger who tried to attack him when he left the bar - does not appear in the newspapers. Celeste stops believing in Dave, reinforced when he reveals the truth about what happened when he was abducted to her. It is when Celeste stops believing in Dave that his reality shatters and he begins to be unable to function.

And Dave is a sympathetic character. The viewer empathizes with his struggle; the idea of him being tormented and trying to live a normal life after that is a compelling character journey. When Dave's truths are revealed, he becomes vivid and pitiable. It is difficult to watch him struggle, so vivid is his experience and the ramifications of it.

Similarly, Jimmy Markum is exceptionally empathetic. In the world we hear is increasingly dangerous, Jimmy becomes the logical extension of the desire to protect one's family from the realities of those dangers. Jimmy is arguably a man who is doing what society demands of him - reinforced by the love and support of his wife for doing it.

Jimmy is played by Sean Penn. Penn, who has impressed me in All The King's Men and I Am Sam (reviewed here!) continues to prove he can be a true dramatic heavy. With a gaze, with the setting of his jaw, Penn is able to create a vivid characterization. From his earliest appearances on screen, the audience is able to figure out exactly what kind of man Jimmy has become in the years since his childhood. The viewer is able to buy completely a quasi-thug who is still able to ask his childhood buddy, "Do you ever wonder what would have happened if you had gotten into that car?" because of the way Penn portrays Jimmy. He's not just a dumb thug or hitman here, he's layered and that role is somewhat demanding. And Penn delivers.

Kevin Bacon is surprisingly good as Sean Devine, though the role is not much of a stretch for the intense actor. Instead, Bacon comes naturally to the role of a detective. Similarly, Laurence Fishburn, who plays Sean's partner Whitey, seems naturally cast as a detective and the role falls more within his established caliber of acting rather than an actual challenge for him. Marcia Gay Harden (Celeste), Laura Linney (Jimmy's wife Annabeth), and Emmy Rossum (Katie) all give wonderful supporting performances. All three have been in roles where they are leads and prove their acting worth and Mystic River merely offers them another outing, continued practice. Harden, particularly, is unchallenged by the role she plays in this film as she plays it quite closely to her character from The Spitfire Grill (reviewed here!).

The performance that makes Mystic River worth coming back to more than once is that of Tim Robbins as Dave. Robbins is quiet and understated, the very model of deeply wounded in this movie. Robbins plays Dave in such a way that the viewer knows he's not right even before he delivers his first line. With his body language and soft-spoken delivery of most of his lines, Robbins wonderfully embodies a man whose childhood demons still live within him.

The DVD is scant on extras, which I was disappointed by. It is, however, the only real disappointment coming out of Mystic River. Everything else lived up to the viewer's expectations, high as they were.

For other works with Spencer Treat Clark, check out my reviews of:
The Last House On The Left
Unbreakable
Gladiator

6/10

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

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

The Turnaround on U Turn, Oliver Stone's Directing School Art Project

The Good: Some decent acting, Moments of character/intrigue
The Bad: Stone's directoral toying, Terrible characters, Feels long
The Basics: With violent, mean and unredeemably bad characters, U Turn tells a story of a man trapped in a backwater town that Oliver Stone sloppily creates.


When I was in college, possibly when I saw The Usual Suspects (reviewed here!) in the theater, I saw a preview for Oliver Stone's U Turn. Ever since then, it has been on my list to see and I was thrilled to find it on DVD (albeit a no-frills version) and I was excited to sit down and watch this movie. If anything, I was biased toward it from the previews I barely remembered. As the movie stretched on and on, the anticipation faded and the reality sunk in; there's a reason U Turn is almost never mentioned with Stone's classic works JFK and Natural Born Killers.

Bobby Cooper is driving through Arizona en route to paying off a gambling debt that has already cost him two fingers when the radiator tube in his car's engine ruptures and he is forced to get it repaired. In the desert, he finds the small town of Superior and a crazy hick mechanic named Darrell. While Darrell is repairing Bobby's car, he goes into the town where he encounters Grace. Grace is nice enough, recognizes his flirting and brings him back to her house. Bobby is attacked by her husband, Jake, who then approaches Bobby with a proposition; he'll give him money to kill Grace, a proposition Bobby rejects. Unfortunately for Bobby, he's at the site of a stick-up and the money he's carrying to pay off his debts gets shot up by a store owner who kills the robbers. As Bobby is tossed between Darrell and a psychopath named TNT, attracted to Grace and avoiding the law in the form of Sheriff Potter, he finds himself desperate to get out of Superior and in need of money he does not have.

U Turn has a number of elements that seem to set it up for greatness. It has a respected director (Oliver Stone), it has a decent cast that includes Sean Penn, Nick Nolte, Jennifer Lopez (remember when she was primarily an actress?), and Billy Bob Thornton. It has characters that are, at the very least, intriguing. It even has some truly brilliant lines. The problem is, almost none of them all come together at the same time.

Possibly the best moment - and this is in the trailer, so it's not revealing anything too big - is when Bobby, played perfectly in the scene by Sean Penn, turns to Darrell - played with gruesome perversity by Billy Bob Thornton - and with uncharacteristic wit says, "Forty thousand people die each day, how come you're not one of them?" Now that's an insult! Penn delivers the line well, to the right character at the right moment. It's a nice moment of cinematic quality that is not necessarily indicative of the rest of the film.

Bobby owes people money and they've lopped off some of his fingers so from the moment Bobby comes into the picture, the viewer knows we're not dealing with the morally upstanding citizens of the world. Writer John Ridley does not keep the viewer waiting long, with Darrell being the first character the very impatient Bobby encounters. Whatever sympathy we have for Darrell who is immediately insulted by Bobby, fades with his shifty ways and underlying meanness (to say nothing of his rotted smile).

In short, U Turn features a cast of almost entirely unlikable characters. Superior, Arizona is populated by rogues, killers and psychopaths who bully, bribe and sex their ways through life. And it gets old pretty quick. Unlike a movie like Payback (reviewed here!) where the viewer roots for the antihero because they have been, in some way, wronged and has some redeeming quality to them, U Turn has no such luck.

Throughout this movie, characters tell Bobby that they see within him the killer instinct, the ability to kill, something he claims he has never done before arriving at Superior. The thing is, whether they see it or not, Bobby's sense of desperation leads him to exercise what he's never seen within him before. It's that kind of weak characterization where there's no integrity that turns the viewer off to empathizing with him. Instead, the viewer shrugs and says, "Don't care what's coming to him now."

Even the abused Grace has moments where the viewer thinks her character might be redeemable. Alas, Ridley and director Oliver Stone mortgage that by making Grace even more shifty than her abusive husband Jake. To his credit, Stone chose well to cast Jennifer Lopez as Grace and Nick Nolte as Jake. Nolte is appropriately menacing as Jake and almost every moment he's on screen makes the viewer's skin crawl. Similarly, Powers Boothe is decent as Sheriff Potter.

What's unredeemable is Stone's directing. Stone plays with the camera like a film school student, cheapening almost every vital moment of the film by using camera techniques. A good (or great) director figures out how to use the medium to effectively tell the story they want. While I applaud experimentation, Stone's camera experiments fail to illuminate the story or more importantly the characters in U Turn. Instead, the abrupt clips are distracting, sloppy and annoying.

Whatever potential the rogues gallery of U Turn had of surviving the unlikability of the characters and the somewhat predictable (or standard) criminal underworld plot is mortgaged by Stone's direction which sinks this film out of being watchable. At least now, it's off my list. If it's on yours, you might want to take it off before you, too, are disappointed.

For other works by Oliver Stone, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Platoon
Wall Street
W.
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

4/10

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

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

i am sam Is Sean Penn's Magnum Opus!

The Good: ACTING! Character and writing.
The Bad: Obvious Dichotomy set up, Plot gets nailed in.
The Basics: When the mentally retarded Sam gets into a custody battle for his daughter, a high-powered lawyer changes her whole life around the case in I Am Sam.


For a long time, it seemed all Sean Penn was truly associated with was Madonna and smacking around photographers. In recent years, he seems to have gained some respectability within the acting community and earned a name of his own. I Am Sam finally cuts all links to his early 80s history and establishes him undeniably as an actor of the highest caliber.

Sam is a mentally retarded man whose girlfriend leaves him immediately after giving birth to their daughter. Sam raises his daughter Lucy alone until around her seventh birthday, with the help of his neighbor, Annie. Lucy learns quickly that her father is different and her maturity helps keep the family balanced. However, when Sam gets into some minor problems with the law, Child Services steps in and works to have Lucy taken away. Sam hires the high-powered lawyer Rita Harrison to take his case and the fight of his - and Lucy's - life begins.

What sets I Am Sam apart from most films involving the mentally retarded is that the movie does an excellent job of providing a balanced view of the limitations and abilities of the retarded individual. Sam is not glorified as an exceptional parent. Indeed, to make her points on how inept any parent may be, Rita uses some underhanded lawyering against the prosecution's expert on parenting. Sam is portrayed as childlike and limited, but as a person of many moods, never falling into the cheap stereotype that all mentally retarded individuals are happy and simple.

On the other hand, Rita does come across as less faceted. She is very much an archetype of the power-lawyer with an obsession with money and the cold hard facts of the law. Instead of being sympathetic or empathetic, she is simply a force working for the emotional Sam - reluctantly, to begin with.

The real power of I Am Sam is in the acting. Sean Penn delivers magnificently as Sam. Indeed, it is often difficult to remember that Penn is not mentally retarded, so adeptly does he draw the viewer in with his performance. With an incredible range of facial expressions and body language, Penn articulates confusion, bewilderment and pure joy. His voice, similarly, uses the full spectrum of tone to convey the raw emotions Penn clearly emotes.

But the quality acting does not stop there. Michelle Pfeiffer does a magnificent job of creating an instantly unlikable character who the audience sees as an antagonist. Pfeiffer's performance reminds the viewer of their own indifference and forces us to accept that mentally retarded people are part of our society that many deal with simply through avoiding and containment. Pfeiffer's Rita is not afforded the luxury of simply being able to ignore Sam and in a similar way, the viewer is forced to endure the obstacles of Sam with her.

The real acting genius - besides Penn - is in the form of little Dakota Fanning. Fanning portrays Lucy with an acting brilliance that is uncommon in one so young. She emotes so much with her face and eyes that it is astonishing she is as young as she is. Fanning has a great future in acting if she wants it; her command of complex dialog and body language in I Am Sam are evidence of that.

What keeps the film from being perfect is that it often does feel like a glorified after-school special wherein the obvious disadvantages of a mentally retarded parent are hammered home repeatedly. What makes it worse is the somewhat predictable dichotomy between Sam and Rita wherein she teaches him a valuable lesson.

Still, the supporting cast gives great performances, notably Richard Schiff as the antagonistic lawyer Turner and the film comes across as something worthy of repeat viewings. If the worst thing one may say about a film is that it is heavy-handed about tolerance, is that truly a problem?

For other works with Rosalind Chao, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Six Feet Under - Season 5
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Star Trek: The Next Generation

8.5/10

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

© 2012, 2003 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

A Remarkable Game: The Game Holds Up Over The Years.

The Good: Excellent Acting, Good Directing, Good character development, Intelligently Written
The Bad: Unsurprising to a trained eye.
The Basics: Intelligent, Quickly-paced, expertly acted, The Game has suspense and entertainment down pat!


Every now and then, two films come out too close together and the latter one suffers. Alien 3 was seen as too derivative of Terminator 2 (especially in the end). Similarly, Star Trek First Contact and Alien Resurrection had endings too close for comfort. In the case of The Game, the film suffers for genre fans due to an episode of Star Trek Deep Space Nine entitled "Move Along Home." If you're not that into other media, other shows, that sort of thing and haven't seen "Move Along Home," you're fine. You're going to love The Game. It will catch you by surprise, it will make you happy to see because it is an atypical Hollywood thriller. The Game successfully jerks around the viewer. It's pretty fabulous. If you've seen "Move Along Home" or anything similar, The Game is better.

The Game follows Nick Van Orton, wealthy investment banker. I mean, so rich he makes most people look like beggars. He's in that top .5%. He has a loser brother, Conrad, who gives him a birthday gift, a game from Consumer Recreation Services. CRS gives Nick a test that begins his game. Shortly thereafter, CRS implants a clown in his house and his game is underway. He then is accosted by people dying, a woman who pleas ignorance, guns, dead bodies, drugs, pornography and a vandalized house. He's drugged and wakes up in Mexico, he is sent in a taxi into a river and other things that may or may not be fun.

The film is truly about the power of standardized testing. Honestly. CRS gives Nick a series of tests. From those tests, they determine what is lacking in Nick's life. They are able to anticipate his moves, his motivations, all from the test. It all makes sense. The right test with the right analysis team can understand a person perfectly. The Game seeks to prove that.

The magic of The Game is that everything fits. Michael Douglas is perfectly cast as Nick. His natural intensity works perfectly in the character of a stressed out investment banker. He's confused and lost and trying to make order to an emotive world. Douglas plays that perfectly. The supporting cast of Sean Penn and Deborah Unger, who plays Christine, work quite well to round out the story, adding suspense and confusion. The pace is perfectly executed with everything timed perfectly. It has a wonderful rising action, it speeds along with excellent precision and just when it seems like the film is bordering on being tired, it ends.

The quality of the writing is superb. CRS leaves clues all around and the perceptive viewer finds them. All of the elements of the game come together without any real loose ends. The film is quite tightly woven and that there is an actual denouement works wonderful!

Why watch The Game? It's suspenseful, intelligent, well acted and has characters that read as very real. The supporting cast is excellent. And, rarely, the pieces come together in a way that everything makes sense. In all, the film is fun. It makes you want to keep watching. And, even if you've seen something like it before, you've not seen this. It's worth it.

On DVD, The Game now comes with a commentary track from director David Fincher as well as featurettes on the making of the movie.

For other movies that bend reality, please check out my reviews of:
Inception
Shutter Island
Dark City

9/10

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

© 2010, 2007, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |