I've complained before about how independent film has become just as cookie cutter as mainstream movies, mainly the quirky lead character blueprint. "Waitress" follows that and also include the assortment of quirky supporting cast that often fills the bill. Jenna (Keri Russell) is a waitress in a pie diner, who also has a talent for creating interesting pies of her own. As the movie opens, she learns she is pregnant. She is not thrilled with the news, as she is in the middle of a horrible marriage to an abusive husband (Jeremy Sisto), who may also be one of the most irritating characters on film (HONK, HONK, HONK!!). The movie follows us through her pregnancy and her incredibly inappropriate relationship with her obstetrician (Nathan Fillion), along with the struggles of dealing with her husband, who she wants nothing more than to get away from. The setting in the deep south and its offbeat people makes this slightly reminiscent of the work of the Coen Brothers, except not nearly as good. As "chick flicks" go, this one is better than most. Andy Griffith (who has become so old he is almost unrecognizable) is one of the bright spots of the movie as the eccentric old man who owns the diner and always seems to be able to read exactly what is going on in Jenna's life. He informally becomes her conscience, giving her unsolicited advice based on what he believes she is up to (and seems to always be right). The odd pacing and storytelling (pies are often shown being made with voice-over to explain how those pies reflect her feelings) took a little getting used to, as did the diner setting which was way too similar to the TV show "Alice". The bottom line is that this is a pretty good "chick flick", but at the end of the day, it IS a "chick flick".
Hack movie critic time: Here are some other possible titles for "The Forbidden Kingdom": "Lord of the Mings" or "The Dragon of Oz". Basically, this film follows the "quest" blueprint of those films and has many common themes. Of course, the source material for this movie comes from Chinese folklore and probably pre-dates either of those films or the books they were based on. "The Forbidden Kingdom" unites Jackin Chan and Jet Li for the first time on film. While they come from very different martial art film backgrounds (Chan is usually in lighter, fun martial arts film, while Li leans toward more darker fare), the collaboration works very well. The film begins with the story of Jason Tripitikas (Michael Angarano), a boy in South Boston obsessed with kung fu movies, who finds himself forced by neighborhood thugs to help them rob a Chinese pawn shop he frequents. During the robbery, he is given an ancient staff by the store owner (Jackie Chan) and told to return it to its rightful owner. He finds himself transported to China many years in the past (the exact time period is unclear), where he meets a drunken master (Jackie Chan), who will assist him in his quest. The "rightful owner" of the staff is the Monkey King (Jet Li), who is being held after being transformed to stone. Along the way, they meet The Silent Monk (Jet Li) and Golden Sparrow (Yifei Liu), who also agree to assist them on their mission. Along the way, they are met with many obstacles and good old-fashioned adventure as Jason is taught the ways of "gung-fu". This is a very fun adventure film and I was actually very impressed with the performances of Jackie Chan and Jet Li. They really complemented each other perfectly in this film and their differing styles meshed very well. As far as the films referenced earlier, this is a little darker in tone than "The Wizard of Oz" and not quite as dark as "The Lord of the Rings". This movie is a fun adventure story where you actually get to learn a little bit about some of the characters that make up Chinese folklore.
It's been out for 10 years and I have finally gotten around to seeing "American History X". While I am a big Edward Norton fan, there is one scene in the film that is so brutal, just hearing about it made me avoid the film. While the scene in question was brutal, it was merely one of several scenes of brutality and ugliness. Edward Norton plays Derek Vinyard, a vehement racist who leads a group of white supremacists in urban Los Angeles. When he violently confronts a group of black men who are breaking into his car, he finds himself going to prison for his actions. While he is in prison, his younger brother, Danny (Edward Furlong), becomes more and more deeply involved with the gang of white supremacists. When Derek is released, he is hailed as a returning hero but he is a very changed man. He no longer believes in the extreme racism he once championed and is driven to get his brother back on the straight and narrow. His transformation is so complete, it actually comes off as unrealistic. This was a bad dude, hell-bent at being on the forefront of the race war and now, he is a reasonable man who hates all that he once stood for. It does not seem realistic that such a complete reversal would take place while in prison. Using black-and-white flashbacks, the film does an excellent job at explaining this transformation, while also detailing the genesis of his hatred. Edward Norton and Edward Furlong are fantastic in this film. People familiar with Ethan Suplee from "My Name is Earl" and several Kevin Smith films will be amazed by the utterly reprehensible character he plays in this film. There are also very good performances by Stacy Keach, Beverly D'Angelo, Elliot Gould and Avery Brooks, who has been a personal favorite of mine since his role as "Hawk" in "Spenser: For Hire". If you having been living under a rock like I have with regards to this movie, I highly recommend getting up to speed and seeing this powerful film.
Screenwriter/director David Mamet explores the corrupt world of prize-fighting, using Mixed Martial Arts as the setting, in this gripping drama. Mike Terry (ChiwetelEjiofor) is an honorable jiu-jitsu instructor struggling to make ends meet as his gym is struggling. An incident in his gym starts a chain of events that have him faced with the prospect of losing everything. Reluctantly, he accepts a proposal to enter the undercard of a mixed martial arts event, where he comes face to face with the corruption that exists in the fight game. Despite being rooted in martial arts, this is not an action film, by any means. It is a slow moving, yet riveting human drama of a man faced with the dilemma of doing what is right, against heavy pressures to take the easy way out. Ejiofor, a very unknown actor, is straddled with the task of carrying this film as he appears in almost every scene and he pulls it off beautifully. His struggles, his confusion, his agony are all written on his face and there to illustrate the tough choices he faces. The plot has several twists, some of which are shocking, which help keep your interest in this movie glued, even as the plot itself moves along slowly. While it seems there are several subplots going on, the strings of these all get tied together, showing them to be all related. Mamet has a great writing resume ("Glengary Glen Ross") and this is one of those films where the star of the film is the script. The dialogue is well-written and the plot, while intricate, is never confusing. While I do not follow mixed martial arts fighting, this did not deter one bit from the movie. This story might have worked equally well with a boxing backdrop, but the philosophies and teachings of martial arts help to set up some of the dilemmas faced by the main character.
There are several reasons not to bother with this movie: it was not screened for critics, it did horrible box office and the theater-to-DVD turnaround time was very quick. Those are usually the ingredients for a horrible movie. There is only one reason to actually give the movie a chance: It is actually pretty funny. Using the framework of the first "Spider-Man" film, "Superhero Movie" spoofs the comic-book movie genre and actually does so pretty effectively. One of the problems with many of these modern spoof movies is a tendency to throw everything into the mix to see what sticks, paying no attention to whether any of it makes sense or maintaining narrative flow. "Superhero Movie" goes back to the "Airplane!" method of spoofing the genre while telling the story in a cohesive way. Make no mistake, the comparison to "Airplane!" does not put this film in that class. Many of these films, e.g, "Scary Movie" try too hard to shoe-horn as many movie references as possible, whether they fit or not. "Superhero movie" at least sticks to the genre it is spoofing and rarely makes a tangent just to fit something else in. Two instances where it does so are a Tom Cruise You-Tube spoof that is actually pretty funny and a Pamela Anderson cameo that is really not. The Pamela Anderson cameo is part of an X-Men tangent that the movie could have done without. Another problem with the movie is, surprisingly, Leslie Nielsen. With "Airplane!" and "The Naked Gun" on his resume, he is arguably a master of the spoof genre. However, somewhere along the way, he forgot the basic element to what made those films a success: Play the comedy straight. In "Superhero Movie", he is way over the top, making him sort of a parody of himself. The bottom line is that this a much-maligned movie, sometime for good reason, but one that actually made me laugh quite a few times. It is hardly a great movie, but no nearly as bad as you may have been led to believe.
"Vantage Point" refers to the different points of view individuals have of the same event. This storytelling device was made famous by the Japanese film "Rashomon". In this instance, the event in question is the shooting of an American President (William Hurt) when appearing at an anti-terrorism summit in Spain. The movie opens with the arrival of the President, protected by his Secret Service detail, Thomas Barnes (Dennis Quaid) and Kent Taylor (Matthew Fox). For Barnes, it is his first assignment on the presidential detail since recovering from a bullet he took for the President some time ago (apparently, people like shooting at this president). The story continues to the shooting, followed by some explosions as we have a full-scale terrorist attack. Then, the movie stops and starts again as we see this unfold from another vantage point. This happens around five or six times, so it does get a little frustrating watching the same thing happen over and over and over again. They do manage to feed little details each time to keep it interesting. Once we have gone through all of the different viewpoints, the rest of the film is non-stop action as the Secret Service, led by Barnes, close in on the bad guys. There are a couple of interesting plot twists, some of which you don't see coming (one of which is a bit of a "cheat", but I can't expand on that without giving it away). The cast is very good and this is an entertaining movie overall. It is not without some problems, however. One issue was the character of Howard Lewis (Forest Whitaker), an American tourist with a video camera who, for some reason, decides he is the only man that can save the world. The things he does as the movie unfolds are just not realistic at all. One of the other issues was one particular dialogue exchange. The President is being pressured by one of his National Security staffers (Bruce McGill) to give an order to strike a suspected terrorist camp. "We have to act strong", he says. "No, we have to BE strong", the President responds, "We have the world on our side, we must respect that and not squander it." It was an incredibly transparent dig at the current administration and actually took me out of the movie. Why Hollywood insists on doing stuff like this is beyond me. If you can get past seeing the same events over and over for a while, though, you have a pretty entertaining movie.
The Saturday Night Live duo of Tina Fey and Amy Poehler move to the big screen in this surrogate mother comedy. Fey plays Kate Holbrook, a successful career-driven woman who decides she wants to have a baby. After striking out using sperm donor services, she finds a service that provides surrogate mothers. Enter Angie Ostrowiski (Poehler), a lower income, much less sophisticated woman with boyfriend (Dax Shepard) issues. After being implanted with embryos to carry for Kate, she ends up leaving her boyfriend and ends up having to live with Kate. This bascially sets up the tried-and-true "Odd Couple" scenario for most of the rest of the film. There are a few subplots and, of course, an eventual romantic interest (Greg Kinnear), but most of the story and comedy revolves around the chemistry of Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, who clearly enjoy working together and seem to be having fun in this film. It is not laugh-out-loud funny and sort of leans more toward the "chick flick"genre, but it still works. It would definitely be funnier for women who have had children and even the men who shared the experience with them as they hit all of the points parents end up talking about: lamaze classes, eating right, and even the childbirthing videos that almost look like amateur porn. Overall, a funny movie and a good excuse for these two to work together again.
I've complained before about how independent film has become just as cookie cutter as mainstream movies, mainly the quirky lead character blueprint. "Waitress" follows that and also include the assortment of quirky supporting cast that often fills the bill. Jenna (Keri Russell) is a waitress in a pie diner, who also has a talent for creating interesting pies of her own. As the movie opens, she learns she is pregnant. She is not thrilled with the news, as she is in the middle of a horrible marriage to an abusive husband (Jeremy Sisto), who may also be one of the most irritating characters on film (HONK, HONK, HONK!!). The movie follows us through her pregnancy and her incredibly inappropriate relationship with her obstetrician (Nathan Fillion), along with the struggles of dealing with her husband, who she wants nothing more than to get away from. The setting in the deep south and its offbeat people makes this slightly reminiscent of the work of the Coen Brothers, except not nearly as good. As "chick flicks" go, this one is better than most. Andy Griffith (who has become so old he is almost unrecognizable) is one of the bright spots of the movie as the eccentric old man who owns the diner and always seems to be able to read exactly what is going on in Jenna's life. He informally becomes her conscience, giving her unsolicited advice based on what he believes she is up to (and seems to always be right). The odd pacing and storytelling (pies are often shown being made with voice-over to explain how those pies reflect her feelings) took a little getting used to, as did the diner setting which was way too similar to the TV show "Alice". The bottom line is that this is a pretty good "chick flick", but at the end of the day, it IS a "chick flick".
