Summer Blockbuster Season Starts With The Hilarious Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2

The Good: Very funny, Good effects, Engaging character moments, Good performances
The Bad: Less distinct music, Imbalance in serving the characters
The Basics: Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 does a decent job of tying up some big loose ends in the far corner of the Marvel Cinematic Universe with style and humor!


There are few elements of the Marvel Cinematic Universe that have aged as well as Guardians Of The Galaxy (reviewed here!). Comedies, especially, tend to have a shorter half-life than dramatic films, but Guardians Of The Galaxy has held up much better than a number of the Marvel Cinematic Universe origin stories and sequels. Arguably, the reason Guardians Of The Galaxy has endured so well over the years (and many, many viewings) is because it found the right balance of humor and action and paired both with an incredible and memorable soundtrack. So, of course, enthusiasm for Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 would be very high, perhaps to an unrealistic extent.

But Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 actually does an excellent job of creating an exceptional sequel and successor to the original film. Instead of having to work to assemble a new super hero (or anti-hero) team and build an entire franchise within the Marvel Cinematic Universe from scratch, Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is allowed to play within the established corner that was created in the first film. And the pretty amazing aspect of Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is that the entire film is built on an allusion in the first film and a throwaway joke at the end of the film's teaser/first act.

Peter Quill, Gamora, Drax, and Rocket have been contracted by the leader of the genetically-perfect race living on the planet cluster Sovereign to thwart an impending attack from an interdimensional creature. The quartet works to take down the giant alien when it appears, while keeping Baby Groot safe from the conflict. Victorious against the creature, the Guardians go to Ayesha's throne room to receive their payment; Nebula, who was caught by the Sovereign security forces trying to steal the planet's rare and valuable batteries. Ayesha recognizes something in Quill, but in the process insults him and the team. Either because of the insult or simply on a whim of his own, Rocket steals the batteries from Sovereign while Gamora stows the new prisoner.

As the Guardians head to deliver Nebula to collect the bounty on her head, Yondu finds himself excommunicated by the Ravagers for breaking the Ravager code of dealing in children. Ayesha does not take long to realize that the Guardians have taken the batteries and she sets the Sovereign drone fleet against Quill's ship. The Guardians are facing certain death until they are rescued by a previously-unknown alien who destroys the Sovereign fleet right before the ship crash lands. With the ship out of commission on a distant world, the crew is met by Ego and Mantis. Ego tells Peter he is his father and invites him back to his world. Peter, Gamora, and Drax accompany Ego and Mantis back to Ego's idyllic world, leaving behind the angry Rocket and Nebula to fix the ship. Left vulnerable, Rocket falls prey to Yondu and his Ravagers who have been hired by Ayesha to recover the batteries and the Guardians. But Rocket and Yondu soon find themselves at the mercy of the Ravagers and Nebula with only Baby Groot to save them. And on Ego's World, Peter Quill learns his father's origins, his own powers and the destiny his father has for him. While Quill embraces his father's vision, Gamora and Drax learn from Mantis that Ego is not all he appears and they discover a threat to all life in the galaxy!

First off, one of the big aspects that separates the first Guardians Of The Galaxy from Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is the music. The first film had incredibly distinct music that resonated and became inextricably tied with the scenes it was in. For all of the apparent popularity of "Awesome Mixtape Volume #2," the film's music is hardly as iconic or memorable as the works from the first movie. In fact, after watching the film, I could only recall two of the songs used in the movie and - unlike the first movie - my mind resonated with the thought that director James Gunn absolutely missed the mark on one of the musical cues. There is a big, key scene in Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 that features a bit of violence and one of the film's utterly unmemorable songs that would have been made absolutely hilarious and entirely memorable if James Gunn had used "It's Raining Men" in the scene. Seriously, there's arguably no bigger musical misstep in the film than that missed opportunity - and when viewing Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2, with that bug in your ear, it is virtually impossible not to watch the scene and imagine it with "It's Raining Men," laugh at how funny that would have been and then grimace at how the film's big moment there loses something by the musical piece that was worked in.

The only other major flaw in Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 - outside, perhaps, wasting any time in the film to seed a potential future incarnation of the Guardians Of The Galaxy - is that the story has so many characters to service that in giving each one adequate screentime and story points, the film has an unfortunately erratic flow. Gamora draws the short straw for the major characters, largely because Zoe Saldana's best character moments are reflections of Karen Gillan's Nebula's character growth. Gamora acts as a sidekick to Star-Lord before reacting to Nebula's surprisingly deep realization that her hatred for Gamora is very reasonable. Gamora's bits are peppered throughout Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 without her actually getting a very strong narrative of her own (though she does have some big action moments and, ultimately, some decent character moments).

Similarly, Drax begins Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 with an impressive number of the film's funniest lines before the movie gets packed with a slew of other character and plot threads. Drax has almost no presence in the film's middle and he comes back late in the film with retreads of some of his earlier jokes. Rocket is presented as taking the brunt of everyone's ire and lashing out obnoxiously, but his practical joke motivates almost all of the film's action. Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 devotes a significant amount of time to developing Yondu and utilizing Rocket as a foil for a whole "buddy comedy" subplot within the film. To be fair, Michael Rooker (Yondu) plays off the virtual Rocket amazingly well and Bradley Cooper's deliveries for Rocket have an impressive emotional range from snarky to hurt to goading in the funniest way imaginable.

Chris Pratt does well as Peter Quill, starting authoritative and moving fast into reasonably shaken by Ayesha's remarks about his heritage. Pratt has been thrust into the role of action hero and he rises to the occasion with good physical performances and - in some key moments as Peter learns about his father - acting through his facial expressions alone. Beyond that, Pratt plays to his comedic strengths is familiar deliveries of deadpan and sarcastic lines that made Quill memorable from the first film.

Newcomer to the Guardians team, Mantis, is an intriguing addition who is ultimately integral to Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2. Whether the character has enduring value beyond the specific story told in Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 remains to be seen, but she is utilized well in this film. And, despite being given lines that are variants of her one trick pony, Pom Klementieff delivers them with credible, wide-eyed innocence that plays as very funny. Klementieff and Dave Bautista have great on-screen chemistry as a rare successful comedic pairing of dual straightmen.

While Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 has a somewhat erratic plot execution as the various threads work to come together in a fairly predictable "stop the super-villain" way, the result is surprisingly satisfying. Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 finds the right balance between action-adventure violence and humor. Seeing the film in the theater, both my wife and I were shocked by the number of children being brought to Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2; it is not a soft PG-13. Between hilarious lines - "I have famously large turds!" - complex character motivations (are children truly likely to understand the motivation of the Celestial?!), a disproportionately large spider, and a fair amount of action violence, Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is not intended for kids.

But Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 is funny, has clever moments and the characters are motivated by surprisingly deep psychological factors. And for a film opening Summer Blockbuster Season - which is historically known for being vacuous and spectacle-based - it is hard to ask for more than what Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 delivers.

For other science fiction comedies, please check out my reviews of:
Ant-Man
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
Men In Black

8.5/10

For other elements of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, please check out my Marvel Cinematic Universe Review Index Page for a complete relative listing!

© 2017 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Worth The One Viewing: 10 Cloverfield Lane Is Interesting!

The Good: Performances, Mood, Plot development
The Bad: Limited concept appeal, Lack of genuine complexity, Mediocre characters
The Basics: 10 Cloverfield Lane is a clever glimpse back into the universe created in Cloverfield that works surprisingly well on its own!


Cloverfield (reviewed here!) is one of those films that I watched when it first hit theaters, reviewed, and spent no time beyond it considering. When the very first movie poster for 10 Cloverfield Lane was posted online, I rolled my eyes and thought that Cloverfield was a film that did not really require a sequel, so it seemed odd that the studio had bothered to make one. I wasted no time rushing out to see 10 Cloverfield Lane in the theaters (because one of the few things I recall about Cloverfield was nauseating angles on the big screen).

Now on Blu-Ray and DVD, I decided to watch 10 Cloverfield Lane because I like John Goodman and his presence in the film gave it an instant credibility. Besides Goodman's presence in the film, all I knew about 10 Cloverfield Lane before I sat down to watch it was that it was a very different film from Cloverfield. I envied the ambition of making a very different type of film from the "found footage" science fiction film to continue the franchise.

Michelle packs up a box of her possessions, leaves her engagement ring behind and drives off into the night. When her fiance calls, the call is disconnected moments before Michelle gets into a car accident. She awakens in a concrete room, an i.v. in her arm and her knee in a cast, handcuffed to the wall. After she manages to recover her smartphone from across the room, she is visited by a man who brings her food, crutches and the key to the handcuffs. He tells her that he intends to keep her alive and, despite what she says about her boyfriend, that no one is looking for her.

The man is Howard and he has a fully functional bunker where he is prepared to live out the catastrophic event that has occurred outside. Howard believes that there is either a chemical or nuclear attack, which has poisoned the air outside (as evidenced by two dead pigs within sight of the airlock door on the surface). Howard, Michelle, and a man named Emmett (who has a hurt arm) adapt to life in the bunker with Emmett revealing to Michelle that he saw what he believed was the attack and he fought to get into the bunker. Emmett helped Howard build the bunker and he believes Howard can help him survive. Michelle, convinced she heard a car above her bunker room, is unsettled by Howard. She remains unconvinced of the horrors outside until she tries to leave the bunker when a crazed woman, with a bloody face, tries to get into the bunker. Howard admits that he was responsible for Michelle's car accident and the two begin to bond over things like Michelle stitching Howard's head wound and going through the box of possessions Howard rescued from Michelle's car. After bonding for a bit, the bunker is shaken by something on the surface and Michelle has to go into the air ducts in order to restart the air filtration system. She is spooked, though, to find a message scratched into the glass of a window in the filtration room and an earring, which seems to belong to a local girl that Emmett knew went missing. Michelle and Emmett scavenge a shower curtain from the trash chute to build a contamination suit and gas mask to leave the bunker.

10 Cloverfield Lane is essentially a film that tries to keep the viewer guessing as to the nature of Howard's bunker. Is he a benevolent rescuer who accurately foresaw the potential of an impending apocalyptic event or is he a nutcase conspiracy theorist who has abducted Michelle? That type of film truly hinges on the characters in the film being interesting enough to carry long scenes of people simply interacting to make the viewer care as to what happens to them. 10 Cloverfield Lane does that well-enough to be watchable. There are plenty of moments in the film where the viewer is able to be immersed within the narrative of the three survivors in the bunker as opposed to simply thinking, "I wonder how this fits in to Cloverfield?"

John Gallagher Jr. is very good as Emmett. Gallagher might well be best known for his clean-shaven, upstanding, articulate character from The Newsroom, but in 10 Cloverfield Lane he plays a laborer who feel like he missed his chance to accomplish something. Emmett fought to get into the bunker and he plays fearful and ambitious and the character is just clever enough in some of the key, tense, scenes to be plausible. Gallagher is able to portray the wide range of emotions for the sometimes simple character very well.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead is fine as Michelle, but the truth is that Michelle is a very simple character. Most of Winstead's performance and time on screen is designed to make the viewer fearful for Michelle and Winstead does everything she needs to to make the viewer care. Michelle is vulnerable and the physical contrast between Winstead and Goodman is significant enough that the viewer worries instantly for her safety. As Winstead bugs out her eyes and breathes frantically, the concern the viewer has for Michelle intensifies.

10 Cloverfield Lane features a predictably diverse performance from John Goodman as Howard. Goodman has the range that keeps the viewer unsettled, wondering just who Howard actually is and what his motives actually are. Goodman plays Howard as alternately reserved and exhibiting a dangerous temper. Howard is an interesting foil for Michelle and Goodman finds the balance to play him to make him seem like someone who was shellshocked, but smartly prepared.

Ultimately, 10 Cloverfield Lane plays out as a somewhat predictable mindfuck. The film makes a final scene left turn from the drama-thriller that preceded it, but it works and is, at its worst, watchable.

For other works with John Gallagher Jr., please visit my reviews of:
The West Wing - Season 4
Jonah Hex
The Newsroom - Season 1
The Newsroom - Season 2
The Newsroom - Season 3

5.5/10

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

© 2016 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Yeah, It’s Propaganda: American Sniper Is NOT The Best Movie Of 2014!

The Good: Bradley Cooper’s performance, The direction is generally good
The Bad: So many of the lines are propaganda, Neglects complexity for archetypes, Racist
The Basics: American Sniper transforms Bradley Cooper in an impressive way . . . but does not give him a role worth the changes.


Those who know me know that I am a pacifist and one who is not at all interested in war movies. So, when I pledged to watch all eight films that were nominated for the Best Picture Oscar, the one I was (by far) least enthusiastic about watching was American Sniper. There was a pretty decent chance, going into American Sniper, that I would fall more into the camp of Michael Moore and Seth Rogen about the movie. I disagree with Moore’s comment on snipers being cowardly (though I understand why he would say that), but Rogen pretty much hit the nail on the head: American Sniper is little more than propaganda for much of the film.

And, having watched American Sniper, I suspect that part of the reason that so many people have so many issues with the film is that they treat criticism of the film as an attack on the military lifestyle. This review is about the film American Sniper and any references to Chris Kyle are for the character presented in the film, not the actual human being upon whom the film’s character is based. As a cinephile, though, what separates the pro-military American Sniper from a great film is its lack of subtlety. In American Sniper, the men are Men, the women are pliable and the film’s initial sense of moral ambiguity is quickly subdued by a macho, pro-America, post-9/11 “The military solution is the only patriotic answer” sensibility that focuses on a very monolithic and redneck viewpoint.

Opening with a U.S. convoy in Iraq being overseen by sniper Chris Kyle, tensions in Iraq are running high. When Kyle sees a boy being given a grenade, he has to shoot the boy. The film flashes back to Kyle’s indoctrination as a child where his father grooms him to be someone who ends fights and guides “the herd.” Following the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Tanzania, Kyle enlists and at 30 years old, he begins training to be a Navy SEAL. On the day he finishes his training, he goes to a bar where he meets Taya. After the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, Chris and Taya get married. Chris is almost immediately called to action in Iraq.

In Iraq, Chris becomes an efficient sniper, dispatching both the child and the woman from the opening scene. Kyle protects most of the Marines, though there is an Iraqi sniper who might be his match. Kyle assists and protects the Marines in Iraq. In the search for the Al Qaeda leader Zarqawi, Kyle and his team encounter the sniper (Mustafa) and Zarqawi’s lieutenant, who uses torture and intimidation to keep Iraqi citizens in-line. After the disastrous encounter, Kyle returns home, but cannot adapt to life back with his wife. Kyle continues to return to Iraq, hunting Mustafa and insurgents there while neglecting his wife and newborn son.

In many ways, American Sniper is Moby Dick for the military crowd. Virtually all of Kyle’s lines could be lifted from recruiting posters as he dehumanizes the Iraqis and focuses exclusively on the idea that somewhere in the world, America is a war . . . and he’s not there. Whenever he is not in Iraq, he is preoccupied with it and Mustafa is Kyle’s White Whale. Kyle is not a sympathetic character in that his actions are never reflected upon in a way that makes his actions seem deep. In fact, in dialogue with one of the Marines working in Iraq, Kyle’s banal assertion that “there is evil here” is put into proper perspective (“there is evil everywhere”) without any acceptable counterpoint.

American Sniper is geared toward a very specific demographic. That demographic is one that might be amused by beefy military men throwing darts at each other’s bare backs . . . as opposed to horrified by that. What makes American Sniper feel like propaganda is how monolithic it is. The five minute montage of kills when Chris Kyle arrives in Iraq (a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks featured two scenes prior) is treated without any sophistication: all of the people shot are would-be killers, suicide bombers, etc. There is no ambiguity or complexity and Kyle does not reflect at all while in the field upon the killing he has done.

Perhaps the most disappointing moment in American Sniper, for me, was the moment Sam Jaeger appears on screen. While I certainly respect an actor wanting to get away from a role, Jaeger is impressive and deep in his role on Parenthood (season five is reviewed here!); seeing him go from a role where he plays an emotionally-evolved character to a monolithic soldier-type hardly seems like career growth.

Director Clint Eastwood does a decent-enough job with American Sniper. American Sniper looks good-enough, which is good because the dialogue in the film is atrocious. Iraquis are referred to almost exclusively in racist terms, women are called “bitches” a disturbing number of times and the character version of Kyle is treated like a superhero who is good at all aspects of the military job (in addition to sniping, he goes door to door with Marines, performs interrogations, etc.). Eastwood, however, does not know the difference between a comic book and a graphic novel (individual issues of comic books are, in fact, comic books; graphic novels are the compilations) – which makes for pretty

Moreover, there is a distinctly un-American quality to American Sniper. Our Third Amendment (placed above our protective right against self incrimination!) protects American Citizens from having to quarter soldiers. In American Sniper, American soldiers take over Iraqi houses, basically keeping their citizens under house arrest in their own homes. The only justification within the film? Of course, they are insurgents, too!

Bradley Cooper does a fine job as Chris Kyle. It’s not a great role, but it is a very different one from those that he has had. Anyone who became a fan of Cooper from Alias (reviewed here!) will find the actor utterly unrecognizable, both in his physical performance and his character style. But good acting doesn’t make the film less propaganda.

For other films currently in theaters, please check out my reviews of:
To Write Love On Her Arms
The Last Five Years
The Voices
Love, Rosie
The Seventh Son
Song One
Project Almanac

3/10

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.
| | |

If The Avengers Were Made As A Science Fiction Comedy: Guardians Of The Galaxy!

The Good: Good humor, Decent soundtrack, Good plot development
The Bad: Rather obvious (and rushed) character development, Nothing exceptional in terms of performances, Distracting 3-D in several points
The Basics: Guardians Of The Galaxy further expands the Marvel Cinematic Universe while amusing viewers . . . without resonating the same way as the prior installments.


Guardians Of The Galaxy has a number of reasonable comparisons to the giant Marvel film The Avengers (reviewed here!), not just because both are set within the same storytelling universe. The Marvel Cinematic Universe was established in Phase One (reviewed here!) as a surprisingly grounded place: Tony Stark needed time to train within his suit of armor, Steve Rogers was a unique warrior set in place as the only stopgap against an army powered by an extraterrestrial device and for the bulk of his time on Earth, Thor was without his godlike powers. For all of the supernatural and comic book conceits that exist in science fiction and comic book movies, the Marvel Cinematic Universe did not employ most of them (save in the Hulk movies, which is arguably why they failed). In other words, most of the Marvel Cinematic Universe strove to generally recreate the real world and then add slight twists to it and explore how “real people” and the “real world” would react to those twists.

Until the climax of The Avengers, when an interstellar alien force invades, and outside the climactic event of Thor: The Dark World (reviewed here!), the Marvel Cinematic Universe has worked hard to keep a realist sensibility to itself. Taking an entirely different tact is the new addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Guardians Of The Galaxy. Guardians Of The Galaxy, as the name implies, is set (mostly) in the farthest reaches of the galaxy (where a sizable population still looks mostly human) and explores the larger consequences of the artifacts that the other films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe have been introducing. Those artifacts, like the Tesseract and the seed in the Thor sequel, are given an explicit name in Guardians Of The Galaxy: they are Infinity Stones (which Marvel geeks knew years ago). Guardians Of The Galaxy introduces another one and reveals what their purpose is . . . along with the motivation Thanos had for hunting the Tesseract in The Avengers. More than just in its outlandish setting, Guardians Of The Galaxy transforms the Marvel Cinematic Universe into a much less grounded place. Guardians Of The Galaxy feels like exactly what it is: a film based on a comic book.

That is not to say Guardians Of The Galaxy is not good. It is. Guardians Of The Galaxy is a fun and funny science fiction comedy, continuing the tradition of the niche genre like Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (reviewed here!) or Men In Black (reviewed here!). Unlike the former, Guardians Of The Galaxy lacks a sense of theme and universal resonance and treads more toward entertainment than enlightenment.

Opening in 1988, Peter Quill’s mother dies and the young boy flees into the night where he is promptly abducted by aliens. Twenty-six years later, Quill is scavenging on a dead world where he recovers an orb from the ruins. Moments after he gets the item he was sent for, he squares off against Korath and his forces. Evading them and retreating to his ship, the Milano, Quill decides to betray his employer and sell the recovered Orb on his own. While Quill heads to Xandar to sell the Orb, the villainous alien Ronan dispatches Gamora (who volunteers) to recover it. When the potential buyer for the Orb freaks out – after learning Ronan is after the artifact – Quill is attacked by Gamora, a sentient genetically-modified, cybernetically enhanced raccoon named Rocket and his humanoid plant companion Groot, and the Nova police force.

The quartet is imprisoned on a remote world, the Kyln, where virtually everyone wants to kill Gamora, especially Drax The Destroyer. Quill manages to save Gamora’s life and refocuses Drax on finding and killing Ronin. The quintet stages an incredible escape from the Kyln by working together, with the four aliens actually waiting for Quill when he goes back for his prized mix tape. Hunted by Ronan, Quill’s regular employer Yondu Udonta and the police force from Nova, Quill and his compatriots become determined to keep the Orb from falling into the hands of Ronan and Thanos when Ronan reveals that the Orb contains an Infinity Stone with virtually unlimited power to destroy. Working together, Quill, Gamora, Drax, Rocket and Groot must protect the citizens of Xandar from the genocidal plans of Ronan and Thanos.

In many ways, Guardians Of The Galaxy is a very typical science fiction film. In fact, its reliance upon humor makes it fun, but also as formulaic as virtually every comedy to grace the big screen . . . ever. Guardians Of The Galaxy transforms the Marvel Cinematic Universe simply by realigning the physics of the galaxy to allow virtually every comic book conceit as opposed to conforming to realistic physics. That makes the fight scenes in Guardians Of The Galaxy extraordinarily dynamic and animated, especially when Groot and Rocket are involved. They hop around without clear boundaries on their abilities (Groot, for example, is entirely inscrutable and only reveals the extent of his powers and abilities when they become relevant and necessary).

Peter Quill is a decent anti-hero; he does the right thing when it suits him, but he is a Han Solo-esque bounty hunter who also strangles small animals to use them as microphones when the mood takes him. In his quest to get respect in the galactic underground as Star Lord, Quill does not actually distinguish himself in any strong or meaningful way. Less the function of his personality or values, Quill manages to survive Guardians Of The Galaxy simply by biology. Heavily alluded to in the film’s very first scene, Peter Quill is not simply a human, but his heritage is only a minor subplot in the larger film.

Far more of a component of Guardians Of The Galaxy is establishing and then defying the premises of the universe and characters Peter Quill is a part of. In this regard, Guardians Of The Galaxy is painfully formulaic. Elements that are established in an obvious way include Groot’s limited vocabulary (he, we are told, only speaks the three words “I am Groot,” though Rocket seems able to interpret what he means by it as the film goes on), Gamora’s absolute refusal to dance, and the obviously seeded gift Quill receives from his dying mother that he has not opened over the lapsed twenty-six years. For sure, viewers need a film with character development to make any movie worth watching, but Guardians Of The Galaxy is like watching a checklist of the elements that are used to establish the characters getting checked off. Virtually everything established about a character, up to and including Drax’s lifelong struggle with metaphor, is defied by the film’s end. Guardians Of The Galaxy is obviously intended to build a franchise, but the way the film ends, there is almost nowhere to go for the characters that will not force the writers to completely redefine them. This would be analogous to Bruce Banner learning to control his ability to transform in Hulk (such an ability would have left the character with nothing compelling for The Incredible Hulk or The Avengers). So, in some ways, Guardians Of The Galaxy undoes its own attempt to build a franchise by making a solid (if formulaic) story.

In a similar fashion, Guardians Of The Galaxy is nothing extraordinary on the acting front. John C. Reilly is (mostly) goofy as the Nova Police Officer Dey and Glenn Close is appropriately authoritative as Nova Prime, the leader of Xandar. Djimon Hounsou plays the villainous Korath with virtually the same presence that he has played many other adversaries over the years. The film’s lead, Chris Pratt, plays Quill as an everyman and he does so with a similarly goofy quality (but without the slouch) to his character from Parks And Recreation. Even Zoe Saldana (who plays Gamora) is used in such a familiar way that director James Gunn doesn’t even bother hiding the allusion to her playing Uhura by throwing her in a miniskirt at the movie’s end.

Guardians Of The Galaxy is charming and worth watching, but it is hardly a great and enduring film the way some other, recent super hero films have managed to be.

For other works in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, please check out my reviews of:
Ant-Man
Captain America: Civil War
Doctor Strange
Iron Fist - Season 1
"What If . . . " - Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D.

7/10

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

© 2014 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.
| | |

Ending Charmless, The Hangover Part III Resolves The Franchise On A Downbeat.

The Good: The acting is fine, The action elements work.
The Bad: Not at all funny, Characters get substantially dumber than in previous versions, Does not feel fresh or original in any way.
The Basics: With The Hangover Part III, the franchise comes to an unremarkable, unfunny, action-adventure end.


My instinct when The Hangover Part III was released was to suggest that Jeffrey Tambor was having a very good month. After all, with Netflix releasing the long-awaited fourth season of Arrested Development (reviewed here!) and the cinematic release of The Hangover Part III, Jeffrey Tambor’s star is once more in a prominent position. But, fans burned through the new Arrested Development in hours and Tambor is in, at best, two minutes of The Hangover Part III. In fact, it is the abrupt death of his character, Alan’s father, that sets off the road trip that is the centerpiece of the Hangover franchise adventures.

The Hangover Part III promises viewers it is the end to the story of Phil, Stu, Alan, and (to a much lesser extent) Doug (and a much more significant extent Mr. Chow) that was begun in The Hangover (reviewed here!) and continued in a clunky way with The Hangover Part 2 (reviewed here!). While The Hangover Part III goes to great lengths to try to convince the viewer that The Hangover was the first part in an intended trilogy instead of a runaway summer comedy hit that was then exploited for two mediocre sequels, the relationship between the third film and its predecessors is much more flimsy than fans might want to admit.

First and foremost, in order to make the various conceits of The Hangover Part III work, much of the characterization established in The Hangover had to be thrown out. That is to say that The Hangover was essentially the story of three guys who are roofied, lose a night of their life and spend the subsequent day(s) desperately trying to assemble the clues to piece together what the hell happened to them so they can take responsibility for their actions and recover their lost friend. It’s basically two smart guys and an idiot thrown into a bad situation and acting as detectives in order to find a missing friend . . . with hilarious results. In The Hangover Part III, Phil (especially) and Stu lose most of their innate intelligence in order for their characters to abide by the conceits which allow them to be exploited by the villainous Mr. Chow. In fact, the moment Marshall, who was alluded to in a throwaway line in The Hangover presents the story of gold that was split up and stolen from him, the film heads in painfully obvious directions. If your audience is smarter than the characters and sees the villain’s plan immediately, it undermines the interest one is able to keep in the movie. Sadly, that is exactly what happens with The Hangover Part III.

Opening in Thailand, Mr. Chow makes a daring escape from prison. After killing a giraffe he just bought and causing a nightmare for his father, Alan is reunited with his “wolfpack” for his father’s funeral. Following the funeral, Doug convinces Stu and Phil to help him get Alan to a mental health facility in Arizona. Unfortunately, en route, they are hijacked by Black Doug’s employer, Marshall. Marshall is hunting for Chow, who stole some $21million dollars in gold from him years prior. Marshall keeps Doug as collateral and he tasks Stu, Phil and Alan with finding Mr. Chow. As it happens, Chow recently texted Alan and the trio finds him easily enough.

With Doug’s life in the balance, Chow tells the trio that he needs them to break into his old house to get the gold he stole from Marshall and the three do so . . . until the most obvious double-cross in the world. Set up by Chow, Phil, Alan, and Stu witness Marshall’s brutality and know that he is serious about killing their friend Doug. Tracking Phil’s phone back to Las Vegas, Alan hits on a pawn shop owner and Stu calls in a favor from Jade to track Chow to Caesars. There, the men confront Chow and chase him around Las Vegas with the goal of capturing him and delivering him to Marshall.

There is a noticeable change of tone in The Hangover Part III, certainly as it relates to The Hangover (the truth is The Hangover Part 2 was so forgettable that I cannot make comparisons now, years after its initial release); The Hangover Part III is largely not funny and for most of the film, it does not even try. Instead, this is a remarkably straightforward action movie with the occasional flat-falling joke thrown in. Given how the movie meanders back to Las Vegas and devotes time and attention to the characters getting excited about “Black Doug,” Jade, and the now not-baby “Carlos,” The Hangover Part III stands poorly on its own and instead strives to remind the viewer of the superior film they enjoyed years before. At its best, The Hangover Part III is a series of loosely held together allusions to The Hangover without (until the mid-credits scene) the usual everybody is drugged and wakes up to discover horrible things have happened conceit. Instead, The Hangover Part III is a remarkably straightforward hostage negotiation action adventure movie in many ways. It just happens that the main antagonist is a bit ridiculous.

What is not ridiculous is Marshall, played with usual greatness by John Goodman. Goodman manages to steal the few scenes he is in and add a real sense of menace (albeit somewhat predictable in the reversals he both initiates and is subject to) to The Hangover Part III. Goodman’s Marshall provides the film’s ticking clock and it is far more compelling than simply “man might be late for his own wedding.”

The rest of the acting is fine. Melissa McCarthy’s somewhat understated role as Cassie plays off the more familiar role of Alan well. McCarthy and Zach Galifianakis have decent on-screen chemistry. The others – Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Ken Jeong – reprise their roles well, but give the viewer nothing we have not already seen before. And given that The Hangover Part III is supposed to be Alan’s big emotional journey, Galifianakis is a bit underwhelming, but it is hard to blame him for it. After all, it is not Galifianakis’s fault that he does not repeatedly deliver lines about Alan being in mourning for his father. Instead, after the set-up and a casual reference to it in two subsequent scenes, the death of the most important person in Alan’s life has no resonating effect on the character. So, Galifianakis plays the role of Alan as he always has and he manages not to infuse the character with so much growth that we feel like we are watching It’s Kind Of A Funny Story (reviewed here!) again.

Ultimately, The Hangover Part III is an homage to itself and it succeeds in concluding the franchise in a very different, if humorless, way: may it rest in peace.

For other works featuring Melissa McCarthy, please check out my reviews of:
The Heat
Identity Thief
This Is 40
Bridesmaids
Gilmore Girls
White Oleander
Charlie's Angels
Go

4/10

Check out how this movie stacks up against others I have reviewed by visiting my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 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.
| | |

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That is certainly not me!

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

5.5/10

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

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

Oscar Pandering Season Officially Starts With The Words

The Good: Excellent sense of realism, Interesting characters, Wonderful performances
The Bad: Pacing goes off in the late-middle/early-end and never quite recovers.
The Basics: The Words is a legitimate Oscar contender, though it falls apart in the end, it is riveting until it does!


Oscar Pandering Season, a time of year I usually enjoy, is the only major movie releases season that is broken down into two parts. Only a few years ago, Oscar Pandering Season was Thanksgiving through the end of the year. But, in recent years, with the release of films like The Social Network (reviewed here!) and The Help (reviewed here!) in late August and September, other studios have followed suit and realized that they might not have to drop all of their attempts for Best Picture nods right before the Academy voters have to nominate their favorite films of the year! This year, September – which historically was a weaker movie season filled with date movies and horror flicks – is packed with films from both the major studios and art houses that are geared toward getting nominations for Oscars.

The first obvious attempt to score the Oscar nods is The Words. The Words has a number of elements that would make it a fine Best Picture nominee and is lightyears better than The Artist (reviewed here!), though it is not a truly great movie. Bradley Cooper getting a Best Actor nomination and Jeremy Irons getting (I’d lean, at this point toward him winning) a Best Supporting Actor nod are pretty sure bets. The Words makes excellent use out of them and, very briefly, Zoe Saldana. Honestly, Zoe Saldana and Bradley Cooper suddenly started popping up in everything, so it is pretty amazing that it has taken them this long to appear in a movie together!

Clay Hammond is a famous author who is reading his new novel, The Words to a captivated audience of the literary elite. The story of his novel focuses on Rory Jansen, a writer who will win the American Fellowship Of Arts And Letters award. Five years before that, he is a struggling novelist who moves into a New York City loft with his girlfriend, Dora. Struggling with his writing for years, he is eventually financially cut off by his father, who insists he get a regular paying job. Rory starts work at a major publishing house working in the mailroom and he spends his days delivering packages throughout the building, which exhausts him until his writing aspirations are pretty much dead.

But on his honeymoon in Paris, he finds an old leather briefcase and Dora buys it for him. Returning home, he learns that a prestigious agency is eager to meet with him and when he attends that meeting, he is heartbroken to learn that his submitted novel is great, but not marketable. So, Rory begins putting his life in order and when he is filing papers into the briefcase, he discovers a manuscript there. That manuscript moves him and when he becomes obsessed with it, he transcribes it on his computer. There, Dora finds it and insists that he publish it. While Rory tries initially to tell her the truth, her pride in “his” abilities leads him to promote the manuscript as his own and one favor from the in-house agent, Joseph Cutler, puts him on the path that will make him a huge success. But all of his success teeters when he meets an old man: the author of the mysteriously found manuscript!

The Words is poignant in its realism, both for the continual rejection of being a writer and the strain that the poverty of the young writer puts on relationships. Dora and Rory do not have it easy and it does not take long before it becomes clear that (after a certain point) Dora is financially supporting the couple. In fact, one of the weaknesses in The Words is how it fails to explore the struggle Dora might have in supporting Rory, especially as they live an impoverished lifestyle. Say what you will about women’s lib, but the psychological backlash against a woman supporting an artistic husband is pretty huge and that The Words neglects to address that explicitly weakens an otherwise powerfully realistic experience that dominates the first half of the film.

The sense of realism is compelling and, for those who have lived it, potentially difficult to watch. Co-writers and directors Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal absolutely nail the reality of constant rejection and the sense of constant strain it puts on a relationship. The first half of The Words should be mandatory viewing for anyone who is considering getting into a relationship with a serious writer.

Dennis Quaid draws the short straw for the acting and character fronts. His character, Clay Hammond, all but admits that he is useless to the piece. Hammond serves, more often than not, as the narrator and it speaks to the use of actors as tools for selling the film to audiences that Olivia Wilde manages to get billing as high as she does for the narrator’s seductress, Daniella. Quaid does what he can with the lame roll, but part of the problem with The Words comes from the movie shifting focus from his characters to him.

Conversely, Zoe Saldana’s Dora has a significant presence only in the first act of The Words, but she shines in the role. Saldana’s Dora is something the actress is not known for; subtle, quiet, nuanced. In the dishwashing scene she shares with Bradley Cooper is a powerful emotional expression between their characters largely because of her body language. Jeremy Irons dominates the second act as The Old Man in much the same way. While it is fairly obvious who he is from the opening moments of the film, when Irons’s character follows Rory to Central Park, he begins to steal the show.

But it is Bradley Cooper who is charged with making The Words work and he pulls it off. For sure, the movie has problems – largely by trying to make Hammond more important than he actually is to the viewers – but Cooper is not one of them. Cooper makes the fictional character of Rory Jansen memorable and intriguing. Never before have I seen Bradley Cooper pull off quiet and emotional the way he does in The Words and he is truly magnificent in the role.

The Words may be Oscar nomination bait, but it kicks off the season by setting the bar high enough to make the next few months an exciting time to go to the movies. And, The Words is so engaging that by the time it takes a turn for the problematic, the viewer is already hooked and we, like Daniella, must know how it ends.

For other films focusing on writers, please check out my reviews of:
Adaptation.
Wonderboys
Young Adult

7.5/10

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

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