Tag: Review

THE THREE STOOGES – The Review

Every decade or so, one or two film makers become a major force in cinema comedies. The 1980’s saw the influence of ZAZ (AKA Jerry Zucker, Jim Abrahams, and David Zucker) starting with AIRPLANE! and RUTHLESS PEOPLE . For the last ten years or so Judd Apatow (40-YEAR OLD VIRGIN) and Todd Phillips (OLD SCHOOL) have ruled the comedy roost. In between there’s the Farrelly brothers (Peter and Bobby), former sitcom writers who invaded the multiplexes with the big box office laugh fests DUMB AND DUMBER and THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY (which opened the gates for the return of the R-rated movie comedy). When interviewed during their salad days, the guys related their affection for a decades old comedy team and vowed to bring them back to the big screen (they even appeared on a tribute  NBC-TV special hosted by their KINGPIN star Woody Harrelson). After some recent under performing movie missteps (HALL PASS couldn’t connect with today’s raunchy comedy crowds), they’ve decided to finally put together their dream project/love letter. The end result is THE THREE STOOGES. Several fans of the trio have been quite vocal on the internet decrying this new film as sacrilege. They say that this will tarnish the good name of the classic comedians. Really? The Stooges?  While they were still with us, the fellas did plenty of material that was not exactly sterling. Remember SNOW WHITE AND THE THREE STOOGES? What about the crudely produced 60’s cartoons (from the “Clutch Cargo” folks) with cheaply made color live-action intros? A decade later “The Three Robotic Stooges” from Hanna-Barbera (a real low point for HB-and that’s saying something!) premiered on CBS Saturday mornings. And the boys nearly co-starred in BLAZING STEWARDESSES (Emile Sitka was to replace the ailing Larry Fine, but Moe’s death put the kibosh on this!). So whether this should be done is beside the point. It’s here. Let’s see how it works as a film..

First, here’s a quick stooge history lesson (a Stooges 101). The Three Stooges were a comedy group assembled by vaudeville comic Ted Healy in the early 1920’s. They were Shemp Howard, his brother Moe, and wild-haired violinist Larry Fine. When Hollywood beckoned they were featured performers in a couple of Fox films. Shemp left the team for a solo career and was replaced by another Howard brother, Jerry AKA Curly. They made some features and shorts with MGM before the stooges split from Healy. Soon they were signed by the struggling Columbia Pictures for a series of short subjects (16 to 18 minute films sometimes called two reelers) over the course of 25 years! When Curly retired due to illness, brother Shemp came back to replace him. When Shemp died, veteran comic Joe Besser filled the spot till the final short in 1959. The advent of television had pretty much shuttered all the studios’ shorts departments. Looked like the end of the road for the trio. But suddenly TV made them more popular than ever! Columbia’s Screen Gems division sold the stooges shorts to local TV stations around the country during the heyday of the kiddie show host (usually aired during the afternoon with local ads, a live audience of youngsters, and assorted short cartoons). They were in demand again. Comic vet Joe DeRita (AKA Curly Joe) replaced Besser and the fellows packed stadiums, hit the TV variety shows, and even starred in new feature films from Columbia (beginning with HAVE ROCKET, WILL TRAVEL). No doubt the young Farrelly boys were glued to their sets watching the boys during this big resurgence. Sadly the last of the stooges, DeRita passed away in 1993.

In putting together this new screen romp, the Farrellys are aiming squarely for family audiences (the ads tout its PG rating) since the stooges’s rapid slapstick and cartoon look always connected with kids. Now this is not an autobiography of the team (been done), nor is it a period piece set during the stooges golden era (late thirties, early forties). It features the most popular trio 0f Moe, Larry, and Curly, set in today’s world with a good deal of topical humor. As in the Brady Bunch feature films, the stooges don’t quite seem to belong (Gene Siskel used to say that they were always out-of-place) in these modern settings which gives the film the old fish (or fishes) out of water premise. There’s one plot flowing through the film’s 90 minutes, but there are title cards and animation inserted to make it appear that three new short subjects have been strung together. The story harkens back to the plots of several of the old shorts. The boys leave the orphanage where they grew up (on the entrance sign it states “est. 1934”, the same year as the release of the first stooge short, WOMAN HATERS-nice inside joke) in order to raise $830,000 and save it from closing (shades of THE BLUES BROTHERS). They get into many mishaps along the way and get entangled in a plot to do away with the rich husband of a femme fatale’ (Sofia Vergara). Although they’re in 2012, the stooges remain in somewhat familiar story territory.

Quite a lot of publicity has been stirred up by the Farrellys about the casting of the comic icons. Russell Crowe is Moe. Now it’s Benicio Del Toro. Sean Penn’s a lock as Larry. He’s out, Paul Giamotti’s in. Jim Carrey’s gonna wear prosthetics and a fat suit to be Curly. Nope, maybe Jack Black will shave his head. Finally three TV vets were cast who bring a great deal of energy and skill in re-creating the trio (hard to imagine those higher-profile stars doing a better job). The real discovery is Chris Diamantopoulos as Moe (Chris is a vet of several TV shows including “24”). He’s quick-tempered, easily frustrated, and dishes out punishment (and takes a lot) with authority. Surprisingly he shows some vulnerability and tenderness in a couple of scenes (A sensitive Moe!). His nicknames for by-standers (he calls a stout matron “Jumbotron”) are a hoot! The biggest star of the three may be Sean Hayes who got an Emmy for his work as Jack on the long-running “Will and Grace”. He displays his expert comic timing as the frizzy-haired Larry. While in the old shorts Larry would blend into the background, Hayes’s Larry gives the film some of its biggest laughs. And he can take a smack almost as well as the original. Interesting side note: both actors played comedians in TV bio films. Diamantopoulos played Robin Williams in “Behind the Camera: the Unauthorized Story of ‘Mork and Mindy'” while Hayes was Jerry in “Martin and Lewis.” And then there’s perhaps the most beloved and imitated stooge. Curly is played by the former “MadTV” cast member Will Sasso. He more than brings the required manic energy to the role, while reproducing the child-like nature of the groups’ wide-eyed innocent. Curly always seemed to be off on another dimension from his two pals and Sasso gets that, too. I was concerned about his being taller than his team mates, but that was not an issue after a few minutes in. During several sequences, the actors are like a well oiled machine as they engage in a rapid bopping, eye-poking, slapping whirlwind worthy of a top drill team or dance troupe. There have been several recreations on TV of the boys over the years: SCTV (with the legendary John Candy as Curly), ABC’s Fridays (with Larry David as Larry!), Fox’s In Living Color, and the ABC bio movie (produced by Mel Gibson), but Chris, Sean, and Will are the best yet.

And the guys have some great supporting players (besides the talented youngsters that play the trio at age ten). The biggest scene stealer has to be Larry David as the orphanage’s Sister Mary Mengele. Excitable and full of fury, he holds his own against the stooges and several overly cloying orphans (guess the kids are there for young audience identification. Seemed like a lot of forced pathos). Craig Bierko is terrific as the sap who enlists the stooges in the murder plot, but then suffers the most abuse from them. Vergara is as lovely as she is on “Modern Family,” but here we get to see her ruthless side as a variation of the classic double (and triple) crossing film noir bombshell. The other ladies don’t have as much to work with. Jennifer Hudson gets to belt a bit of gospel as one of the nuns, but spends the rest of her time responding the boys’ antics. The real waste is the great Jane Lynch in the somber, bland role of Mother Superior (one of the best comic actors working today, and she doesn’t get to crack wise?). There’s a welcome cameo from Bill Murray’s brother Brian as a priest and a very satisfying sequence involving the cast of a much reviled (but strangely popular) reality TV show (perhaps cathartic is more appropriate). A few moments lag, but there’s a whole lotta’ fun packed in these ninety minutes ( try to stick around for the end credits music video ). You might find yourself laughing more than the kids. Like the Farrellys, I watched those black and white gems on my favorite TV host’s show (hey Cactus Pete’s Funny Company!) and this new film gave me some  nostalgic amusement. There’s some clever sight gags and slapstick along with clever riffs on time-tested bits. It’s silly and crude, but I laughed a lot in spite of my “adult sophistication.” You stooge-iphiles need not worry. This is a film that captures the spirit of the old classics and is filled with affection for those ‘chowder-heads.’ Should you give this flick a look? Why ‘soitenly’!

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

THE RAID: REDEMPTION – The Review

Once more, an incredible film emerges from an once unlikely corner of the world, to many a place virtually unknown to Americans. This time, its Indonesia and the film is THE RAID: REDEMPTION. Do you think you know action? No, not Schwarzenegger and Stallone, but true badass, butt-kicking, jaw-dropping action that sticks to your ribs like so many seen brutally busted? If so, then this is one film you had better not miss… or else!

THE RAID: REDEMPTION — from here out referred to simply as THE RAID — is written and directed by Gareth Evans. You may be wondering why or how a film from Indonesia is made by a guy who certainly doesn’t sound Indonesian, but really… who cares?!?! [From what I gather, Evans is Welsh-born and a cinephile uniquely obsessed with Eastern culture. I’m down with that.] Evans clearly has a firm grasp on the culture, the setting and the hardships of the Indonesian people. The film takes place in a crumbling, urban setting, primarily a towering housing complex/fortress controlled by the local drug and crime boss who rules with a heavy hand, blatantly providing safe haven for all the worst type of subhuman beings — for a price — mocking the authorities who fear to enter his domain, as many have tried and failed.

Reluctant but loyal to his duty and eager to do his part in ending the reign of criminal terror, this is where our hero Rama (Iko Uwais) enters the story. Rama is a young, but lethal soldier for justice, a husband and soon-to-be father with a glimmer of giving his unborn child a better future twinkling in his eye. This will ultimately be what drives Rama through the pain as he takes on the highrise from hell. What Evans does that I appreciate is to introduce our hero in a way we’re not normally accustomed to seeing, a montage cutting between shots of Rama training in solitude and shots of Rama praying in solitude as well. He’s a complete man, father and husband, at peace and clear-headed… making him dangerously focused and powerful.

THE RAID spends a little time up front introducing the characters on both sides, a little time setting up the premise for what is about to take place on screen, then quickly throws the audience right into the police raid which rapidly unravels into chaos and bloodshed, a vertical monsoon of bullets followed by a barrage of unbelievable feet and fists that will have you on the edge of your seat. The fight choreography in THE RAID is superb, and without the (apparent) use of wires, this is a feature film showcasing a whole new cast of awe-inspiring martial artists. At first, hot lead is everywhere, followed by cold steel and hardened fists when the bullets run out. This is when the fun really begins and the pain takes hold.

The story, while simple and direct, has a team of SWAT-like police infiltrating the corrupted high rise with the implied intent of ridding it of the criminal cockroaches plaguing their city. What eventually reveals itself is a twist at the end, one I will not divulge, but will elude to it being a fairly formulaic but effective plot tool which takes a backseat to the great portion and focus of the film, which is the magnificent fight choreography, conceived by Yayan Ruhian (remember this name) and Iko Uwais himself. Truly amazing stuff on display here guys, and gals. THE RAID features more moments of phantom pain amidst the audience than I can recall in so many years. I found myself on multiple occasions reacting with an “Oooh, ow!” or flinching or briefly turning away, then morbidly looking back for more. Busted heads, broken backs, faces, ribs, necks, limbs… it’s all demolished on both sides of this epic conflict with fantastic, painful realism. I do love Jackie Chan, but these guys make his real-life stunts and fight choreography look tame in comparison.

Remember that guy whose name I said to remember? In addition to co-choreographing THE RAID, Yayan Ruhian also plays Mad Dog, the crime boss’ enforcer, opposite his right hand man, who has a secret of his own to be discovered when you see this film. Mad Dog is the little psycho killer who could, and seemingly NEVER FREAKING DIES! This short, long-haired little mutt’s bite is way, way way worse than his relatively quiet bark. It’s rare that I find myself actually rooting in a way for the bad guy, but Mad Dog in a monster in a small package. He does more damage to this crew of tactical enforcers of good than Godzilla has down to Tokyo. Pain is his middle name and he prefers fists and feet to guns, as he explains before utterly annihilating Rama’s #2 guy Jaka (Joe Taslim), but not without a lengthy and spectacular fight to the death.

THE RAID only has one, relatively minor flaw, hence receiving 4.5 rather than 5 stars. The film is light on depth of plot and back-story, but not so much that it detracts from the overall enjoyment of the film. Hey, sometimes you just want to be entertained by extraordinary, excessive violence, right? Otherwise, why would mixed martial arts be so popular? Speaking of which, imagine the best MMA fighters being thrown together into a massive multi-level royal rumble a la Donkey Kong and you still wouldn’t have the level of awesomeness available to you in THE RAID: REDEMPTION. ‘Nuff said!

Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

THE RAID: REDEMPTION opens today, April 13th, in Saint Louis at Landmark’s Tivoli Theatre.

BLUE LIKE JAZZ – The Review

BLUE LIKE JAZZ is based on the New York Times best-selling book of the same title by Donald Miller, and an official selection in the SXSW (South By Southwest) Film Festival. This alone may be enough for some to count this film as an unwavering success, but despite the film’s valiant efforts, it is not without it’s flaws. That being said, the film is also far from being a waste of the viewer’s time… in fact, I encourage seeing this film for what it is, flaws and all, because it’s the kind of movie we rarely see in theaters, and one that is rarely as accomplished as this one has turned out within it’s distinct genre of storytelling.

Directed by Steve Taylor, BLUE LIKE JAZZ is a story of faith and how it collides with one’s struggle to find his place in the world. Marshall Allman plays Donald Miller, the central character and author of the book from which  the film is based. Donald is a young Texan man, a Southern Baptist with divorced parents, son to an uber-conservative Jesus-freak mother (Jenny Littleton) and a liberal intellectual atheist father (Eric Lange) whom he refers to as “The Hobo.” Life is peachy and grand for Donald, as he goes about his quaint little life as assistant to the youth pastor of his church… until he discovers a life-altering secret about his mother and the servant of God with whom he served. At this moment, Donald’s continuing collegiate course changes drastically, choosing to attend Reed College in the Pacific Northwest instead of Trinity Baptist in Texas.

This is the setup, having successfully framed Donald as the proverbial square, a holy-roller without a clue, but a nice guy who gets dumped on by those he loved. BLUE LIKE JAZZ presents itself in an oddly, often forced quirkiness, but given the nature of the film and the tone of the film, this forced quirkiness actually lends a certain pleasant peculiarity to the film’s charm, which permeates even the lower moments. From day one, arriving at Reed College, Donald is clearly a fish out of water, but this is carried over from his time in Texas, where Donald was already something of a fish out of water without truly realizing it. We’re introduced early on, perhaps subconsciously, to this idea of Donald being different from the average folk, falling somewhere between the two extremes. This may be slightly cliche’ in it’s execution, but once more… it works here.

Donald meets and befriends two fellow students at Reed College that ultimately hold extremely influential roles in his personal epiphany. Kenny (Jason Marsden) — aka, The Pope — is a wild card, a free spirit and a sort of rebellious anti-religious version of Donald, while Penny (Claire Holt) is a straight-laced, well-mannered do-gooder with whom Donald develops an infatuation with despite the unknown similarity they share. Donald struggles to reconcile between his being drawn into the life of parties and pranks that Kenny leads and the more righteous, conscience-driven life led by Penny. Somewhere in the middle is the relatively insignificant but welcome friendship Donald makes with a lesbian student named Lauryn (Tania Raymonde).

BLUE LIKE JAZZ plays out much like ANIMAL HOUSE (1978) meets ACCEPTED (2006) as a college film with lots of partying and craziness but with substance and a message, even if the message is heavy-handed. BLUE LIKE JAZZ definitely wears it’s heart on it’s sleeve, making no effort to hide it’s agenda as a film focused on making a statement. BLUE LIKE JAZZ stands up and proudly says “I’m a Christian and that’s alright, because we’re not all crazy extremists and I have a sense of humor about my life.”

Regardless of where you stand on the scale of religion, BLUE LIKE JAZZ is a film that can be appreciated for it’s willingness to expose itself and have fun with a topic otherwise taken far too seriously by far too many people. BLUE LIKE JAZZ is funny, light-hearted and quirky… until the final act, specifically the long, drawn-out ending scene when Donald has his ultimate epiphany. This scene removes itself from the lighter touch of the rest of the film, sinking into the preachy depths from which it had successfully avoided up to this point. My advice, enjoy the film up to this point, then bite your tongue during the end, followed by an intriguing and intelligent debate with a number of various outlooks on the film with others as you leave the theater.

Overall Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

BLUE LIKE JAZZ opens today, April 13th in St. Louis at Wehrenberg Theatres.

More information about BLUE LIKE JAZZ can be found at bluelikejazzthemovie.com

AMERICAN REUNION – The Review

Before all the big Summer vacation escapes and adventures, some folks want to take time to remember the past and re-connect with old friends. The same is true for the characters in one of the last decade’s most influential comedies. Building on the return of the R rated sex comedy begun with the big box office of THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY in 1998, AMERICAN PIE exploded at the cineplexes in 2000. As SCREAM did with the slasher genre ( or as Siskel and Ebert referred to them, ” the dead teenager movie ” ), PIE brought back to life another genre from many years ago: the youth-oriented sex comedy ( or as S & E called them, ” the horny teenager movie ” ). In the years since the original, its theatrical sequels and a few direct to DVD flicks, the HANGOVER films and BRIDESMAIDS have shot to the top of the list of movie grossers ( in money and raunch ). So can the old PIE gang return in AMERICAN REUNION and show these cinema upstarts a thing or two ( I mean they’re ” gasp ” in their thirties now! ) ?

As with the original  AMERICAN theatrical trilogy, Jim Levenstein ( Jason Biggs ) is the main focus of this installment. He’s working for a big Chicago company and has made a home with his ” band girl ” Michelle ( Alyson Hannigan ) and his adorable three-year old son. But it seems that the couple have lost that ‘ spark ‘. What could rekindle, or re-ignate said spark? How about a trip back to their home town for the big thirteenth high school reunion ( Hmm, thought most classes get together in five-year increments. Oh well )? They’ll stay with Jim’s dad ( Eugene Levy ), a widower of the past three years who may try to get back out in the dating scene, and meet up with the old gang. Kevin ( Thomas Ian Nicholas ) is a house-husband to a very successful woman. Finch ( Eddie Kaye Thomas ) arrives with tales of globe-trotting adventure. Oz ( Chris Klein ) has perhaps made the biggest splash as a TV sports talk show host. He’s living the LA high life in an opulent mansion with a hot blonde girlfriend ( Katrina Bowden ). Except for an embarrassing stint on a TV reality / talent competition , Oz seems to have it all. And then there’s Stiffler ( Sean William Scott ), still a wild man even in the corporate world. All’s going well with the big get-together prior to the main event, until the ladies from their pasts shake things up. With Kevin, it’s old high school sweetheart Vicky ( Tara Reid ) and Oz meets his former flame, ‘ choir girl’ Heather ( Mena Suvari ). Jim is stunned, not by a former girlfriend, but by his next door neighbor. Turns out the little girl who Jim babysat is now a very stunning 18-year-old woman who wants to celebrate her birthday by acting on that crush she had on her old sitter. What’s going to happen to all these relationships during this long wild weekend back home?

So, is this reunion worth attending? The script hits a few bumps ( The Jim and Michelle conflict is a bit tired ), but there are some big laughs ( although we can see the set-ups sometimes ) and the cast is very eager to please. In the last few years, many of them have fought their demons publicly , so here they’re given another chance to show us their comedic skills. Biggs is still a master of embarrassment and humiliation ( this time, the now chunkier actor is referred to as an Adam Sandler clone! ). Kudos for the addition of Dania Ramirez as Michelle’s old band geek buddy who’s now a smokin’ hot bartender ( a bit of ethnic diversity helps spice things up ). Most get their chance to shine, although several orignal classmates only have glorified walk-ons ( you could miss them if you go on a bathroom break ). John Cho does return as the guy who launched ‘ MILF ‘ into cinema lexicon. Speaking of that term, the cougar queen, Stifler’s Mom ( Jennifer Coolidge ) is back too and has some great scenes with her Christopher Guest team-mate Levy ( be sure and stick around for the end credits for a great bonus bit ). The most dependable laugh-getter of the bunch maybe Scott as the oddly endearing Stifler. By all rights this coarse, clueless oaf should be the villain, but somehow we feel bit protective of him ( to paraphrase one of his pals, ” Stifler may be a d**k, but he’s our d**k” ). The guy’s like an overly frisky puppy that goes right for your leg, Annoying, but still lovable. This may be in part because of the zeal the talented Mr. Scott infuses into every line reading ( look for him as a sweeter, but still dense  guy in GOON ). The movie’s a tad too long at just under two hours, but you’ll have a good deal of fun spending time with the old crew. They’re not horny teenagers anymore, but as the Who classic ( and recent film ) states, the kids are all right

Overall Rating: 3.5 Out of 5 Stars

 

UNDEFEATED – The Review

This past February, UNDEFEATED took home the Best Documentary Feature Oscar. The film tells the story of a feisty, focused coach determined to end the losing streak of a football team from a school that’s seen better days. The prime example of this plot would go all the way back to 1940 with KNUTE ROCKNE, ALL AMERICAN and continue through to the more recent REMEMBER THE TITANS and WE ARE MARSHALL. So it might be more than a bit familiar. And the documentary techniques are not ground-breaking. We’re basically a fly on the wall observing the start of the new season.  But what observations! There’s just as much drama and suspense here as in any big Hollywood ” based on true events” flick. You don’t have to be a pigskin fanatic to be enthralled with these people. Perhaps you may identify with one or two of the principals even if you never took to the field.

UNDEFEATED chronicles the Fall 2009 football season at Manassas High School of West Memphis Tennessee. The area around the school has been hit hard by the economic down-turn. The neighborhoods are filled with boarded-up, abandoned houses, piles of garbage, and drug dealers on nearly every corner. The school’s football team ( as Colbert would call them, ” the fightin’ Tigers” ) is almost in the same sad shape as those mean streets. In some recent seasons the team went without a single win. Hoping to reverse the trend is Head Varsity Football Coach Joe Courtney. He’s the owner of a big lumber company who’s had a love of the game since childhood. We see him spending the early morning hours supervising his business then zipping over to the school to roam the halls and do some on the run recruiting ( ” Got a nice jersey just for you! “). He’s a big, jovial guy ( kind of a cross between Kevin James and the much missed John Candy ) who’s often the only white face roaming the hallways. With racial issues filling the news today, the film presents a great portrait of respect and co-operation. Courtney loves his team, but feels guilt pangs over the time away from his own kids. He blows his top sometimes, but he’s always there when his players have a problem.

Speaking of players, the film focuses on three members of the Tigers. The most promising, gifted player may be the gentle giant O.C. Brown. He’s got the size to take out the competition, but unlike most husky guys, O.C. has the speed. We see him clearing a path for the running back to score and running alongside. College scouts have started to sniff around. The only thing that O.C. can’t seem to break through is his studies, particularly the all-important SAT tests. Because he and his grandmother live in such a rough part of town, no tutors will venture there, so the coach came up with a plan. O.C. will live with the family of one of the coaching staff during the school week. After class and practice, the tutors will work with him there. The opulent suburbs are a completely foreign world to the big, sweet-natured young man ( reminiscent of THE BLIND SIDE, except he’s back with Grandma’ on the weekends ).

While O.C.’s a man of few words, his team-mate Motrail ‘Money” Brown, has the gift of gab. Money’s got big plans, but unfortunately he’s one of the shortest guys on the squad ( ala’ RUDY ). He spends most of the game begging to be sent in. His story might be the most affecting. He’s an easy-going, ambitious guy, who’s pals with the team’s loose cannon Chavis Daniels. We first meet Chavis as he returns to school after 15 months in a youth detention facility. He’s got an explosive temper and lashes out unexpectedly. Courtney’s got his hands full dealing with this angry young man’s blow-ups. The coach wrestles with Chavis’s behavior. How many chances does he get? Can football channel all his pent-up emotions. Or will he be swallowed up by the streets? It’s a wrenching dilemma.

What comes across in the film is a need by most of the team, including the coach, for a male authority figure. In an emotional confession Courtney talks about his father walking out of his life as a toddler. After finding some joy in football, he’d be filled with sadness watching his team mates leaving the field with their dads ( one hand on his son’s shoulders, the other carrying his boy’s helmet and pads ). We see the profiled players with mothers, aunts, and grandmothers, but rarely with male relatives. This not to say the film is full of gloom. Included are many small victories ( I won’t reveal how the season ended ), a major setback for one player, and an act of incredible kindness that may have you reaching for your hankie ( unless your veins are filled with ice water! ). As I said earlier, no ground-breaking documentary techniques here. No re-creations, no graphs, no animations. It’s similar to the format now adopted for TV sitcoms like ” The Office ” and ” Modern Family “. Except there’s very few seated confessionals or interviews here. Everyone’s always on the move, particularly Coach Courtney. I never threw on the pads and helmet at school, but I was delighted to spend some time with this team. Any teenager mentored by Coach Courtney is a winner, no matter what the scoreboard reads.

Overall Rating : 5 Out of 5 Stars

CHICO AND RITA – The Review

The following is taken from the film’s review when it was featured as part of the 2011 Stella Artois St. Louis International Film Festival this past November.

CHICO AND RITA is a dazzling, musical feature-length animated film that uses many modern techniques while harkening back to a time, not too long ago, when American studios flirted with the idea of animation geared to more adult stories. Now this is not to say that the great Pixar films don’t have adult themes but their  finished stories are “kid-friendly”. Forty years ago Ralph Bakshi was heading the charge for movie cartoons to compete for mature audiences. As Fritz the Cat said in the ads, ” I’m X-rated and animated! “. Soon Bakshi’s  toned down th more extreme elements in his features ( ending his run with WIZARDS, AMERICAN POP, and his take on Tolkein ) while other studios explored the territory with WATERSHIP DOWN and HEAVY METAL. American audiences never embraced these as they did in Asia and Europe. With C&R the artists are tackling an old fashioned show biz rags to riches love story ( having just seen the new BluRay release I was reminded of NEW YORK,NEW YORK ) and giving it some animated energy to go with that bouncy Latin beat.

The film begins in modern day Havana as Chico, an old shoe shine man, returns to his simple apartment. He tunes in his battered radio to a classic music station and listens to one of his old melodies. His mind flashes back to 1948. Then he was a promising young jazz pianist who, along with his bandmate Ramon, are giving two American “chicas ‘ a whirlwind tour of Cuban hot spots. When they enter a small  nightclub, Chico is stunned by the talent and beauty of a young singer named Rita. Over the next few years the two form a professional and personal partnership. They make great music, fight, break-up, reunite, and pursue their dreams. Eventually they separate and Chico travels to New York, Las Vegas, and Hollywood to be with his dream girl as her star quickly rises.

The story is told primarily through the medium of hand-drawn 2-D animation ( as opposed to the CGI molded stars like Shrek ). The human characters are simply designed with a minimum of details and linework. Like a live-action film the camera does zoom in slowly on them for dramatic effect. Now, this is not to say that computers were not used here, The intricate background drawings are separated into levels and given a rounded quality as are the gorgeous vintage autos. This is very effective as the principals race through those sixty year old neon streets. Caricature is also used to establish the settings. We get to hear and see several musical greats from Woody Herman to Charlie Parker to Nat King Cole ( is that Desi Arnaz singing at a funeral? ). During a fantasy dream sequence  Rita’s  dancing with Astaire and romanced by Bogart. As I stated earlier this is really an adult story. There’s some rough language, drug use, smoking, full nudity, and a mob-style shoot out. We even get a bit of history with the Cuban revolution and segregation ( the two leads are dark-skinned Cubans ). This film is a treat for the eyes and ears that doesn’t forget the heart. It’s no wonder that this was one of the five nominees for Best Animated Feature Film at the 20212 Oscars.

 Rating: 4.5 Out of 5 Stars

CHICO AND RITA plays exclusively in the St. Louis area at Landmark’s Tivoli Theatre

WRATH OF THE TITANS – The Review

*** Fair warning, this review may contain some very, very MINOR spoilers. ***

It’s a rare thing that a sequel surpasses it’s predecessor, and in the case of WRATH OF THE TITANS, the theory wavers slightly. CLASH OF THE TITANS (2010) was a remake of the 1981 Ray Harryhausen classic that had action and lots of CGI special effects but did little to honor the original, nor did it compare to the thrill and excitement the 1981 original still offers fans. With this sequel, loosely based on the the 1981 screenplay written by Beverley Cross, who also wrote the 1981 original CLASH OF THE TITANS, the film ponies up a more fluid story with better special effects, but the pacing differs greatly from the 2010 CLASH OF THE TITANS.

WRATH OF THE TITANS takes place a decade after Perseus (Sam Worthington) defeated the Kraken. Having turned down his god-father Zeus’ offer to rule by his side from Olympus, the demi-god [half human/half god] Perseus now attempts to live a normal, human life with his son in a small village. Perseus devotes his life to his son now, but when Zeus returns asking for Perseus to fight once more to save the world, Perseus sticks to his guns and stays with his son… at first. Perseus doesn’t realize the severity of his father’s need for his help.

Meanwhile, in the realm of the gods, Hades (Ralph Fiennes) has something up his cloak and is secretly plotting to dethrone Zeus (Liam Neeson) and free their father Kronos from the prison within which Zeus and Hades once confined him. The key to this story is that the gods are growing weaker as humanity no longer prays to them, which means the safeguards they have placed in the world to protect humanity weaken along with their power, threatening to unleash the Titans on the world. This is bad news, but it takes nearly losing his father to bring Perseus around once more and step into his big boy shoes to save the day for all mankind.

WRATH OF THE TITANS is directed by Jonathan Liebesman, who’s last outing was in last years BATTLE LOS ANGELES, a film I would describe as great looking but story lacking. While the story itself was a plus in WRATH OF THE TITANS — and it did look great, with cinematography from Ben Davis — I do see some pacing similarities between the two films. Both have some extremely intense action sequences that are well constructed, but the time spent between these high-octane moments tends to falter a bit, losing some of the momentum, requiring a fresh buildup to the next round of excitement, acting as a slow, unnecessary buffer.

Sam Worthington has hair this time around, which I consider a good thing. His quasi-miliatry buzz cut from CLASH OF THE TITANS always bothered me, as if he just came off the set of AVATAR to shoot CLASH. Leading man aside, the cast was one of the high points in this sequel. Neeson and Fiennes aside, both of whom were naturally enjoyable, Danny Huston returns for a short time as Poseidon and Edgar Ramirez plays Ares, the god of war. Queen Andromeda features a new face, played this time around by Rosamund Pike, replacing Alexa Davalos.

However, the real acting treat in WRATH OF THE TITANS comes from Bill Nighy, who plays the “fallen one” Hephaestus and whom serves a vital role in the quest of Perseus. Nighy, a veteran actor not unaccustomed to fantasy and genre films, is usually a fan favorite, from his roles in SHAUN OF THE DEAD to the UNDERWORLD franchise. Covered in long, gray hair and a ratty beard, it’s difficult at first to recognize the actor, especially when he attempts to disguise his voice, but the tell-tale vocal trademarks and mannerisms do still shine through, resulting in a pleasant “hey, I know him” epiphany. Nighy delivers a fun time in the middle of a movie that mostly takes itself very seriously.

As I mentioned, the special effects are better in WRATH OF THE TITANS than in the CLASH remake. From the monstrous double-bodied soldiers called the Makhai, wielding a relentless onslaught of death and destruction onto the human army, to the fire-breathing bat-dog things and the Chimera, a small band of giant Cyclops, the creature design and effects are the true stars of the film. In this way, WRATH feels like a Harryhausen film, but not it’s equal. Kronos, in particular — albeit lumbering and slow — is quite the eyeful of coolness and scary to boot when you consider what he is and what it would be like in real life. The one creature design I was disappointed in was during the labyrinth segment — a very well designed segment, I might add — when Perseus confronts the minotaur, which I felt lacked greatly, resembling little more than THE GOONIES’ Sloth with horns stuck to his head.

Overall, WRATH OF THE TITANS is a solid film, a true summer blockbuster that will draw crowds and makes lots of money. WRATH is slightly more accomplished than the CLASH remake, enough so to be noticeable and enjoyable. Perhaps it was just me, but beware the down time between the action sequences. These would be good times to sip freely from your caffeine tank, nestled closely in your cup holder. Finally, I suppose I’ll mention the ever present 3D, which is a far cry better than the virtually non-existent 3D of CLASH OF THE TITANS, rendered pointlessly in post-production. The 3D is there in WRATH, visible and effective, if you’re into the blatantly self-conscious, somewhat gimmicky style of 3D in film. My recommendation — as usual — go old school and see the film in 2D.

Overall Rating: 3 0ut of 5 stars

MIRROR, MIRROR (2012) – The Review

Last year it seemed that Hollywood was taking a short break from adaptations of toys, video games, comic books, and TV shows when two films were announced that would be live-action versions of classic fairy tales. Well, actually both would be based the same tale ” Snow White and the Seven Dwarves ” by the Brothers Grimm. The entertainment news magazines, blogs, and TV programs were all a flutter. Remember the dueling big asteroid and volcano movies from a decade ago! Would the movie-going public be interested in two versions of that raven-haired heroine? And more importantly, who would make it to the multiplex first?  Slowly photos and trailers hit the internet and it became clear that the films were quite different in tone. The darker, action-heavy SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN would fit better, perhaps, amid the big, blockbuster thrill-rides of the Summer. Spring was deemed a better time for a more lighter, irreverent, frothy retelling and so MIRROR, MIRROR is the first to hit the screens. Will this Snowy be the fairest flick of the two?

Most of us are pretty familiar with the basic story thanks to Disney’s ground-breaking first animated feature film. The MIRROR team has re-worked the plot and added bits and pieces from other fables and fairy stories. As it begins, the wicked stepmother queen herself ( Julia Roberts ) brings us up to speed with a prologue acted out by shiny porcelain puppets ( CGI, no doubt ). After the King disappeared into the dark forest many years ago, she’s ruled the kingdom ( plunging it into a constant dreary winter ) and kept lovely Snow White ( Lilly Collins ) locked away in the castle. The queen’s running out of funds and may have to marry the frumpy, older, much richer Baron ( Michael Lerner ). The villagers of the kingdom are almost taxed to starvation (shades of Robin Hood ). But then she meets the handsome Prince Alcott ( Armie Hammer ) after he and his valet are robbed by a pack of seven ( ! ) bandits in the nearby woods. Her plans go askew when he meets… guess who at the big animal-themed costume ball ( a bit of Cinderella there ). Banishment, deception, sorcery, reunions, and new friendships occur as the film hurtles towards several big reveals and the ( hopefully! ) happy ending.

This marks the fourth film of director Tarsem Singh ( he made THE IMMORTALS last year ). He gives us many of the same visual tricks ( slow and fast motion, extreme color palettes, wire-work acrobatics, rapid cutting ), but doesn’t have a light touch that this material demands. There’s no THE PRINCESS BRIDE subtlety on display here. There are opulent palace sets, outrageous over the top gowns ( hey Costume Design Oscar nominators! ), and an overly busy Allan Menkin score to capitalize every wink and grimace. And Singh seems to just be moving the cast like chess pieces ( as the queen does in an early scene ) toward the big action set-ups. Julia Robert’s drag-queen villainy and vanity, perhaps a riff on Tallulah Bankhead ( Google her kids! ), quickly becomes tedious. She’s also the mirror reflection/ witch who stares blankly, wears all white, delivers cryptic warnings, and sends killer marionettes ( huh? ) after the heroes. Collins’s Snow is a fairly vacant princess who looks lovely ( even with Peter Gallagher eyebrows ), but tends to be overshadowed in many scenes. She finally gets a bit more interesting after meeting the dwarves and gets a training montage ( surprised I didn’t hear ” Eye of the Tiger’! ) and a makeover ( ?! ) by the metro sexual member of the gang. Speaking of the seven, they’re played by actual diminutive actors ( as opposed to being “hobbit-ized” ) and are not the jewel-miners from the 37′ classic. After taking off their accordian-legs ( really !) we find that each has a name reflective of a trait or habit ( ” Grub ” loves to eat! ” Chuck” likes to laugh or chuckle! Sooo cuuute! And clever! ). One’s got a little crush on Snow and comes off a tad creepy. Hammer is pretty and prince-ly as Alcott ( should make the ladies’ hearts flutter ), but is too pompous and comes off as a teasing older brother in scenes with ” kid sister ” Snow. There’s very few sparks between the two. The very talented Nathan Lane is wasted as the queen’s put-upon aide who looks fearful as he scurries about ( literally after getting hexed! ) and peppers his royal compliments with a sarcastic snark. I was delighted to see a couple of great screen vets. Lerner get delightfully frustrated in his pursuit of the queen, while former ” brat packer” Mare Winningham as the head of castle cleaning and kitchens tries to nurture Snow while placating the queen. Most of the sets are imaginative except for the overused white-blanketed forest. Even in bare feet nobody seems cold there. The very small kiddies may find this amusing, but the pacing and tiresome attempts at wit should have the elders glancing at the time. For a wise cracking jab at story books I’ll take the first SHREK or PRINCESS BRIDE over this ( and I’ll take Jay Ward’s still fresh and hilarious ” Fractured Fairy Tales” from TV’s “The Bullwinkle Show” over all of them). I hope Charlize, Bella Swan, and Thor have a better flick with their take on this timeless tale in a few months.

Overall Rating : 1.5 Out of 5 Stars

THE DROUGHT (2011) – The Short Review

Not since David Lynch’s THE STRAIGHT STORY have I enjoyed a film about the charm of an elderly man’s unwavering determination and loyalty. THE DROUGHT, written and directed by Kevin Slack, is a 12-minute short film starring Edmund Lyndeck as Jonas, a senior resident of Brooklyn who struggles with his efforts to sell umbrellas from a small street cart during a summer drought. During his down time, Jonas recollects his life through visions of his late wife Janet (Kathleen Hope Reilly) as a young woman, the only thing that makes him smile during these dry, hot days of summer.

THE DROUGHT is an extremely romantic film, not in the contemporary sense, but in the nostalgic heart-warming sense. Jonas is a good guy, sad and lonely, but he’s pure and true. Lyndeck gives a quaint performance of a likeable old man, stubborn in his ways. Other than the memory of his wife, only one other thing in this world puts a smile on Jonas’ face… umbrellas, especially his first, which holds a special place in his heart and on his wall.

Cinematographer John Paul Clark works closely with director Kevin Slack to create an absolutely beautiful film, shot with a warmth that conveys the dry, summer heat, but still feel comfortable and inviting. The rest of the world around Jonas is happy and enjoying the weather, but Jonas dreams of the rain’s return… and therefor, the return of demand for his umbrellas. Rob Gokee supplies the original music for the film, adding to the overall romanticism of the story.

THE DROUGHT has two primary characters. The first is obviously Jonas, while the second is Marco (Ivan Goris), a supporting character and fellow street vendor. Marco and Jonas are friends despite being each others indirect competition. Marco makes efforts to help out the struggling Jonas, but he remains committed to his umbrella passion, despite his unspoken uncertainty. This friendship adds a level of generational perception, an element of the changing times to compliment the metaphorical use of the seemingly unchanging weather.

As is usually the case with short films, THE DROUGHT won’t be found in any theaters, except maybe for the occasional film festival. With that said, short films are often well worth the time it takes to seek them out and deserve more attention than they receive. Kevin Slack’s THE DROUGHT is gorgeous. It tells a simple but smart and pleasing story without being condescending or too cute.

With that said, I am privileged to say you can watch the film below:

The Drought – short film from Kevin Slack on Vimeo.

The Drought trailer from Kevin Slack on Vimeo.

THE CORRIDOR – The Review

Review originally published on September 27th, 2011 as part of our Fantastic Fest coverage.

My favorite science-fiction stories are often the subtle ones, films and literature that delve deeper into the philosophical of the genre pool, more than simply wading in the shallow end with fantastic technology and the sensationalism of aliens. THE CORRIDOR, written by Josh MacDonald and directed by Evan Kelly, does this well, while also mingling nicely with the psychological thriller genre.

THE CORRIDOR begins with a jolt to the viewer’s attention, firing a bullet of essential back story at point blank range, leaving a residue of smoldering mystery to ignite the slowly burning story that follows. Stephen Chambers stars as Tyler, returning from a stint of recovery after having a breakdown triggered by his mother’s death. In a show of support and to celebrate Tyler’s return, his four best friends decide to reunite with him for a weekend at his mother’s small house out in the Canadian wilderness.

David Fleming plays Chris, Tyler’s closest friend and probably the most level-headed of the five. James Gilbert plays Everett, the wilder of the friends and a musician with a borderline drinking problem. Matthew Amyotte plays “Bobcat,” the big, burly ex-football star turned family man. Finally, Glen Matthews plays Jim, or “Huggs” as he’s called by the rest of the crew, the smart and somewhat nerdy friend. Together, they’re an unlikely group of characters with a natural chemistry.

In the beginning, the friendly get together seems harmless enough, despite an underlying thread of mutual reluctance and trepidation amongst the friends. It’s difficult for them to feel at ease around Tyler, and the opening scene of THE CORRIDOR offers a more than reasonable explanation for this uneasiness. Over the course of their time together, Tyler’s four friends become more relaxed, but after Tyler takes a late night walk on his own into the woods, he begins to fear the worst about his condition.

Tyler’s mother Pauline (Mary-Colin Chisholm) has a very small role on screen, but the character has a much more significant role in the story as her and her son Tyler share a unique connection, but may not be what it appears on the surface. THE CORRIDOR refers to something Tyler’s discovers on his solitary walk into the woods, leading him to gather his friends to witness for themselves, but Tyler’s actions will ultimately lead to events that change their lives forever.

THE CORRIDOR showcases a cast of relative unknowns, young talent that collectively delivers a high caliber performance. This plays directly into the success of the director’s vision, as this is a dialogue driven story with strong, well developed characters. The viewer is given ample time to empathize with each of the characters and their motives, but the pacing of the film is also crucial, maintaining a comfortably controlled release of clues enhanced with properly placed brow-raising twists.

As THE CORRIDOR rises to a boiling point it morphs gently into a horror story wrapped around a science-fiction puzzle. What exactly is the Corridor? What does it mean? Where does it lead? These are the questions the filmmaker sews within our minds and leaves to germinate and take root. Evan Kelly tells a strong, engaging story that raises curious ideas, but he stands back and allows the viewer to come to their own conclusions about the Corridor.

Evan Kelly makes some bold but effective choices in his use of CGI. The special effects are minimal and simple, but not cheesy or distracting. THE CORRIDOR is a precise description of the anomaly presented in the film, while maintaining an nearly indescribable nature. The makeup effects are brutal and graphic, but do not exceed necessity. THE CORRIDOR seamlessly blends human drama with science fiction, psychological and visceral horror, and even a touch of metaphysical philosophy for one of the more mesmerizing but accessibly cerebral films I’ve seen in years. Enter THE CORRIDOR with your thinking cap on, but there’s no need to turn it up to eleven on the dial.

THE CORRIDOR opens theatrically in the United States and Canada on March 30th, 2012.

“Like” THE CORRIDOR on Facebook, or check out TheCorridorMovie.com for more information.