You can bet that the major studios have been looking at the movie career of multimedia mogul Tyler Perry very closely. Particularly those big box office numbers. For the last few years Perry has become a major Hollywood power player with his low budget, big grossing  films. Most of these have been adaptations of his stage productions that tour the country playing for a couple of performances to very enthusiastic, mostly black audiences. Many are little morality dramas spiced up with comedy (often with Perry himself in drag as that force of nature Madea-very broad comedy) and religious lessons (with an occasional hymn or song). Now the big studios hope to tap into that market with a mix of Perry, and a dash of TV’s “American Idol” and “Glee” with a pinch or two of FOOTLOOSE. The end result is a cinematic stew called JOYFUL NOISE, which might tickle the taste buds of many moviegoers. Or not.

When the cameras dolly (wait for it!) down the streets of sleepy Pacashau, Georgia we see the results of the economic down turn with many of the main street stores boarded up and plastered with ” Going Out of Business ” signs. But things are hoppin’ at the Pacashau Divinity Church with the singin’ and testifyin’ rainbow-hued choir (no racial tensions in this peach-flavored Brigadoon) led by Bernard Sparrow (Kris Kristofferson). But before the hymn is finished (hey, before the last of the opening credits) Sparrow has taken wing. The solemn, sometimes stuffy pastor (Courtney B. Vance) passes over widow G.G. Sparrow ( Dolly Parton ) for the position of choir director and appoints Vi Rose (Queen Latifah), the first of several conflicts between the two earth mothers (kind of like Stallone and Snipes facing off in DEMOLITION MAN). Vi Rose is a hardworkin’ mom and nurse (Dad has re-upped at a military base far,far away) trying to raise two kids: her rebellious sixteen year old daughter Olivia (Keke Palmer), who’s the choir’s big voiced MVP, and her kid brother Walter (Dexter Darden), whose Asperger’s syndrome compels him to rattle off music history one-hit-wonder trivia. As if things weren’t complicated enough, G.G.’s teenage grandson Randy (Jeremy Jordan) arrives in town after his mom kicked him out of his NYC home. He’s gonna’ shake things up and make em’ kick off their Sunday shoes (Oops. Well, it does seem that he stumbled on to this set right from the FOOTLOOSE remake auditions). Randy takes an immediate interest in the choir especially Olivia (Conflict #2!) . And before you can say “Conflict #3,”  Randy (and G.G.) are pushing Vi Rose to move away from the “traditional” spirituals and get down with gospel versions of pop tunes. I mean that’s the only way they’re gonna’ make it past those pesky regionals (aren’t those “Glee” kids always worked up about them?) and head on to the national finals (cue another TV bit from “American Idol” – “Welcome to Hollywood!”). I mean the poor, out-of-work folks back in Pacashau are a countin’ on them!

The many diverse elements in this film seem to bump, and often crash, into each other making for a sloppy, disjointed wreck of a film. At times it did seem like the first season of a new musical “dramedy” TV show called “The Church Choir” all mashed up into two long hours.  Like episodic TV, besides the main leads we get the wacky choir second-stringers (one repeats everything, another believes her lovin’ is fatal- a literal killer “booty”, there’s a break-dancin’ good ole’ boy, and an Asian who talks like Jethro Bodine- it’s pure comedy gold!) The stars do their best, but are hampered by the cliche’ ridden script. It seems as though Latifah’s Vi Rose is delivering sermons to other characters rather than conversing with them. She’s constantly ’ speech-ifying’. Dolly’s still playing the sweet, feisty, down-home, trashy-dressin’ gal, but is saddled with lots of tired corn-pone idioms and adages. I couldn’t help, but be distracted and saddened by her appearance, which is referenced a few times in the dialogue (Dolly’s G.G. says, “God didn’t make plastic surgeons to starve!”). It’s a shame that actors (male and female) don’t allow themselves to age gracefully (and have a mobile face instead of a plastic kabuki-like mask). This film is the second to explore Asperger’s in the past few weeks (after EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE), but here it seems to be more of a plot device to bring the two young love birds together. Most of the time Walter wears shades (resembling Jamie Foxx in RAY) and is able to interact socially when the script needs him to do so. His confrontation with Vi Rose questioning God is, at the least,  awkward (He cries, “I don’t wanna’ be like this!” Really?). The scenes at the national finals are laughingly absurd. Sure the stage crew could completely improvise and fellow the performers! No sweat! The popularity of gospel music is deserving of a great fiction feature film since there’s been a number of great documentaries (like 1982′s SAY AMEN, SOMEBODY). Let’s hope Hollywood will produce one soon. In the meantime file this under films you can give to Grammy for her new DVD player.

Overall Rating: 1.5 out of 5 stars

Since cinema began Hollywood has raided the opposite coast (the Great White Way AKA Broadway) for works to be adapted into big screen blockbusters. Of course we’ve got the old standards by Shakespeare- his plays seem to get a cinema “dusting off ” every few years. The studios seems to have had the biggest box office hits with the Broadway musical (or to be more specific, the musical comedy). Beginning in the early thirties these movie adaptations did brisk business and some garnered lots of acclaim (including such Best Picture Oscar winners as MY FAIR LADY, THE SOUND OF MUSIC, OLIVER!, and fairly recently CHICAGO). But before the movies could talk or sing several works of the “legitimate theatre” were adapted to film. Many times the original cast is recruited to preserve their stage performances (like THE MIRACLE WORKER with original stars Anne Bancroft and Patty Duke-both picked up Oscars). Most times the studios will cast established movie stars in these adaptations (Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton in WHO’S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOLF? is a prime example). This may be the case for director Roman Polanski’s film of Yasmina Reza’s hit play “God of Carnage” (now, shortened to CARNAGE). And quite a cast of movie stars is assembled to play the two couples: Jodie Foster, Kate Winslet, John C. Reilly, and Christoph Waltz (four Oscars in that group). This play had a great Broadway run, but does it work as a film?

At the very start Polanski’s tackles one of the criticisms leveled at filmed stage works. He adds a scene outdoors that influences the adult conflicts (this helps “open-up” the play). In a long shot we observe several children (third or fourth grade) on a playground. Soon a verbal stand-down erupts into violence as one boy uses a stick to strike another boy in the face. The next scene takes place later in the home of Penelope (Foster) and Michael (Reilly), the parents of the injured lad. They’re meeting with the parents of the “stick-boy” Alan (Waltz) and Nancy (Winslet) to iron out school statements and medical bills (the boy lost two teeth!). Through the rest of the afternoon over cobbler, coffee, and scotch the friendly get-together dissolves into passive-aggressive one-upmanship, name-calling, and stress-induced nausea. Although Polanski has an end credit outdoor finale, the film suffers from stage claustrophobia. Alan and Nancy make several attempts to leave, but never let the elevator doors close. Several times I wanted to shout, “So leave already!!”. By the end we feel as trapped in this plush apartment as this foursome does. I lost track of how many times Winslet took off and the put on her gloves.

The main interest for most moviegoers will be seeing these four actors have at each other. It seems the men have a better time in it, but this may be more the fault of the play itself. Reilly is the same big, ole’ likeable bear we’ve seen  in most of his films as the bathroom fixture wholesaler Michael, who tries to follow his wife’s lead. Unfortunately there’s little sense of danger to him during some of the more heated scenes. Waltz is the standard, boorish, lawyer character who spends much of his screen time loudly talking on his cell phone (He’s taking another call! Enough!). He does get some big laughs as his no-B.S. honesty bursts through all the good-mannered correctness. I hope we’ll get to see Reilly and Waltz team up again in a future flick. Winslet has little to do besides being exasperated with her blase’ hubby and getting green around the gills. Foster may have the most thankless role as the cultured, overly sensitive Penelope who soon loses her patience and civility after trying to deal with the corporate-ladder climbing couple. After they break out the booze she becomes bug-eyed and shrill. Polanski is doing his best with the play, but the end result seems like a superstar charged PBS broadcast “night at the theaah-tre”. There’s a few laughs sprinkled sparsely throughout but not really enough to warrant being stuck in that room with these four.

Overall Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

Seems that not that long ago holidays were almost the exclusive domain of horror flicks ( thanks in no small part to John Carpenter’s 1978 classic HALLOWEEN ). This extended to other calendar dates like certain Fridays and even birthdays. With the release last year of VALENTINE’S DAY the “rom-com” has decided to horn in on the cineplex action thanks to TV sitcom master ( his trifecta being ” Happy Days “, ” Laverne and Shirley ” and ” Mork and Mindy ” ) turned movie comic kingpin ( PRETTY WOMAN ) Gary Marshall. Now Mr. M has decided to take on another big ( usually romantic ) holiday with NEW YEAR’S EVE and once again he’s assembled another gang of big stars ( with two returnees from last year ). We’ve haven’t opened our presents under the tree yet ( some of us haven’t even begun shopping ), so is this early cinema offering a gift that we’ll revisit again and again?

 Like the previous holiday flick, this is several stories intercut over the running time ( some share characters and settings ). Speaking of settings, this time NYC replaces LA ( a very mild winter Big Apple ). Let’s check them off! Hilary Swank is a city worker in charge of the big Times Square celebration ( including the dropping of the big ball ) who’s aided by good pal, policeman Chris ” Ludacris ” Bridges. One of the entertainers there is Jenson, played by real life rocker Jon Bon Jovi, who’s also singing at a big record company party catered by Katherine Heigl and her assistant Sofia Vergara. A put-upon worker at said record company, Michelle Pfieffer, quits and offers tickets to the big party to messenger Zac Efron if he can help her check items off her ” things to do list “. Zac’s brother is a cynical, New Year’s-hating cartoonist ( Ashton Kutcher )  trapped in his building’s elevator along with perky singer Lea Michelle, who’s on her way to sing back up with Jenson. At a hospital young parents-to-be Seth Meyers and Jessica Biel compete with another couple to collect the cash prize for the first birth of 2012. On another floor, nurse Halle Berry tends to a dying Robert DeNiro, who just wants to live long enough to see the 2011 become history. Sarah Jessica Parker is a harried single mother trying to track down teenage daughter Abigal Breslin who hopes to share her first kiss with that special boy at midnight in Times Square. Also racing into town in order to share a midnight kiss is Josh Duhamel, who encounters many obstacles ( and wacky characters ) on his way back from a Connecticut wedding. Whew, what a night!

 Marshall does his best to juggle the many stories. Unfortunately he has to cut away from many plots just as the momentum starts building. And many of them would’ve been better left on the editing room floor, particularly those agonizing attempts at pathos. The DeNiro/Berry scenes really seem to slow things up while a turgid,televised speech by Swank grinds things to a complete halt ( really, the Times Square crowds are completely silent? Really? ). The script is very TV “sitcomy” with many obvious set-ups and punch lines. The big star list may be more a testament to the good will that Marshall engenders rather than the quality of the material. Still several of the more seasoned comedy pr0s wring some laughs especially SNL’s Meyers and Vergara ( her character here is an even more ethnic and hot-to-trot variation of her Gloria from TV’s ” Modern Family ” ). Many pairings just don’t have much of a spark ( the Kutcher/Michelle pairing is a bit creepy ). I was really disheartened that Pfieffer was saddled with a frumpy brown wig and doing another take on the pre-Catwoman Selina Kyle. Fortunately the film moves to another location and pairing very quickly. I breathed a sigh of relief that Heigl and Parker shared no scenes. I feared that the two queens of awful romcoms on-screen together might create some sort of cinema black hole. There is great use of NYC locations, but it’s not enough to recommend this cliche-ridden, cloying mess. Stick around for the end credits bloopers-they’re a lot funnier than what’s in the main film ( maybe you’ll get to be that funny in a comedy soon, Mr. DeNiro! ). Let’s hope this is the last holiday to get this big screen desecration from the Marshall gang ( I’m sure Hector Elizondo will still get plenty of work! ).

Overall Rating: One and a Half Out of Five Stars

A wise man once said: “It is much easier to become a father than to be one.” Writer/director Alexander Payne’s THE DESCENDANTS, based on a novel by Kaui Hart Hemmings, is the best example of that sentiment on film that I’ve seen in many years. The story of a father and husband trying to find his way after failing in both roles isn’t as funny as Payne’s previous films CITIZEN RUTH, ELECTION, ABOUT SCHMIDT, or SIDEWAYS, but it’s his most emotional and one of the best films of the year.

Set in Hawaii, THE DESCENDANTS opens with an off-screen boating accident that puts Elizabeth King (Patricia Hastie) in the hospital, on life support and in a deep coma. It’s looking less likely by the day that she’s going to wake up. While her distant husband Matt (George Clooney) attempts to deal his wife’s likely death, he realizes that he doesn’t have the experience to take care of their daughters –  young Scottie (Amara Miller) and teenage Alexandra (Shailene Woodleyz). They’ve never been close as a family and the fact that they have to pull together now through tragedy makes things even more awkward. When Alexandra announces that she caught her mother cheating on Matt before her injury, he’s astounded and unsure how to deal with an infidelity crisis while the women who betrayed him lies dying.  Determined to confront his wife’s lover, Matt and the girls take a trip across the island to track down this man (Mathew Lilard) who might have broken up their marriage if fate hadn’t interfered. The rebellious Alexandra brings along her dense, out-of-his-league boyfriend Sid (Nick Krause), more just to annoy her father than any real emotional need. In addition to the kids, Matt’s estate includes a valuable expanse of Hawaiian beachfront property bequeathed to him and his cousins, descendants of a long-ago marriage of a Hawaiian princess and the banker son of white missionaries. Matt is charged with the decision of what to do with this property before it legally falls out of the family’s hands.  Should he sell it to turn it into a resort or let it remain pristine? While facing the daily challenges of parenthood while coping with his two young daughter’s expressions of grief, he also has to deal with the fate of this family legacy.

THE DESCENDANTS is the story not of death, but of the strategy people devise to cope, to defend and to protect themselves against pain and loss. And though it sometimes reveals the distasteful, ugly ways in which people interact while coping with tragedy, it is also a beautifully shot and truthful portrayal of human frailties and reactions to losing a family member. Clooney gives a rich, nuanced performances, generating real warmth and vulnerability as well as the usual smoldering charisma. Matt quickly realizes that he’s got some growing up to do himself if he’s ever going to develop a proper relationship with his girls and the dynamic between the three is kept interesting on many levels. There’s something very natural about Clooney’s presence with these two but his performance, as good as it is, would be for nothing if the girls didn’t complement it so well. Both young actresses bring the individuality of their characters to life and are more than capable of holding their own on screen. Ten-year-old Amara Miller as Scottie moves ably from joy to sullen petulance, and 17-year-old Shailene Woodley as Alexandra, who we first meet drunk at an expensive teen rehab clinic, brings a believable adolescent fierceness to the character, pushing boundaries with the kind of disrespect that any parent of a teen will recognize. The rest of the supporting cast is fine, with Robert Forster coming off particularly well as Matt’s cantankerous father-in-law, profound in his grief. Mathew Lilard adulterous lover works wonders with his goofy grin in a small role and Judy Greer as his wife steals a couple of big emotional scenes. Only Nick Krause as Alexandra’s stoner boyfriend steps near some clichés but he does walk off with some of the film’s funnier lines. THE DESCENDANTS isn’t my favorite movie of the years (that’s still SUPER), nor is it Payne’s best (still ELECTION), but it is one of the best movies of this year and deserving of the many awards it’s bound to receive.

5 of 5 Stars

 THE WOMEN ON THE 6TH FLOOR is a new period comedy/ drama from France that surprisingly has much in common with one of 2011′s American blockbusters, THE HELP. Both films are set in the societal upheaval of the early 1960s and both concern the travails of domestic workers and their employers. While the US version was tied to the civil rights movement ( with literally life and death at stake ), the French story is more concerned with social class structure along with a second chance romance. Still both films have a great deal of empathy for the sometimes invisible ” hired help”.

Jean Louis ( Fabrice Luchini) is a successful investment consultant at his old, established family banking firm in 1960′s Paris. He and his status-seeking socialite wife, Suzanne ( Sandrine Kiberlain ) and two spoiled preteen sons ( usually away at an exclusive boarding school ) reside in a large downtown apartment complex. Living above Jean Louis’s opulent apartment that encompasses the entire level are the Spanish born maids who work in the different households. These are the women of the sixth floor who each live almost in squalor, in tiny single rooms and must share one bathroom and a communal sink. One day Jean Louis’s French maid of many years finally quits after another clash with Suzanne. This occurs around the time of the arrival of Maria ( Natalia Verbeke ) a lovely young woman from Toledo who is soon seeking domestic help employment. Jean Louis hires Maria and is charmed by her and her other sixth floor friends ( one is a Daily Worker reading radical, another is deeply religious, one must escape an abusive husband, while another is out to snare a hubby ). His interactions with the ladies rekindle his zest for life after his soul had become deadened by his stale upper class routine. Finally Jean Louis must decide if he will stay on the path that his forefathers have traveled or defy convention and fully join Maria’s world.

The story of cultural and class romance has been explored in many different media ( the BBC-TV series ” Upstairs, Downstairs ” first springs to mind ). Everything here hinges on whether the film makers provide a fresh spin on this subject. I’d have to say that the results here are fairly predictable and a bit condescending. Luchini is the old stick in the mud business guy ( if this were an American film he’d be a WASP ). The breakfast egg fanaticism gives him that anal-retentive extra edge. His wife is a cold shrew only interested in impressing the neighbors, and is never really given the chance to change. Plus the sons are coarse, bullying jerks. Verbeke’s Maria is almost a sensual Mary Poppins who appears to awake the sleeping Jean Louis. She and her “sisters” are the earthy, passionate ethnics that will teach these dullards how to live. They’re each archetypes more than real people. The main problem with the film is the tentative relationship at its center. We can easily understand why Jean Louis falls for the spunky, beautiful, much-younger Maria, but it’s difficult to understand her attraction to him ( yeah, he’s wealthy and becomes more caring, but she deserves more ). The 60′s fashions and settings are well executed, but the final scenes seem hurriedly cobbled together. THE WOMEN ON THE 6TH FLOOR is a sweet-natured film full of good intentions that doesn’t succeed in bringing anything new in the clash between the classes.

Overall Rating: Two Out of Five Stars

The title of the new film LIKE CRAZY refers to the tumult of emotions that overwhelm the senses during the rush of attraction that blossoms into love ( particularly amongst the under thirty crowd ). With these two leads we’re probably not talking about first love as they’re just about to finish college. Still the intensity of their feelings practically explode off the screen. But like most examples of romantic cinema this couple’s journey is not an easy one.

The plot of the film almost follows the old cliché movie love story structure / formula : boy meets girl, boy and girl fall in love, boy loses girl, etcetera. A college writing major from England, Emma (Felicity Jones) becomes smitten with the professor’s student assistant, Jake (Anton Yelchin), a furniture designer, while attending school in Los Angeles. She leaves a note with her number (and a poem) on his car windshield. He calls her up, they date, and begin a whirlwind Spring romance. Unfortunately love clouds her judgement and she stays past her student visa return date. When Emma tries to visit Jake in LA after finally returning to England she’s denied re-entry in the US because of the visa violation. Thus begins a long struggle as the two lovers try to get back together. He can only afford a few trips to see her in the UK. In between visits Jake starts a furniture design business with Samantha (Jennifer Lawrence) who becomes more than a work partner, while Emma becomes an assistant to the editor of a fashion magazines ( Fionela Hughes ) and re-connects with some old friends and an attractive neighbor, Simon ( Charlie Bewley ). Can Jake and Emma’s love survive the strains and temptations of this long distance relationship while also battling the heartless bureaucracy?

Yes, it’s a fairly simple story that’s told without a lot of flashy touches although director Drake Doremus occasionally indulges a few film school tricks. He uses pixilation ( the camera’s locked above the bed as we see Emma and Jake in multiple sleepwear and sleep positions to denote time passage, while later Emma is in one spot at the airport as humanity buzzes and flits about her ) and slow dissolves ( the kitchen remains the same as the characters are in different clothing ). And of course we’ve got to have at least one montage of the two leads frolicking on the beach ( and at the go-kart track ) set to a sprightly tune. It’s really up to the actors to make this basic tale compelling. The two leads bring a a lot of fresh energy to this romance. Yelchin still projects the wit and intelligence the he showed in his two films from earlier this year ( THE BEAVER and FRIGHT NIGHT ), but here he presents a tender side as he tentatively gives his heart to this young woman who has pursued him ( yeah sexual equality! ). Jones as Emma gives a real star-making performance. You can almost hear her thoughts as she finally works up the courage to leave that windshield note. She almost bursts with exhilaration as Emma and Jake make a connection. This makes her poor decision to stay longer a bit more understandable. Later, as she makes a late night call to Jake from London, her pain and loneliness is heartbreaking. This is a young actress of startling sensitivity. I was rooting for them to triumph over those heartless immigration officers, but I began to feel greater sympathy for their interim flings. Simon seems a bit of a prig, but Jennifer Lawrence’s Sam is deserving of a better fate. The other, older actors do a great job of supporting the young lovers. Alex Kingston and Oliver Muirhead have a great rapport as Emma’s indulgent, worldly, supportive parents ( break out the whiskey! ) and Hughes scores as Emma’s nurturing, understanding mentor. This film may be a bit too messy for some viewers ( I was squirming during the big argument ), but relationships can’t always be hearts and flowers. The ending’s a bit open, so I hope we’ll spend some more time with these two someday. LIKE CRAZY is an emotional rollercoaster and a great showcase for two very gifted young actors.

Overall Rating: Four Out of Five Stars

LIKE CRAZY will be screened at 7 PM Thursday November 3 at  the Tivoli theatre as a special sneak preview of the 20th Annual Stella Artois St. Louis International Film Festival. The film’s regular engagement begins on November 11 at the Plaza Frontenac Cinemas

Ahhh, the tropical beaches, the endless ocean view…there’s just one thing missing. Hold up, here he is-Johnny Depp. Is he slapping on the eye shadow for another nautical odyssey as Captian Jack Sparrow? Not quite. THE RUM DIARY skips ahead a couple of centuries to set ashore in Puerto Rico circa 1960. But Depp is in somewhat familiar territory. The film is based on the work of Depp’s late friend, Hunter S. Thompson. This would be the second Depp / Thompson film project ( not counting Hunter’s cameo/ tribute in the animated RANGO ) after Terry Gilliam’s 1998 screen adaptation of FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS. Does this new flick match that earlier film’s gonzo lunacy?

The film begins with Paul Kemp’s ( Depp ) arrival in San Juan during the politically turmoil of 1960. This chain-smokin’, hard-drinkin’, cynical writer is about to begin a new job at the English language newspaper The San Juan Star. After making his way past a demonstration by striking workers he meets his future roommate and adventure partner paunchy, wiseguy/ photographer Bob Sala ( Michael Rispoli ). Kemp also meets his boss, burnt-out editor Lotterman ( Richard Jenkins ). Try not stare at that very bad toupee! At the docks Kemp meets another Star staffer, religion writer Moburg ( Giovanni Ribisi ), a near derelict who spends most of his days scavenging through the garbage of San Juan. A guy-on-the make, public relations man Sanderson ( Aaron Eckhart ) takes note of Kemp’s recent arrival. The PR whiz believe that he should fit into his plans. unfortunately Kemp also catches the eye of Sanderson’s young, free-spirited, blonde-bombshell girlfriend Chenault ( Amber Heard ). For the next few days Kemp indulges in all the country’s vices while discovering the extreme poverty of the natives who don’t reap the benefits of the big developments spearheaded by Sanderson and some high rollers from the states.

The first act of the film is a whole lot of fun as we drink in the 60′s atmosphere ( fashions, cars,and a look at a Kennedy/ Nixon presidential debate ) and meet these quirky characters. Rispoli’s Bob is very endearing as the gravelly voiced, hard-nosed sidekick, confidant. Ribisi almost floats through his scenes with an otherworldly vibe as the well-connected, resourceful street spirit. Jenkins takes the old gruff editor cliché and gives him a sad edge as a fellow who’s seen it all and doesn’t want to make waves. Eckhart is oily perfection in a role he’s staked a claim to since his sleazy IN THE COMPANY OF MEN businessman oozed off the screen. Heard more than fills the bill as the femme fatale staple of noir thrillers. The screen almost sizzles as she flirts with Kemp. Speaking of Kemp, the movie’s main draw is another crude, shifty wildman played by Depp. He’s always interesting to watch. Here he bugs his eyes while racing through his line deliveries. At times he’s almost channeling Thompson ( even down to the way he handles his cigarette ). For Depp’s devout fans, this film is a must see. Unfortunately the film is a tough, long slog for those of us not completely enamored of his every move. This is director Bruce Robinson’s first film in nearly twenty years and he has trouble with the pacing on this. It seems to be in the same alcoholic haze as most of the characters ( for you Thompson fans there’s one hallucinogen sequence ). When they’re not boozing it up, it seems like Kemp and company are always being chased through the picturesque streets. Oddly the film’s ending seems abrupt and truncated. There doesn’t seem to be a real sense of urgency to any of the proceedings. This is more the fault of a meandering script that perhaps needed a bit more polishing. THE RUM DIARY may seem like a frothy screen excursion, but like many getaways, you may be tired,exhausted , and in need of another vacation when it’s done.

Overall Rating: Two Out of Five Stars

Pack your rain gear and we’ll take a trip to the Northeast, Seattle to be exact. It’s the home of alternative culture and mecca of most quirkiness. And our guide is one of the most off-beat film directors, Gus Van Zant of MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO fame. For a bit of a change of pace he’s presenting a boy-meets-girl story. They do meet “cute”, but these two young people in RESTLESS are far from the typical movie couple.

We first meet the shy, sullen teenage boy Enoch ( Henry Hopper ) as he “crashes” the memorial service of a complete stranger. He sits quietly in the back and after the service, he returns to the big, gloomy house he shares with his aunt ( Jane Adams ). His only friend is the ghost of a WWII kamikaze pilot, Hiroshi ( Ryo Kase ), that only Enoch can see. At the next service Enoch catches the eye of a teenage girl, Annabel ( Mia Wasikowska ). She too has crashed the service and explains that she works at a nearby hospital. She soon returns to the home she shares with her boozy mother and very protective older sister ( Schuyler Fisk ). When she takes Annabel to the hospital we find that she doesn’t work there, but is a frequent patient. A new test reveals that a cancerous growth on the brain is spreading and Annabel has only three months to live. At the next service that Enoch attends, it seems his luck has run out- the cemetery director recognizes him from the two recent services. Before Enoch is ejected Annabelle steps in and covers for him. The pair soon begin a friendship and, after Annabel shares the news of her condition, they begin to fall in love. The stoic Enoch finally lets down his defences and shares his family tragedy. These two free spirits have found each other, but what will happen as they near her final days?

For fans of 70′s cinema the comparisons to Hal Ashby’s classic HAROLD AND MAUDE are too great to ignore. Like Bud Cort’s Harold, Enoch is somber, quiet and obsessed with death although he doesn’t stage elaborate mock suicides as in the former film. Hopper reminds one of Cort in many scenes along with his father Dennis, his dad’s contemporary James Dean and a younger James Franco. Instead of the sprightly septenagerian Ruth Gordon as Maude RESTLESS has a sprightly terminally ill pixie in Wasikowska. With her short cropped blonde hair she’s close to the great movie gamine Audrey Hepburn and free spirits Kirsten Dunst and Michelle Williams. This is a very different side of Wasikowska from her other film roles and solidifies her status as a young actress ro watch. These two do their best with a script that’s cloyingly precious most of the time. The injection of a whimsical invisible pal detracts from the tenderness of the couple’s growing affection for each other. I guess a ghost pilot’s better than a tall invisible rabbit ( sorry Pooka fans). I must single out Ms Fisk for her portrait of an older sister who’s had to step up and be the head of the family. She projects a no-nonsense tough, protective exterior while her heart is breaking over the prospect of losing her sibling. The slow pacing, turgid soundtrack songs, and dark, dreary cinematography don’t service the actors properly. If you can handle some of the forced whimsy, RESTLESS may be worth your time. But the definitive love amongst death comedy is that gem from over 40 years ago.

Overall Rating: Two and a Half Out of Five Stars

Film fans have been enchanted by cinema small towns like Bedford Falls in IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE ( and of course TV fans will always adore the charms of THE ANDY GRIFFITH SHOW’s Mayberry ) for many years. Well, let’s hop across the pond and spend some time in a mellow little village over in France. This is the setting of a sweet little love story called MY AFTERNOONS WITH MARGUERITTE that begins with a chance encounter between two villagers with very little in common, but who soon are able to fill a void in each other’s lives.

We first meet the younger, male half of the duo during the film’s opening titles. Chazes Germain ( Gerard Depaedieu ) is a middle aged, lumbering, good natured jack-of-all-trades known to most everyone in the little town. He frequently hangs out at a local tavern ( you almost expect them to yell Chazes upon his entrance ala’ Norm in TV’s ” Cheers” ), shares his bed with his lover, the much younger bus driver Annette ( Sophie Guillemin ), and tends to his vegetable garden ( he sells his crops at a local farmers’ market ) in the back yard of the home of his now senile ( but still abrasive ) mother ( Chazes lives in a trailer outside the house ). His life changes radically when he meets a sprightly septuagenarian named Margueritte ( Gisele Casadesus ) at a bench in the town park. She lives at a nearby retirement center and enjoys reading in the fresh air. Her reading aloud sparks a passion for literature in Chazes. In flashbacks we see young Chazes belittled by a bullying teacher as he struggles to read to the class. She even gives him her dictionary as a present. Unfortunately Marguritte’s family cannot afford her apartment at the center and may have to move in with them in Brussels. This, along with news from Annette, prompts Chazes to make some decisions that will change his life.

Spending some time in that park with these two is a nice change of pace from some of the loud, bombastic recent cinematic offerings. Much of the charm that has made Depardieu a French movie icon is well displayed here. Chazes may be thick ( in body and intellect ), but he is a kind, gentle soul. Unfortunately he has a talent for saying the wrong things ( especially when he tries to console the tavern owner who has lost her much younger lover ). This makes the flashback scenes so heartbreaking . Not only do we have the dour school scenes I’ve mentioned, but we see the horrific physical and verbal abuse he endured from his frustrated single mother ( father was out of the picture after conception). Although well into adulthood Chazes still yearns for a nurturing parental figure. The kind, caring, patience Margueritte fulfills his needs. She also becomes an encouraging teacher that opens up the door to knowledge that was slammed shut by the local school. There’s lots of small laughs along with the pathos. Chazes’s conversation with a cat is particularly lovely. MY AFTERNOONS WITH MARGUERITTE is an endearing modern fable that shows how an act of kindness can cause a ripple effect and bless everyone it touches.

Overall Rating: Four  Out of Five Stars

With a cast this impressively eclectic, THE BIG YEAR is not nearly as ridiculous as I was expecting. While the hilarity factor falls short of anticipated, the film still delivers plenty of humor, but the approach is far more charming than absurd, resulting in a pleasantly entertaining, somewhat uplifting dramedy.

Directed by David Frankel, THE BIG YEAR is a film which clearly falls somewhere between MARLEY & ME and THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA on his range of storytelling prowess and style. What the film does is to take an otherwise mundane subject that the average viewer would find dull and uninteresting, but fills it with a message of finding one’s true priorities, then wraps it up with a talented cast.

THE BIG YEAR follows three main characters, all three are passionate birders, as they venture out to set the world record for spotting the most bird species in North America in a single calendar year. Sound exciting? Exactly. However, the film actually does end up being rather exciting, sort of, in the sense that I actually cared about all three characters, even the one I was meant to hate, somewhat.

“Birding” is the observation of birds in their natural habitats as a hobby. Therefore, a “birder” is one who partakes in birding.

THE BIG YEAR is told from the perspective of Brad Harris (Jack Black), a thirty-something divorcee living with his parents and working a dead end job he hates, but whose passion for birding drives his will to push on each day toward his dream of being the best. This presents something of a dilemma, as the current record holder and inspiration for Brad is Kenny Bostick (Owen Wilson), who happens to be planning his own “big year” for a second consecutive time in an effort to secure his world record. Brad and Kenny are diametrically opposite personalities. Brad has a child-like passion for the art and wonder of birding, while Kenny appears to be far more interested in the fame of being the best.

Our third main character is Stu Preissler (Steve Martin), a successful CEO struggling to force himself into retirement so he may finally pursue his own big year, a dream he’s had since a child. Brad, Kenny and Stu all pursue the same goal, but tension emerges as they attempt to keep this a secret from one another in an effort to avoid heated competition. Brad and Stu are well aware of Kenny’s reputation for being a relentlessly brilliant birder who plays the game from any angle necessary, but rumors of being a cheat sparks an increased level of distrust toward him from both Brad and Stu.

I can only assume that the acts of birding in THE BIG YEAR are accurately portrayed, as I’ve never participated myself, but there is a very real sense of authenticity in the film. All of that aside, the movie isn’t really about birding, but rather about realizing what’s really important in the characters’ lives. This ultimately proves to be the families and loves ones of all three characters, but only two of them will end their journey having had that epiphany in a positive way. The other will ultimately learn a valuable lesson from his mistakes.

THE BIG YEAR doesn’t always hit the comedic nails squarely on the head, but the overall product is well worth the effort. With moments of slightly off-kilter timing or less-than-perfect delivery, the film stumbles slightly on occasion, but always manages to pick itself up and stabilize before ever falling flat on its face. Jack Black manages to pull back the reigns a bit, allowing his character to develop without Black’s trademark orneriness getting in the way, while Owen Wilson pretty much plays his character in his typical fashion, but it works. On the other hand, it was Steve Martin who impressed upon me the most connection with his character. Perhaps seeing a bit of his own life in Stu, Martin drew upon my empathy with astonishing ease. Stu is also something of a catalyst, a mentor even, for Brad’s own growth as a well-rounded individual.

What made the biggest impression on me while watching THE BIG YEAR was the supporting cast, filled to the gills with veteran cameos and recognizable fresh faces. Brian Dennehy plays Brad’s unsupportive, hard-nosed father while Dianne Wiest plays his loving, exceedingly supportive mother Brenda. JoBeth Williams plays Stu’s supportive wife Edith, Kevin Pollak and Joel McHale (TV’s COMMUNITY) play Stu’s corporate yes men, Rosamund Pike plays Kenny’s lonely and frustrated wife Jessica, Jim Parsons (TV’s BIG BANG THEORY) plays birder-groupie and blogger Crane, and Rashida Jones plays Brad’s love interest Ellie. And, as if this isn’t alluring enough, the film is brimming with cameos including Tim Blake Nelson, Anjelica Huston, Corbin Bernsen, Steven Weber and Al Roker.

When its all said and done, THE BIG YEAR is essentially a dramedy, finding its niche somewhere between quirkiness and melodrama, a film that could easily fall through the cracks if not properly marketed. So, this is my final word… THE BIG YEAR is not a great film, but its a reasonably good film that’s fun without being stupid, dramatic without being emotional, and friendly audiences of all ages, but intended for the grown-ups.

Overall Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

THE BIG YEAR opens in St. Louis theaters on Friday, October 14th, 2011.

It’s not an easy finding the humor inherent in even the darkest subjects of human life, carefully trying to extract the essence of that elusive silver lining everyone keeps talking about. Many would say there’s nothing funny about cancer, and I would agree on the most basic level, but when done tastefully and with compassion, humor can not only be found in anything, but can actually be a positive force of healing and inspiration.

No, this isn’t Dr. Phil guest writing my review. This is an effort to describe what I took away from watching Jonathan Levine’s third feature film 50/50. As far as I’m concerned, Levine is now three-for-three, having first won my affection in 2008 with THE WACKNESS, his first feature outing was actually in 2006 with ALL THE BOYS LOVE MANDY LANE. Unfortunately, Levine’s first feature has still yet to be released, which quite literally makes me angry.

50/50 tells the story of Adam Lerner, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt (500 DAYS OF SUMMER, HESHER), a 27-year old nice guy who suddenly discovers he has a rare form of cancer. The film tackles the subject comically, but doesn’t wash over the seriousness of the situation, maintaining absolute integrity. We follow Adam as he muddles through the painful process of beating cancer. His best friend Kyle, played by Seth Rogen (PAUL, FUNNY PEOPLE), sticks by his side through the entire film, providing more than just the comic relief he does so well, but also as his crutch, his cheerleader and wing man.

Angelica Huston (THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS) plays Diane, Adam’s over-protective mother. Adam spends most of the film avoiding his mother, especially once he learns of his condition, relying more on the questionably authentic support of his live-in artist girlfriend Rachel, played with cold ambiguity by Bryce Dallas Howard (HEREAFTER, ECLIPSE). All the while, Adam seems oblivious to the intrinsic nature of Kyle’s friendship, and slowly sinks into self-pity, until he meets Katie, played by Anna Kendrick (NEW MOON, UP IN THE AIR), a support counselor as green to her profession and he is to having cancer. Kendrick is cute and fragile, like that pretty porcelain figurine on your grandmother’s shelf that you’re afraid to tough for fear of breaking.

Primarily a television producer, Will Reiser makes an incredible first impression as a screenwriter with his freshman offering. The characters of 50/50 are rich and detailed, tangible with real human flaws. The humor is perfectly timed, edgy but respectful, with a charm that balances nicely with the emotionally challenging aspects of the script. Reiser paints his characters with gently, relying on the quality of the paint rather than the boldness of his strokes. Levine and the cast must have picked up on this as well, because the whole film works beautifully.

Levine allows the cast of 50/50 to shine, unencumbered by an over-intrusive visual style or disruptive gimmicks, but enhances the performances and the writing with a keen sense of reflective stillness and an ear for great music that harmoniously brings what we see and hear on screen into full maturity. Levine seems to be telepathically synced with the cast, successfully harnessing Rogen’s familiar and goofy, often-stoned style of comedy, but reining it in enough that’s it’s not overbearing and never overshadows Adam. What Levitt has done, is take a topic just recently attempted by FUNNY PEOPLE with moderate success at best, and has succeeded in applying the “less is more” rule.

50/50 takes the audience by the hand and says, this isn’t always going to be an easy journey, but we’re going to make the most of it and have fun. In fact, it’s the perfectly executed ups and downs of Adam’s experience that makes it so damn easy to connect and empathize with him. Levitt evokes the very best of what makes an actor a leading star as well as what makes the best character actors so vividly unique and memorable, doing so in a way that seems almost effortless. One of the tiniest, but most significant ways he has done this with 50/50 is in how affects his own appearance, his pale complexion, his red and tired eyes, his posture, all small but important ingredients in selling such a difficult role.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt has been on my radar of fine actors for a long time, but 50/50 just further proves what a fascinating actor and craftsman remains to be seen. Not only has he managed to continue redefining his own range as an actor with this role, but does so convincingly that I never once found myself questioning whether he had on some level had some experience with what a cancer patient must feel.

Philip Baker Hall (MAGNOLIA) and Matt Frewer (WATCHMEN) provide small but strong performances as two older cancer patients who share chemotherapy sessions with Adam. Hall and Frewer supply an additional layer of humor, but also indirectly serve as mentoring guides in Adam’s journey.

50/50 is a film that will make you laugh, it may even make you cry, but should ultimately make you care. 50/50 is one of those rare films that reads like real life, not all good, not all bad, but almost always somewhere in between, which is where the most interesting and honest stories reside.

Overall Rating: 5 out of 5 stars

The new romantic drama ONE DAY owes much if it’s structure to one of the greatest romantic comedies of the last 25 years, 1989′s WHEN HARRY MET SALLY. Like the previous film, the two leads meet many years ago and try to fight the mutual attraction and prove that a man and a woman can be good friends and avoid all that messy sex stuff. That’s not to say that there’s not a few laughs in DAY, while SALLY certainly has more than it’s share of dramatic tension. Still, is it possible that DAY’s Dex and Em will be more successful in pulling off the good friends thing than Harry and Sally?

The day referenced in ONE DAY’s title is July 15. That’s the day that Emma ( Anne Hathaway ) and Dexter ( Jim Sturgess ) celebrate their college graduation in 1988 by getting to know each other. Dex is more of a swinger, a player, while Em’s been a bit of a wallflower ( designated by her studious eyeglasses ). She’s not been on Dex’s radar, but since their friends have coupled up…why not? Em acts on her attraction to him and soon they’re back at her modest flat ( oops, forgot to mention that they’re British ). Fireworks don’t happen, but they do strike up a friendship. The film then catches up to them on July 15 for the next 18 years. Dex’s life takes a surprising turn when he becomes the star/host of a late night music and chat show. We also get to explore his rocky relationship with his Dad and Mum ( Patricia Clarkson another Yank doing a Brit accent ). Of course his meteoric rise is soon reversed thanks to the usual trappings of fame. Em finds that her climb is a slow one. She aspires to be a best selling author, but is stuck at a seedy Mexican restaurant where she begins a relationship with an aspiring stand-up comic. Somehow Em and Dex’s paths usually meet on that mid-Summer’s day. Will they ever spend some time together during the other three seasons?

ONE DAY is a terrific looking film. Director Lone Scherfig ( AN EDUCATION ) makes great use of the European locations ( besides the UK ) and approximates each year very well ( are we going to get nostalgic about the 90′s already? ). She’s got two engaging young actors to work with, but I had a tough time buying into this relationship. This may be more of a problem with the screenplay by David Nicholls based on his popular novel. We’re supposed to root for these two to get together in the opening scenes, but it seems that their personalities are so different that it’s difficult to imagine how they could have a long relationship outside of ” movie-romanceland”. Sturgess is a talented actor, but the Dex character for most of the film is a superficial, selfish jerk who’s not deserving of Em’s company. I’ll admit that I find Hathaway enormously appealing ( even hosting the Oscars ), so I had a difficult time buying her as a frump ( she does lose the glasses quickly, though she was still a mighty cute four-eyes ) who has to settle for the somewhat drippy, annoying comedian. Her accent was a bit iffy at times, but she’s still an enchanting screen presence ( so when is she gonna’ do a big musical already? ). My other problem with the script ( a big one ) is that a character abruptly does a 360 degree turn in behavior from what she had stated just minutes earlier ( I won’t say who ). Perhaps it was an editing snafu, but it took me right out of the story. If you’re a fan of the actors and a wanting a nice European travelogue than you might enjoy ONE DAY. I was hoping for a better thought out, mature romance that’s worthy of these two talents.

Overall Rating: Two and a Half stars Out of Five

Several of this Summers’ fantasy blockbusters Like X-MEN: FIRST CLASS and TRANSFORMERS: RISE OF THE FALLEN have used real life figures and events as a background for their fantastic tales.  In that vein, almost at the season’s end we now get THE HELP, an intimate character drama ( with many good laughs ) based on the bestselling novel by Kathryn Stockett. The film boasts some powerful performances and arrives in theatres as a change of pace from the CGI beasties, explosions, and R-rated wiseguys and gals.

THE HELP begins in 1961 as Eugina ‘Skeeter” Phelan returns to her hometown of Jackson, Mississippi after finishing college. She immediately applies for a position at the Jackson Journal newspaper. She’s hired to ‘ghost’ the “Ask Myrna” housecleaning weekly advise column, but wants to work for a New York publishing house run by Elain Stein ( Mary Steenburgen ). Skeeter moves back into the Phelan household run by her imposing but frail mother Charlotte ( Allison Janey ). None of her family will explain why their old ‘colored’  maid Constantine ( Cicely Tyson ) quit and moved away during Skeeter’s college absence. Skeeter soon reunites with her old high school girlfriends who are lead by their queen bee Hilly ( Bryce Dallas Howard ). In order to get help with her newspaper column Skeeter befriends her friend Elizabeth’s maid, Aibileen ( Viola Davis ). Their long talks give Skeeeter an idea about writing a book full of stories from the ‘Negro’ maids’ perspective ( with anonymous names of course ). Miss Stein encourages her during one of their phone conversations. Soon Hilly’s put upon maid Minny ( Octavia Spenser ) joins the ladies on the secret project. The stories of these two women are not enough. Many more interviews are needed. Will the other domestics risk their jobs ( and lives ) to share their stories?

THE HELP is a very classy production, one that should be remembered at the end of the year when Oscar ballots are filled out. The art directors have done a wonderful job of evoking the early sixties in the deep south with particular attention given to the fashions and hairstyles. Film maker Tate Taylor has crafted a crackling screenplay based on Stockett’s novel that has wonderful character interaction. He’s also gotten some great performance from this mix of newcomers and acting veterans. Stone exhibits some of her great on screen charm (  perhaps best shown in EASY A and this Summer’s CRAZY,STUPID LOVE ) and makes Skeeter a thoughtful, spirited heroine that we can all root for over the course of the film. Davis’s sweet soulful work as Abileen is the film’s heart. She’s greatly abetted by Spenser’s sassy, spunky, weary Minnie who shines when she befriends the outcast from Hilly’s group, Celia ( played by Jessica Chastain in the great tradition of cinema’s  sweet, child-like, daffy blonds like Judy Holliday and Marilyn Monroe ). Howard makes Hilly a great hiss-able villainess ( if she had a moustache she’d twirl it), but at times her character seems too cartoonishly evil ( we finally see a bit of her humanity at the end ). Janney’s an imposing funny ( and intractable ) matriarch while Sissy Spacek is used mostly  for comic relief as Hilly’s no-hold-barred flighty mother. We briefly get to meet the men of the household and a potential beau for Skeeter, but this movie, like the opulent homes, is run by the women. My only problem with the film is that it backed off some of the intense brutality that was part of the fight for equal rights in that period. The assassination of Medgar Evans is a major event ( along with JFK’s) and headlines featuring the murder of voters’ rights workers and lynching are shown ( and many an N-word are uttered by bigots ). For the most part the film makers only hint at the horrors, while the ending doesn’t foreshadow the epic struggles to come in the next few years. Perhaps the book dealt more with the contradiction  between the white parents’ fear of the ‘colored’ germs ( even building outdoor bathrooms for them ) while entrusting the maid with their children’s care ( one of the ladies ignores her adorable daughter ). These are small quibbles when compared to the excellent performances  on display. THE HELP is an old fashioned drama that you can take your folks to, and you may end up enjoying it  even more than them.

Overall Rating: Four and a Half Out of Five Stars

Fathers’ Day was last Sunday, but it’s not too late to enjoy the latest entry in a long line of cinematic father/son stories. Like many other films, this twosome bonds as the son navigates through adulthood and the dad is near the end of his life’s voyage. But this story involves a surprising revelation from pop which sheds a new light on many incidents from their past.

Oliver ( Ewan McGregor ) is a single, thirty something, hang-dog California graphic artist. Besides dwelling on his past failed romantic relationships, he must deal with the home and effects ( including a very cute Jack Russell terrier ) of his recently deceased father, Hal ( Christopher Plummer ). In flashbacks we witness Hal coming out to his son shortly after his wife’s death. Oliver is stunned to hear his seventy-something father declare, “I’m gay.” after decades of marriage. In deeper flashbacks to Oliver’s adolescence we meet his eccentric, non-conformist mother ( Mary Page Keller). In these memories Hal is a faceless, shadowy figure always leaving the house as Mom stares at him with concern. Once he’s single and out of the closet Hal is re-energized. He buys a new wardrobe, places personal ads, joins a men’s choral group, hits the dance clubs, and gets a much younger boyfriend, Andy ( Goran Visnjic ). Unfortunately cancer arrives to curtail his new lust for life. Hal asks Oliver not to tell anyone and becomes more determined to not let the disease keep him from his new interests. In the present day Oliver meets a beautiful French actress, Anna ( Melanie Laurent ) at a party. She’s staying in town for a short time, but wants to act on her attraction to Oliver. As he tries to open up to his new love, Oliver has to put Hal’s estate in order while reflecting on the close bond the two shared in Hal’s final days.

Writer/director Mike Mills has made a very engaging-and personal- film. He’s told interviewers that his own father came out to him. Mills uses lots of interesting visual touches while occasionally veering into whimsically cute territory. The photo montages ( In 1969 this was beauty. This was the president ) are used too frequently and the close-ups of the dog with subtitles expressing his thoughts ( Go after her! ) seem forced. I did not enjoy the scenes of McGregor and his office mates indulging in some late night graffiti. It’s not cool, it’s vandalism. Speaking of McGregor, he does his best to make this mopey artist interesting, but often comes off as whiney and self absorbed. I was looking forward to seeing Laurent ( from INGLOURIOUS  BASTERDS ) in an English language role, but she and McGregor generate very little chemistry on screen. Also, Visnjic’s  child-like character almost becomes a male bimbo parody.

In spite of my problems with the film I recommend seeing  BEGINNERS for the inspired acting by Christopher Plummer. He lights up the screen while portraying Hal’s infectious joy. Hard to believe that he’s been working in movies and television for nearly sixty years. Now past leading man roles, Plummer’s been giving one one supporting character performance after another in the last few years. Let’s hope the members of the Academy remember this great work at the end of the year. He makes you believe that you’re never too old to be a beginner.

Overall Rating: Three and a Half Out of Five Stars

Throughout Hollywood’s golden age rarely did character actors graduate into leading roles. Frank McHugh and Mary Wickes were almost always the buddy or the maid in studio features. That really started to change in the 1960′s. For instance, Gene Hackman went from a supporting role in BONNIE AND CLYDE to the lead in THE FRENCH CONNECTION within a couple of years. Such is now the case of the gifted character actor, Paul Giamatti. After memorable supporting turns in films like PRIVATE PARTS ( as Howard Stern’s arch-nemesis ) and BIG FAT LIAR ( the poor guy’s covered in blue paint! ) , Giamatti graduated to leading roles with AMERICAN SPLENDOR and SIDEWAYS. He’s been given another opportunity to headline a film as the title role in Richard J. Lewis film of Mordecai Richler’s BARNEY’S VERSION.  This time he gets to show some of his romantic side along with his considerable comedic talents. And Mr. G does not disappoint.

Over the opening titles we meet Barney Panofsky as he stumbles into his home in the wee hours of morning, lights up a cigar, knocks back a bottle of booze, and drunk-dials his ex-wife’s current husband. The next day, he meets with his twenty-something daughter Kate who chastises him for tormenting her step dad. Later after working as the producer of a long running TV show, Barney settles in for a drink at his favorite pub and is accosted by a retired cop, O’Hearne  ( Mark Addy ). Seems a new book has come out concerning the disappearance of one of Barney’s old pals. The book reiterates O”Hearne’s belief that Barney murdered  “Boogie” ( Scott Speedman ). The film flashes back several decades as Barney and several buddies ( including Boogie ) party in Rome prior to his marriage to the free-spirited-and very pregnant- Clara ( Rachel Lafevre ). After  finding out that he is not the father of their still-born child, the marriage ends in tragedy. Soon Barney meets and marries again even though the parents of the bride ( Minnie Driver ) look down upon Barney’s widowed ex- detective father, Izzy ( Dustin Hoffman ). At the wedding reception Barney becomes smitten with one of his wife’s old college pals, Miriam ( Rosamund Pike ). Following her to the train station, she rebuffs the new groom’s advances. But Barney is certain that she’s the one and continues to send flowers to her in NYC while setting up a new home with his wife. Suddenly Boogie re-enters Barney’s life. He’s on a drug-fueled bender and decides to hit up his old pal for some dough. Barney takes Boogie to the family lake house to dry out. Upon his return from an errand Barney finds Boogie bedding down his wife. After she storms off the two men get into an argument over Boogie testifying in the divorce proceedings. They get drunk, scuffle over a loaded pistol, Barney passes out and Boogie is nowhere to be found. After he’s cleared of any foul play, Barney divorces and begins his pursuit of Miriam with new vigor. Is she the love of is life? If so, how’s he gonna’ muck it up? Can it be fixed?.

There’s plenty here for Giamatti fans to enjoy. You may wonder at first how these beautiful women are swayed by him, but you soon come to appreciate his considerable charms. He’s sweet and funny but also frustratingly self-destructive. You want to grab him by the shoulders and implore him not to screw things up! Giamatti has great chemistry with all the Petrofsky wives. Rachelle Lefevre has little screen time as the first Mrs. P, Clara, but  really embodies this swingin’ seventies free-spirited gal. The second Mrs. P is almost a cartoon of the spoiled, shrewish Jewish princess, but Minnie Driver plays her with great gusto and comic timing. As the final wife Miriam, Rosamund Pike, is quite charming as the ethereal, endlessly patient  angel of Barney’s dreams. Bruce Greenwood is very funny as the annoying, too-good-to-be-true Blair, Barney’s nemisis. The funniest actor in the cast has to be Dustin Hoffman who brings so much joy to his role as the happily vulgar Izzy. The screen practically sparkles when he enters a scene. Director Lewis does a good job of moving this film along as it goes from slapstick comedy to romantic longing, then to murder mystery and finally domestic drama. The last half hour almost becomes a cable TV disease of the week docu drama. But I shouldn’t fault the final scenes too much. There’s plenty of entertainment to be had as you go on the journey of Barney’s life. And we get to enjoy the talents of Paul Giamatti as he adds this unlikely ladies man to his impressive roster of screen characters.

Overall Rating: Three and a Half Out of Five Stars

When promoting a new film, studios can get downright sneaky. A good case in point is LOVE AND OTHER DRUGS. Movie and TV screens have been flooded with trailers and commercials touting  it as a zany, romantic comedy. And the poster shows the cute stars gazing toward the camera in bed while strategically placed pillows cover up their “naughty bits”. True there is comedy and romance, but the film tackles several serious issues which may throw some filmgoers off balance. It’s a shame that the studio marketing didn’t think the public could handle some of the truly adult themes. I think these issues elevate the film above the fluff that’s being passed off as romantic comedies these days.

It’s 1996 and Jamie Randall(Jake Gyllenhaal) is an electronics  salesman cruising by on his charm and good looks. After losing this job(the boss’s girlfriend!), Jamie’s internet millionaire brother Josh(Josh Gad) suggests that he look into the booming field of pharmaceutical sales. Soon he’s hired by Pfizer and sent on the road along with his supervisor Bruce(Oliver Platt) to hawk Zoloft. After finally getting in to see Dr. Knight(Hank Azaira), Jamie is allowed to follow the doc and tout his wares while posing as an intern.  During a routine examination Jamie meets Maggie Murdock(Anne Hathaway), a Parkinson’s sufferer in need of a prescription refill. Later in the parking lot Maggie spies Jamie arranging his drug samples in his car trunk and proceeds to clobber him with her bag . After a clumsy apology, Jamie convinces her to meet for coffee and they soon wind up at her place for some “no strings attached” sex. On another visit to Dr. Knight’s, Jamie is beaten up in the parking lot again. This time by a rival salesman(and former boyfriend of Maggie) who discovered that Jamie was pitching his Valium samples and putting in Zoloft. Jamie’s about to throw in the towel until he hears from brother Josh(who’s moved in after a nasty divorce) that Pfizer’s about to unveil a new wonder drug: Viagra. At last he’s found the perfect product to pitch. Jamie quickly becomes a welcome visitor to all the clinics. While business is booming, Jamie still yearns to be with Maggie. She still avoids commitment while dealing with her Parkinson’s symptoms. Can these two crazy kids finally make it work and get together?

Surprisingly the typical Hollywood happy ending is not a foregone conclusion here. The Parkinson’s issue adds a great deal of gravity to these proceedings. We still only get to see Maggie in the early stages as she struggles to stop the shaking and grasp a pair of scissors. In one powerful scene Jamie talks to the husband of a Parkinson’s sufferer while at a Chicago sales meeting. The man admits that if he had it to do over he would not have married his wife as the strain of her deterioration is too much to handle. Unfortunately these dramatic pieces bump up against the clumsy comedy scenes involving crude, clueless doofus Josh who behaves like a Jack Black caricature. They deserved to be severely trimmed. The other supporting players shine especially Platt, Azaira, Judy Greer(s a ditzy receptionist) and as Jamie and Josh’s parents George Segal and ,in perhaps her last screen role, Jill Clayburgh. Hathaway and Gyllenhaal capitalize on the chemistry that first displayed together in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. They seem very comfortable together which helps make their many intimate scenes feel natural. I was quite surprised at the amount of their flesh displayed in a mainstream studio movie. Director Ed (GLORY)Zwick gets good performances from them, but does indulge in some romance movie clichés. After many arguments, break ups, and make ups the hero must race against the clock to profess his love ala JERRY MAGUIRE during a painfully awkward outdoor scene with the camera slowly zooming in as a busload of senior citizens look on. Still, Jake Gyllenhaal is becoming a confident leading man and Anne Hathaway shows her considerable acting skills with a very offbeat character. The movie’s got a lot going for it, and is much more interesting than the usual rom-com. It’s too bad that Hollywood didn’t think we moviegoers would discover that.

Overall Rating: Three and a Half Out of Five Stars

The hilarious new trailer for I LOVE YOU PHILLIP MORRIS is here. You can watch the red-band trailer here.

As we told you in August, Roadside Attractions and Liddell Entertainment have acquired the U.S. and Canadian rights to the film. Financed by Luc Besson’s EuropaCorp, the film premiered at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival and opened on schedule internationally, grossing around $17 million. Our LA based editor, Melissa T.,  was at one the early test screenings and had nothing but raves for it. 

Synopsis:

The story begins with Russell (Jim Carrey), on his deathbed recalling the events of his life that led him there. He begins with his life in Virginia Beach as a happily married police officer who plays the organ at church, has sex with his wife (Leslie Mann) and spends his off hours searching for his biological mother who gave him up as a child. But after a violent car crash, Russell leaves his life and family behind to go out into the world and be his true self, which is a gay man. He moves to Miami, finds a boyfriend (Rodrigo Santoro) and begins living an expensive lifestyle. He realizes quickly though, that a life of luxury is expensive, leading this resourceful former cop to turn to a life as a conman. But when his con work finally catches up with him, Russell is sent to prison where he meets, and almost instantly falls in love with Phillip Morris (Ewan McGregor). From there it becomes a story of a forlorn lover who cannot bear to be separated from his soul-mate. He will go to any lengths to be with Phillip, including but not limited to walking out of jail pretending to be a doctor, after stealing a badge and painting his clothing, ordering his release pretending to be a judge, impersonating Morris’s lawyer and fraudulently becoming the CFO of a major corporation. He also simulates suffering from AIDS, and forges records to indicate that he died from it.

I LOVE YOU PHILLIP MORRIS will be in theaters on December 3, 2010. The film is rated R for sexual content including strong dialogue, and language.

Source: Yahoo! Movies

Sometimes, you should just hand Bill Paxton the ball and let him run with it.  Why not?  He’s Hudson, for God’s sake.  He’s the only man to have been killed by the Terminator, the Predator, and Aliens.  He deserves to have his dreams recognized a little bit.  So, when I hear from an interview, courtesy of Bullz-Eye, that one of the things on his “to-do” list is a 3-D sequel to TWISTER, I say give him the resources to do just that.

Here is precisely what he had to say after talking about a trip through the mid-west where a massive tornado (The Tri-State Tornado) hit in 1925:

So we just did that to kind of get some ideas, and from that I kind of extrapolated an idea for a sequel. And I kind of put that together into a format, and now we’re kind of waiting to see if that’s going to move forward.That would need Steven Spielberg’s blessing, ultimately, and they probably won’t take it to him ‘til there’s real studio interest, but I think the 3D applications of that could obviously be pretty amazing.

And this is the second time 3-D has been brought up this morning as a potential format for an upcoming project, and it is the second time that I say, “Fine, let ‘em do it.  Whatever.”

This is Bill Paxton just talking about what he would like to do, you should understand.  Nothing has been set in stone.  But, if a TWISTER 2 does make its way to theaters in 3-D, I say so be it.  It’s Bill Paxton, dammit.  He deserves a little notoriety now and again.

Just don’t bring Helen Hunt back.  I beg you of that.

I would love to tell you that Ang Lee’s new film made a big impression on me as a viewer, taking me back to Woodstock itself and giving me an intimate, insider’s look into a significant American cultural event that I was unfortunately not yet born to experience for myself but, alas, I cannot. What I can tell you is that TAKING WOODSTOCK is a light-hearted and fun dramedy that offers a small slice, or glimpse perhaps, into a bit of the essence of Woodstock, or at least of what my imagination and collected exposure to film and music of the event can muster.

TAKING WOODSTOCK marks director Ang Lee’s sixth English-language film. That’s one more than the five foreign-language films Lee has made. What I find interesting about Lee is his choice of topics for his American films. I don’t think I am making too big of a leap in suggesting Ang Lee, originally from Taiwan, is attempting to better understand the American culture through film, and perhaps even attempting to help us understand our own culture a little better in the process.

Lee’s first American film being SENSE AND SENSIBILITY, not necessarily entirely an American topic, but does have it’s place in our culture as a significant work of English literature. From here, Lee tackles the 70′s culture in America with his brilliantly realized film THE ICE STORM, followed by a trek back in time to study the lesser-known pages of the American Civil War with another great film RIDE WITH THE DEVIL. From here, Lee would truly challenge himself by taking on a topic also very much rooted in our American culture. I feel Ang Lee wasn’t entirely sure he knew what he was getting into when he made HULK, perhaps unfamiliar with the essence of this portion of our culture more than the others.

Of course, Ang Lee made waves with BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, which would also prove to be his most “controversial” film. But, enough of the Ang Lee history lesson. Let’s talk about peace, love and rock-n-roll. Let’s talk the late 60′s, Vietnam and Woodstock. Actually, we’re not going to talk much about the Vietnam War because the film barely touches on the topic at all. Strange, considering how the entire phenomenon known as Woodstock came about in response to the war.

In general, this portion of the era and story are embodied within Emile Hirsch’s performance as Billy, a friend of Elliott’s who has returned from the war and suffers from flashbacks, or post-traumatic stress disorder, but it’s not mentioned as such in the film. As much as I admire and appreciate Hirsch (INTO THE WILD, MILK) as a talented actor, his performance in TAKING WOODSTOCK left me unaffected, wanting something more and to some small extent unhappy with the minimal inclusion of this crucial element to the big picture of the story.

TAKING WOODSTOCK tells the story of Elliot Teichberg (Demetri Martin) and his unsuspected success at being the catalyst that made Woodstock happen. Elliot is a college-aged Jewish boy who has returned home to the rural upstate New York town of White Tail to assist his parents with their fledgling motel business as it teeters of the brink of failure. It’s clear that Elliot hates the idea of being shackled to the responsibility of running and saving the family business, but does so out of a sense of duty.

It isn’t until Elliot hears about a music festival seeking a rural venue after being repeatedly thrown out of one small farm town after another. He hears about the event from an eccentric theatre troupe bunking in his parents’ barn, led by Devon (Dan Fogler). In an effort to attract the event to his town as a way to boost tourism and save his family business, Elliot forms a surprising pact with local dairy farmer Max (Eugene Levy) to use his land for the festival. Michael Lang (Jonathan Groff) acts as a sort of Zen-like mediator in the process of securing the deal between the event promoters and Max.

What I liked the most about this story was the attention to character development, especially with Elliot, but the film suffers a bit as a result of the two-hour running time. It’s not an uninteresting or painful two-hours, but it does slow the pace of the film enough to weaken the entertainment value. TAKING WOODSTOCK offers some great characters from great actors, including Eugene Levy’s thoughtful and uncharacteristically under-played performance as Max, Elliot’s parents Jake (Henry Goodman) and Sonia (Imelda Staunton) and best of all Liev Schreiber as Vilma, a transvestite and Korean War veteran who asists with security and befriends Elliot and his father.

What disappointed me the most about TAKING WOODSTOCK is that the film focused more on being funny and pleasing to the general audience and not nearly enough on the heart of the event. For example, there was an altogether shameful lack of music that appeared directly in the film. Marijuana and Acid had a bigger role than the music. That’s just not right, considering it’s a movie about how Woodstock came to be. Clearly the film isn’t intended to be a documentary or even focus on the musicians, but the film lacks any reasonable amount recognition to the music that made Woodstock great.

TAKING WOODSTOCK is a lushly shot film that isn’t hard to watch. Danny Elfman surprisingly earns a credit for the film’s original music, even if it is relatively hidden within the film. It’s an easy story that avoids any real controversy, and what little is there with Elliot’s character is sort of washed over with a quick brush of the director’s hand before moving back into the main arc of the story. Demetri Martin (THE ROCKER) gives a decent performance in his first starring role, but it’s difficult to separate his performance far from his persona created in his stand-up career. The film will certainly have an audience, but it’s difficult to say how well it can do, opening against some hefty late-summer competition in both Rob Zombie’s HALLOWEEN II and THE FINAL DESTINATION 3D.

524 recipes.  365 days.  123 minutes.  A 3 out of 5 star movie.  Those are just some of the numbers that pertain to ‘Julie & Julia,’ Nora Ephron’s biopic/dramedy that has way of entertaining in fits and starts.

Presented in back-and-forth fashion, the film tells two true stories.  One pertains to Julia Child, played by Meryl Streep, and her husband, Paul, played by Stanley Tucci.  Paul works for the US embassy, and, as soon as the couple arrives in Paris, he and his wife take to the culture, particularly the food.  It’s the ’40s and ’50s, and Julia has yet to become the famed chef.  This half of the film centers on her working on her first book, an encyclopedia-sized book of recipes that would eventually become Mastering the Art of French Cooking.

Intercut with this is the story of Julie Powell, played by Amy Adams.  Julie is a frustrated secretary living in 2002 New York City.  She likens herself to an author, though she has not published anything, yet.  Once her husband, played by Chris Messina, introduces her to the world of online blogging, Julie decides she is going to take Julia’s book.  In one year, she plans to have created every recipse in the book.  Writing about it on the internet helps Julie find her own level of success.

Much like one of Julia Childs’ recipes, the ingredients for a first-rate film are all there.  The cast is exquisite.  Ephron’s writing, though she hasn’t had a critical hit in quite a long time, does justice to each narrative.  It moves between the two stories effortlessly, giving just enough time with one that you begin to wonder what is going on with the other.

Of course, this level of smooth transition between the two would be even greater had the same level of care in direction and the details for one story been given to the other.  The Julia Child section of the film is dynamically entertaining.  Streep embodies the character, perfecting the voice and the mannerisms of the great chef, so that you begin to forget what the real Julia Child looked like.  Ephron emerses her audience in Julia’s world, a world of fine cuisine and the imminent threat of McCarthyism.  Don’t worry, though.  The politics the film conveys are definite, but they are never overbearing or seem force-fed.  At least, not in this half of the movie.

There’s a loss of joy in the way Ephron directs the Julie Powell storyline.  Some of this is quite deliberate.  Ephron creates a bright, livelier than life feeling in the Julia Child segments, and you begin to wonder if this is her vision of what actually happened or is this all going on in Julie’s head.  By the end of the film, you begin to wonder if the Julia Child half of the film is Julie’s romanticized vision of what Julia and Paul Child’s life must have been like.  However, there are other aspects, other directional choices that just makes the audience feel like Ephron’s heart wasn’t in it to tell Julie Powell’s story the best way she knew how.  Each up and down in Julie’s path to getting through all 524 recipes comes with a forced hand, a mandatory second act of obstacles and unavoidable detours.

The men in each woman’s life are also given the same level of care the rest of their respective stories are given.  Great for Stanley Tucci.  Not so great for Chris Messina.  Tucci, who always delivers a resounding performance, is excellent here.  His character is immensely likeable, but Tucci brings the character to life, giving just enough decibels that he never overpowers Streep.  How could anyone steal a scene from Streep?  However, you almost feel as if Tucci could if given the chance, but he knows not only what his own character needs.  He knows exactly what is needed for the entirety of each scene.  Ephron gives short change care to Messina’s Eric Powell.  As Julie’s spouse and supporter in her year-long task, we aren’t really given much to work with.  We know he works in the city, and he likes to eat.  That’s about it, and Messina doesn’t seem to want to do anything that makes up stand up and take notice.  Unfortunately, we are forced to watch Messina eat, and that’s tasking at best.

The ups of Julia Child’s story and the downs of Julie Powell’s story are not 100%.  There are moments in the period segments of the film that seem to drag a bit.  The amount of time given to Julia’s sister visiting Paris and her eventual marriage was unnecessary.  Julia is working on the book with two, French women, played by Linda Emond and Helen Carey.  The screen time given to two of them considering ousting the third from the project grows redundant and unessential.

Likewise, there are moments in Julie Powell’s story that keeps it from being a total wash.  One cannot deny how talented Amy Adams is as an actress.  She never reaches out and takes hold of the part, but, for the most part, she plays the part as best as it probably could have been played.  A scene involving Julie having to kill lobsters is quite entertaining, and Ephron’s decision to have Talking Heads’ “Psycho Killer” playing on the soundtrack is inspired.  For better or for worse, the most entertaining segment of the Julie half of the film comes when she and her husband are watching Dan Aykroyd’s impression of Julia Child on an episode of SNL.  It’s a shame that this half of the film didn’t have more to offer, but you have to give Ephron credit for including this skit at all.

For all of its ups and downs, however, Ephron is capable of creating chemistry between the two actresses.  I won’t say whether Streep or Adams ever actually share any screen time.  That would be getting into spoiler territory.  However, you know that, even if they do have scenes together, they are very limited.  The chemistry comes when the actresses are in completely separate scenes, divided by 50 years or more.  This is to Ephron’s credit, but it is also to the credit of Streep and Adams.

At one point, after Julie has created Julia’s recipe for Beef Bourginon.  Her husband, clueless as he is to the skills of fine culinary, begins sprinkling salt on it.  ”Is it bland?” asks Julie.  ”Not now,” he replies.  Perhaps if Ephron would have sprinkled some spice into Julie’s world, this half of ‘Julie & Julia’ would not have been such a frustration on the film as a whole.  There is plenty of story in Julia Child’s life that a full feature could have been made.  In fact, you begin to wonder why no one has ever taken the task to put her life to film before.  Unfortunately, the other half of ‘Julie & Julia’ never quite lives up to it.  Much like Julie Powell working her way through the works of someone else, her half of this story seems to be deriving any level of enjoyment off of the half that follows Julia.  The entire film is left half-alive, and you cannot help but think how much more interesting ‘Julie & Julia’ had been had it only been called ‘Julia.’