Category: Reviews

  • Dwayne Johnson delivers his most vulnerable performance in ‘Snitch’

    Dwayne Johnson delivers his most vulnerable performance in ‘Snitch’

    Dwayne Johnson shows his growth as an actor in 'Snitch'
    Dwayne Johnson shows his growth as an actor in ‘Snitch’

    Certs is a breath mint that was heavily advertised on television in the 1960s and 70s with the catchphrase,  “It’s two, two, two mints in one,” because it was a candy mint and a breath mint.   Now we have Snitch, which turns out to be “two, two, two films in one”.

    Starring Dwayne Johnson (although on Twitter he’s still @TheRock) as “John Matthews”, Snitch is about a father trying to save his son from a long stretch in prison.  His son “Jason Collins” (Rafi Gavron) doesn’t think through the consequences of letting his best friend ship him a very large quantity of ecstasy and he winds up getting arrested.  Due to the fact it is a federal case, minimum sentence guidelines come into play and he will get at least ten years in prison.  Unless he rolls over on another distributor of drugs, like his friend has accused him of being.  John turns himself inside out trying to find a way to help his son until the idea hits him.  He will be the one to lead the feds to the dealers, help them make the arrest and then his son’s sentence will be reduced.

    The local U.S. Attorney “Joanne Keeghan” (Susan Sarandon) isn’t interested at first.  John is determined though, and he gets one of his employees, “Daniel James” (Jon Bernthal) to introduce him to a dealer.  James has a conviction for narcotics distribution and if convicted again, faces 25 years to life under the “three strikes” rule.  He doesn’t know what John intends and introduces him to “Malik” (Michael K. Williams).  Malik is intrigued by the idea of John’s construction firm’s trucks being used to move drugs.

    Dwayne Johnson pleads with Susan Sarandon to help his son in 'Snitch'
    Dwayne Johnson pleads with Susan Sarandon to help his son in ‘Snitch’

    “El Topo” (Benjamin Bratt) is one of the top men in the cartel that supplies Malik and is impressed with John’s coolness under fire.  He lets Malik know he wants to use John again.  This all sparks Keeghan’s interest, forcing John to find a way to hand her the busts and drug money seizure she wants while keeping everyone safe.

    Snitch is both an action thriller and a message film that points out how the mandatory minimum sentence laws are being abused to send small-time people to prison for extended periods, rather than the major dealers they were intended to deal with.  It manages to be both without one ruining the other.  Johnson gives his most vulnerable, humanistic performance to date.  Bernthal is perfect as the man wrestling with having made promises to his wife, but wanting to give her and their child a better life.  Bratt makes an excellent villain and Pepper is strong in his role as a former undercover DEA agent.

    With all of those compelling attributes in favor of this movie, it must be noted that it bears the appellation “inspired by true events”.  Truth be told, much of the story is fictional or makes changes to the actual story upon which it is based.  These changes make it a better movie and since it doesn’t say “this is a true story” they are entirely forgiveable.  This is a good film and deserving of a viewing.

  • Danielle Panabaker saves rape-revenge flick, ‘Girls Against Boys’

    Danielle Panabaker saves rape-revenge flick, ‘Girls Against Boys’

    Nicole LaLiberte (left) and Danielle Panabaker are out for revenge in 'Girls Against Boys'
    Nicole LaLiberte (left) and Danielle Panabaker are out for revenge in ‘Girls Against Boys’

    The rape-revenge subgenre probably doesn’t have a hope of ever surpassing its very first instance, Ingmar Bergman’s The Virgin Spring. But it has been taken to some interesting places over the years, with everyone from Brigitte Nielsen to Sally Field starring in entries.

    Girls Against Boys could have been a notable example, but makes the mistake of radically changing gears way too late in the game.

    Shae Marshall (Danielle Panabaker) is a college student who gets dumped by her middle-aged boyfriend Terry (Andrew Howard), who would rather try to work things out with his wife and daughter. For some reason, she works at night as a bartender. She soon meets co-worker Lu (Nicole LaLiberte) who takes her out to a club to get her mind off her troubles.

    There they meet Eric (Carmine DiBenedetto), Duncan (Will Brill), and Simon (Michael Stahl-David), and then all go back to Eric and Duncan’s place. When Shae wants to head back to her apartment, Simon goes with her. But at parting when it’s clear that she’s not into him, he charges into the building after her and you know the rest.

    She tries going to Terry for support but is too shell-shocked to explain what happened – and he nearly comes close to forcing himself on her as well. Next she and Lu try reporting it to the police, but the latter uses the opportunity to seduce one of the officers (Matthew Rauch), steal his gun, and kill him. She convinces Shae that they need to handle this themselves, and head back to Eric and Duncan’s to find Simon’s whereabouts.

    Danielle Panabaker is the one really good thing in 'Girls Against Boys'
    Danielle Panabaker is the one really good thing in ‘Girls Against Boys’

    But in the last third, the movie suddenly decides it wants to be Single White Female. Yep, apparently it forgot its own title.

    The Wikipedia page for the rape-revenge sub genre lays out this three act structure:

    • Act I: A woman is raped/gang raped, tortured, and left for dead.
    • Act II: The woman survives and rehabilitates herself.
    • Act III: The woman takes revenge and kills her rapist(s)

    Act I happens on schedule (though hardly brutalized enough to be presumed dead), but II and III get rushed together in the second third. It’s almost as though it was meant to be an hour long with the last 30 minutes there just to fill time, and there’s no one left to pit the girls against except each other.

    And because it’s so rushed, the aspects of the revenge are poorly constructed. When Shae speaks with the cops, it’s made as though she doesn’t know anything helpful beyond his first name and can’t be helped. But she knows where Eric and Duncan live, and that should be more than enough for the police to go on. She also most probably knows what club they met at, also something the police can follow up on.

    Now it’s one thing if she’s deliberately withholding this information because she’s already made up her mind to strike back on her own, but that is not the case here. These things just don’t come up, and she doesn’t even entertain the idea of revenge until a conversation with Lu later on.

    But Panabaker is excellent. It’s really a shame that her starring roles lately have been in works with so much squandered potential and low aspirations (see also Piranha 3DD). A weaker actress in the part would’ve dropped this to a 1 no question, but she keeps it (relatively) afloat. Even when everything derails at the end she manages to be an engaging presence.

    The rape-revenge films seem to receive some support from feminists, but I think even they would be hard-pressed to be in favor of this one. But Girls Against Boys isn’t really so much against boys or girls or anyone, as much as it is against itself.

  • ‘A Good Day to Die Hard’ shows the franchise may be terminally ill

    ‘A Good Day to Die Hard’ shows the franchise may be terminally ill

    Bruce Willis and Jai Courtney as father/son badasses about to take on legions of bad guys
    Bruce Willis and Jai Courtney as father/son badasses about to take on legions of bad guys

    There is a difference between acting and performing.  Actors portray a character who is usually somewhat different from themselves.  And hopefully, who is different from the other characters they have portrayed and will portray.

    Then there are performers.  Now by dictionary definition, all actors are performers in one way or another.  But to illustrate the difference, look at the work of two men who call themselves actors.  Jason Statham and Daniel-Day Lewis.

    There is no significant difference between the characters that Statham has “performed” thus far in his career.  They’re all tough, ruthless to a degree, lacking in emotion and so on.  On the other hand, the characters Day-Lewis has portrayed range widely.  From a beloved president, to a ruthless crime lord and a young man wrongly imprisoned.  Very different characters, and brought to life with the skill of a seriously talented actor.

    Yuliya Snigir strips down in 'A Good Day to Die Hard'
    Yuliya Snigir strips down in ‘A Good Day to Die Hard’

    What’s so disappointing in the fifth installment of the Die Hard films is that Bruce Willis has the chops.  He’s shown them in outstanding performances in movies like Moonrise Kingdom and Nobody’s Fool.  Even the first four iterations of his “John McLane” had a modicum of substance and depth, although it faded a bit from the very strong work he did in the first film 25 years ago.  It isn’t all his fault.  He’s saddled with a badly written script and a director (John Moore) who is more interested in pyrotechnics, bullets and blood than anything else.  Moore has shown he can make decent action dramas as he did with Behind Enemy Lines.  Heck, Owen Wilson was believable in that as a Navy fighter pilot.

    Somehow, in spite of the previous suspensions and who knows what else, John McClane is once again a NYPD detective.  His children are grown, and his son “John Jr.” (Jai Courtney) is in trouble in Russia.  He’s in prison.  So John, having been a neglectful father and feeling suffused with guilt over it, decides to go to Russia to see if he can help.  His adult daughter Lucy (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) knows him well, and gives him wise counsel as she drops him at the airport.

    Bruce Willis spits out one-liners in 'A Good Day to Die Hard' like he doesn't even care
    Bruce Willis spits out one-liners in ‘A Good Day to Die Hard’ like he doesn’t even care

    But John Jr. is not really in prison to be punished, he’s there on a mission for the CIA.  It involves stopping the ascent to power of a corrupt Russian government official named “Chagarin” (Sergey Kolesnikov), by using evidence in the possession of “Yuri Kamarov” (Sebastian Koch), a whistleblower and political prisoner.  Junior is going to bust Kamarov out and spirit him out of the country with the file, to bring about the downfall of Chagarin.  But Karamov isn’t going anywhere without his daughter, “Irina” (Yulia Snigir).

    Cross, double-cross and thugs who appear to be in the employ of one but are revealed to work for another follow.  McClane Senior and Junior team up to take on all the bad guys, while preventing the real aim of the real bad guy, the theft of enriched uranium from a vault in Chernobyl.

    One must go beyond serious suspension of disbelief to enjoy this error-ridden pablum that ignores continuity and scientific fact.  However, it has plenty of action, bad one-liners and a lead actor who may be tired of this role but not the eight figure paychecks that come with it.  As action-adventure films go it isn’t awful or even all that bad.  In light of how good the first entry in the franchise was, and remains 25 years later, it is a major disappointment.

  • ‘Sound City’ is a very sound investment of your moviegoing time

    ‘Sound City’ is a very sound investment of your moviegoing time

    This was the place where the music magic happened. Sound City Studio in Van Nuys, CA
    This was the place where the music magic happened. Sound City Studio in Van Nuys, CA

    “Sound City is where real men went to make music.” – Shivaun O’Brien, Studio Manager of Sound City 1992-2011

    Ms O’Brien was referring to the legendary recording studio in Van Nuys that is the main focus of Sound City, an astonishingly awesome documentary from director Dave Grohl.  Astonishing because Grohl, an incredibly talented musician, had no experience with making movies before he took on this project.  The finished product looks like it was made by a master documentary filmmaker.

    Anyone who has even a tiny bit of love for music needs to see this film.

    In 1969, near the Busch Beer Gardens in Van Nuys, an existing building was converted into a recording studio.  In 1970, Tom Skeeter bought the studio and that is where the story of Sound City Studios begins.  Realizing that if they were going to attract the best recording artists to Sound City, he borrowed $75,000 and ordered a custom-made Neve console.  The combination of this console and the unique acoustics of Studio A created a nearly perfect facility for making incredible music.  Analog music.  In particularly, Sound City was renowned for the quality of the drum sound it could capture.  As one artist being interviewed in the film says “once you’ve got the drums right, the rest is easy”.

    But it isn’t just the high quality recordings that are at the heart of the story.  The influence of Sound City Studios on music from 1970 through its last days in 2011 cannot be overstated.  It was where the album Buckingham Nicks was recorded. Then Mick Fleetwood came to town to make a record but Bob Welch left the band.  Needing a guitarist and having heard Lindsey Buckingham on a track played for him at Sound City, he invited him to join Fleetwood Mac.   Buckingham agreed, on the condition that his musical partner and girlfriend, Stevie Nicks, could also join.  The new lineup of Fleetwood Mac released the self-titled album recorded at Sound City.  It sold over five million copies.

    Listing all of the amazing artists who recorded albums at Sound City Studios would take up the rest of this article’s available space.  Notables include Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, Neil Young, Rick Springfield and Foreigner.  The studio was fully booked during the late 1970s and through much of the 1980s era of “hair bands”.

    Dave Grohl next to the legendary Neve console that he now owns
    Dave Grohl next to the legendary Neve console that he now owns

    But by 1991 business had dried up and the studio was on the verge of financial ruin.  Enter a van full of musicians who had heard of the legendary sound that could be captured in Studio A.  Nirvana recorded the album “Nevermind” and launched a renaissance period for the studio.  Paula Salvatore, who had been the studio manager for years, was no longer there and enter Shivaun O’Brien, who would remain the manager until just before the studio closed for good in 2011.

    One of the things that made Sound City Studios so unique was that it was, in the words of several recording artists, “a sh**hole”.  The brown shag carpet on the walls that had been ‘hip’ in the 1970s was the height of tackiness in the 1990s.  Years of spilled booze, too many cigarettes and users basically not caring how they treated the place had taken its toll.  But no one cared about the aesthetics.  It was the music, not the creature comforts that kept people in search of that analog sound coming.

    Grohl has made a documentary that basically tells three stories, using a linear structure of the studio’s history.  There’s the story behind Sound City Studios.  There is the story of that amazing Neve console, which now resides in Grohl’s private studio.  And there’s the story of the film’s soundtrack, which is due out in March, with an amazing lineup of artists and tracks.

    But the real story, the real message of this terrific documentary is that when the digital era of music was born, something was lost.  Digital music may be perfect, but the humans who make that music are not infallible.  It is that ability to be imperfect that gives the best music its character and humanity.  Grohl gets this and that shows.  He said “my mission in making this film is to inspire people to go to a yard sale, buy a used guitar and form their own garage band.”

    Mission accomplished.  Many of the people, particularly young people, who see this film will be in search of an axe as soon as the end credits are finished rolling.  Well done, Dave Grohl.

  • Blockbuster vs. Mockbuster: A Tale of Two Hansel & Gretels

    Blockbuster vs. Mockbuster: A Tale of Two Hansel & Gretels

    Gemma Arterton and Jeremy Renner are 'Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters'
    Gemma Arterton and Jeremy Renner are ‘Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters’

    Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is finally off the shelf and in theaters. But another Hansel & Gretel has just reached shelves, store shelves. The latter is from The Asylum and is clearly meant to capitalize on the former’s release. But who did it better?

    In the Hollywood version, written and directed by Tommy Wirkola, Hansel (Jeremy Renner) and Gretel (Gemma Arterton) slew the witch as they did in the classic fairy tale and have grown up to do it for a living. Their talents are called upon when a town’s children are abducted and witches are suspected of being responsible. And, they’re right. Head witch in charge Muriel (Famke Janssen) has discovered a way to make witches immune to fire; it just requires the sacrifice of the children in a blood moon ritual.

    On the other hand, The Asylum’s title, directed by Anthony C. Ferrante and written by Jose Prendes, works the traditional story into the modern day. The Hansel (Brent Lydic) and Gretel (Stephanie Greco) here are young adults who wander into the woods and the former gets injured from a bear trap (hmm, wonder why that’s there?). They spot only one house in the area and it turns out to belong to Lilith (Dee Wallace), Gretel’s employer who runs a bakery. A specialty of this bakery is meat pies, and the siblings soon find themselves amongst captives who will end up the ingredients.

    Both are actually quite different in terms of genre and tone. Wirkola’s film is really more of an action movie in a horror world, a Van Helsing wannabe. There are touches of humor throughout, both in trying to modernize the medieval setting (like milk bottles with sketches of missing children tied to them) and reference to the original (Hansel being fed so much candy by the first witch that he ends up with diabetes).

    Dee Wallace is a frightfully creepy witch in The Asylum's 'Hansel & Gretel'
    Dee Wallace is a frightfully creepy witch in The Asylum’s ‘Hansel & Gretel’

    But that’s really the high point for this version. It’s at best a fairly decent ride throughout and the supporting cast, which features Peter Stormare as the town sheriff and Derek Mears as a monster henchman of Muriel, isn’t put to its full potential. Janssen does alright, but has played better villains elsewhere.

    The other is a horror film, and really much better than most of its ilk. It truly does justice to its namesake; if the Grimms were alive today, this is the story they would make. There are some issues here and there (like an extremely lame “last minute shock” ending that I want to completely disregard), but Wallace is a standout. She is manically unhinged, maybe even a little too over-the-top at times, yet nonetheless shows effort in a part many actresses would likely prefer to phone in.

    As for Hansel and Gretel themselves, the bigger names don’t pull it off. Renner and Arterton are 15 years apart in age; yeah, not believable siblings (especially when the younger versions shown seem to be one or two years apart). They should have gotten an older actress like Jennifer Garner, who Arterton appears to be channeling. Lydic and Greco though do make a plausible brother and sister. I don’t know their exact ages, but can’t imagine the gap if any is nearly that wide.

    Both movies feature gore and violence, but that of Witch Hunters is very underwhelming. Given the resources available to them, this really should not be the case. While those found in the other are clearly low-budget, it packs more of a punch.

    And how about the thing that’s become synonymous with the story: bread crumbs? Witch Hunters… nope. Did not catch any reference. The Asylum’s… yes! Not bread crumbs precisely, but an analogue is used. Further proof that it stays true to its origins.

    And so the winner? Hansel & Gretel, no subtitle. Better luck next time Hollywood.

    And this is not the end of it. I found on IMDB three more movies for this year: Hansel & Gretel: Warriors of Witchcraft, Hansel & Gretel Get Baked, and Hansel & Gretel in 3D. Now that middle one sounds intriguing.

    Perhaps I called it too soon?

  • ‘Safe Haven’ plays it safe… but that’s not necessarily a bad thing

    ‘Safe Haven’ plays it safe… but that’s not necessarily a bad thing

    Josh Duhamel and Julianne Hough seek refuge from a storm in 'Safe Haven'
    Josh Duhamel and Julianne Hough seek refuge from a storm in ‘Safe Haven’

    Nicholas Sparks has published 16 novels thus far.  With the release of Safe Haven, half of them have been made into films.  But this one does something the others did not.  Oh, it has the usual schmaltz, romance, and major character in jeopardy.  But this time, the person in jeopardy isn’t being endangered by disease, war, or some other ‘thing’.  “Katie” (Julianne Hough) is being threatened by someone.

    RELATED: ‘Safe Haven’ is the latest in a long line of Nicholas Sparks books to become films

    We see her fleeing aboard a bus that comes to a stop in the small town of Southport in South Carolina. It’s a beautiful seaside small town and she decides to get off the bus and stay awhile.  She meets “Alex” (Duhamel), the owner of the local convenience store where many bus passengers stop in.  She also looks for and finds work and a place to rent with ease.  Her rented house is fairly remote, although there is one neighbor, a woman named “Jo” (Cobie Smulders).  Katie isn’t interested in making friends, but she eventually forms a friendship with Jo.  They often walk to and from town together.

    Alex is a widower whose wife died of a disease some years earlier.  He has two children, “Josh” (Lomax) and “Lexie” (Kirkland).  Lexie is immediately enamored of Katie and the feeling is mutual.  Katie also has no interest in getting close to Alex but the best laid plans of women on the run aft agley.

    Julianne Hough is a woman in danger in 'Safe Haven'
    Julianne Hough is a woman in danger in ‘Safe Haven’

    Meanwhile, Boston PD detective “Kevin Tierney” (Lyons) is searching desperately for Katie. He barely missed nabbing her at the bus depot when she left and now he’s issued a notice to all police departments that the woman who is pictured on his notice is wanted for murder.  It’s a pretty recognizable photograph of Katie.

    RELATED: Lasse Hallstrom brings Nicholas Sparks’ ‘Safe Haven’ to the big screen

    Why Katie is running is eventually explained.  When it becomes clear that Detective Tierney is closing in, Katie is ready to flee.  She plans to run even though the predictable has come to pass and she is now romantically involved with Alex.  Of course he wants her to stay and promises to protect her.

    Julianne Hough has only made three features with her in a credited role prior to Safe Haven and her performances before this weren’t anything to write home about.  However, she’s stepped up her game a bit and shows promise here.  She’s not anywhere near Oscar caliber, but is definitely headed in the proper direction.  Josh Duhamel is easy on the eyes of women and has better acting chops than he displays in this film.  Their chemistry is not great but it isn’t bad either.  Cobie Smulders steals nearly every moment she is in.  Southport’s is such a gorgeous setting, it makes this a much more watchable movie.

    This is the second collaboration of director Hallstrom and author Sparks and while it not the best work of either, it is definitely good and worth seeing.  Especially for Valentine’s Day or with a date.

  • ‘Side Effects’ will leave you feeling just fine

    ‘Side Effects’ will leave you feeling just fine

    Jude Law and Catherine Zeta-Jones talk about the treament of Rooney Mara in 'Side Effects'
    Jude Law and Catherine Zeta-Jones talk about the treament of Rooney Mara in ‘Side Effects’

    Side Effects is the latest film from director Steven Soderbergh.  Jude Law plays a psychiatrist who works shifts at a hospital doing consults, in addition seeing patients in his private practice.  He is a partner with two other psychiatrists in a thriving New York City practice.  He’s married to a beautiful woman named “Dierdre” (Vinessa Shaw), who has a son.  He has a great life until he encounters a patient in the emergency room.

    “Emily Taylor” (Rooney Mara) was a very happily married woman a little over four years earlier.  Her husband “Martin Taylor” (Channing Tatum) was making a lot of money until his arrest and conviction for insider trading.  They lost everything and she was forced to move to New York City from their Connecticut home to take a job.  She visited him faithfully in prison and was there waiting on the date of his release.

    Then, without warning something shocking happens that results in Emily being taken to the emergency room.  In the ER she meets Dr. Banks, who wants to keep her hospitalized. He thinks she tried to harm herself. She convinces him that this is no longer her intent.  Eventually they agree to let her go home as long as she begins seeing him for therapy on a regular basis.  He prescribes anti-depressants for her, but she doesn’t do well on any of them.  She asks him about Ablixa, a new anti-depressant she’s seen ads for on television.  He eventually puts her on the drug after she nearly makes another attempt to kill herself.

    Seeking answers about how to best help Emily, Dr. Banks contacts the psychiatrist she previously sought treatment from, “Dr. Victoria Siebert” (Catherine Zeta-Jones).  She had been forced to stop treating Emily when she lost her health insurance in the wake of her husband’s arrest.  Dr. Siebert seems helpful, but the use of the Ablixa is causing Emily to sleepwalk.

    Rooney Mara on the "couch" in 'Side Effects'
    Rooney Mara on the “couch” in ‘Side Effects’

    This is as much of the story that should be told in a review because to detail much more would be to engage in sharing serious spoilers.  Suffice it to say that what happens after Dr. Banks prescribes the Ablixa for Emily is a well-crafted story, with a number of surprising twists and turns.

    The word on the street is that this will be Soderbergh’s last feature film for the foreseeable future, and that’s a shame.  He’s a gifted director.  But at least he’s leaving on a good note if this is the end.  Side Effects isn’t just engaging, it reaches from behind the screen and grabs the viewer securely.  High quality directing are combined with a well-written tale and some excellent acting.  In particularly, Catherine Zeta-Jones makes the most of her supporting role.  Mara was a strong choice to play the depressed wife of Tatum, and when viewed alongside her work in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, it shows off her range.

    As dramatic films go, Side Effects is a cut above.

  • ‘Identity Thief’ will steal your money

    ‘Identity Thief’ will steal your money

    Melissa McCarthy needs better material than 'Identity Thief'
    Melissa McCarthy needs better material than ‘Identity Thief’

    In the first sequence of Identity Thief, Melissa McCarthy’s guileless character, Sandy/Julia/[insert other alias here] treats a barful of Winter Park, FL, strangers to unlimited drinks on the card ages just grafted from unsuspecting Denver yes man Sandy Patterson (Jason Bateman). The other customers love this generous broad who has seemingly come out of nowhere to shower them with live and free spirits. And then at one point, she dives over the crowd to grab a chandelier. She misses the brass ring, and they dive out of her way, letting her land on the floor, alone, with a thud. Thief does pretty much the same thing to its star.

    McCarthy’s recent success, improbable as it is, is a welcome exception to the Hollywood fairy tale. The hardworking comedienne, who trained with the Groundlings before cultivating a fan base as Gilmore girls’ Sookie St. James before winning a surprise Emmy for Mike and Molly and much-ballyhooed Oscar nomination last year for Bridesmaids, is incredibly talented. She can bounce around from genre to genre and improvise with the best of them. And so it’s great that she gets the leading role in a big studio film like Mazin’s Thief despite a script (based on a story conceived with Jerry Eeten), full of holes and lazy direction from Scott Gordon. But boy does her success come at a high price. This film hates her, and shows it at every turn.

    First of all, McCarthy is saddled with an impossible character. Her Sandy has apparently lived her whole life off the grid and the grift, depleting innocent folks of their savings and destroying their credit just, well because. Mazin offers no excuse other than the fact that her appearance puts people at a distance from her, and spending lots of money helps her confidence. But as the film shows, it’s her ridiculous behavior that causes people to laugh at her. And it’s no excuse for depleting people’s life savings. But not long into her being corralled by the buttoned-down Sandy played by Bateman, we’re supposed to be won over by her id as contrasted with Bateman’s superego.

    The male Sandy flies from Colorado to Florida with a week to retrieve his online impersonator so as to clear himself of a bunch of erroneous charges and continue in an executive role as a new corporation in which he has received a fantasy position. His wife (Amanda Peet), despite her pregnancy, gives him the okay, and doesn’t seem to mind as a series of forced, groan-inducing mishaps force the two “Sandys” to drive back across the country together. Bateman, who previously worked with Gordon on the similarly sketch-thin Horrible Bosses, taps into the same kind of slow burn into which he often retreats. Sometimes, it’s a smug choice, underplaying when he should be giving more, but his rhythms are right-on here. Still, I never once believed he’s the loser this movie wants him to be, not as trendily adorned as costume designer Carol Ramsey makes him and as director of photography Javier Aguirresarobe lovingly films him. Also, Shepherd Franklin’s production design suggests no clutter nor mess nor out-of-style products for these near-destitute characters.

    Jason Bateman and Melissa McCarthy in 'Identity Thief'
    Jason Bateman and Melissa McCarthy in ‘Identity Thief’

    Mazin’s slow, episodic plot also jams in a terrible subplot in which a convict (Jonathan Banks) sends two killers (Genesis Rodriguez and rapper T.I., dropping every single one of his lines) on the trail of the thief. This thread is so slim that when all the major characters find themselves together in an elevator, Gordon cannot generate a whiff of excitement. Two other featured players, Robert Patrick and Eric Stonestreet, also figure into the mix, but handle their roles much better.

    Thief wants to be Planes, Trains and Automobiles but ends up more like Due Date And McCarthy’s character is like Zach Galifianakis’ in the latter – annoying with no redemption, until the film decides she should be loved. Thief mimics the same “crazy nasty crazy nasty crazy nasty sentimental” rubric given to McCarthy’s Bridesmaids character. There is no identifiable way to bridge these gaps, but my guess is that Gordon assumed his audience would stop trying. The film’s lame stabs at humor also include making fun of the name “Sandy” as a male name, even though he is named for Sandy Koufax and Sandy is often a nickname for Alexander (or Sanford, in the case of Koufax).

    Thief is a film I will guess that has been conceived by people who have never worked for very long in the real world. Each sequence further strains credibility. This is a film where Bateman’s Sandy earns $50,000 a year but can support a wife and two kids, with an additional one on the way. This is a film where a splinter corporation can form, employ workers, and find clients and office space overnight. The film could have said something about the economy – it shares same “the meek must inherit the earth” philosophy as The Dark Knight Rises – but offers no solutions. Corporate slaves get promotions out of nowhere. An expected climactic showdown with a boss guilty of gross corporate malfeasance (Jon Favreau, ludicrously third-billed although you miss him if you blink) never materializes.

    Thief is also a very violent film. Every character seems to have access to a gun. A MAC truck plows into a parked car, totaling it and driving on. McCarthy’s character has no problem punching innocent men in the throat and kicking them south of the border. But don’t worry – she still gets the worst of it, including a sex scene in which only her head is scene and a chase scene in which a car broadsides her. No film that treats its lead like this much of a punching bag has any respect for him or her.

    I never really bought the détente between the two Sandys. At no point have they have traded enough personal intel to like and trust each other, and that’s a major problem. Her character simply cannot become likable after being such an ass for so long. This is a woman who has knowingly and recklessly ruined lives. You can get away with such a transformation in the soaps, over time and with numerous plotlines to shepherd this shift, but not in a work that knows its final destination. And with neither exciting action sequences (though the stunt players are this film’ MVPs) nor hilarity to help, Thief barely elicits a grunt, let alone a guffaw.

    McCarthy, luckily, has the last laugh. She’s terrific, piecing together Mazin’s jigsaw of a plot and shining in every scene, regardless of the bipolar temperament created by Gordon, only breaking a sweat when her character must beat a (repeated) hasty retreat. But there’s a different reason for the glow emanating from the skilled actress: it’s star quality.

  • ‘Stand Up Guys’ is a tale of vice and men

    ‘Stand Up Guys’ is a tale of vice and men

    Christopher Walken, Alan Arkin and Al Pacino are the 'Stand Up Guys'
    Christopher Walken, Alan Arkin and Al Pacino are the ‘Stand Up Guys’

    If Stand Up Guys, the new light crime noir that marks Fisher Stevens’ second stab as a feature film director, were a person, it would be a voyeur. This is most certainly a film that likes to watch.

    And who would blame him for that when one’s subjects are such mega-ton Oscar winners as Alan Arkin, Al Pacino, and Christopher Walken? Based on a script by Noah Haidle, Guys is so busy watching that it doesn’t stop to give much information away. We hardly know where it takes place, and would it not for references to Viagra, outfits and use of landlines make it so that the film could have easily occurred 30 or 35 years earlier than its modern setting. Pacino plays Val, a thug recently released from prison (how many times has Pacino now played an ex-con? I count roughly 14 billion) after serving a 28-year sentence for the unintended murder of the son of local crime boss Claphands (Mark Margolis, menacing underused). Claphands intends for Val to be killed as revenge for his son by Doc (Walken), Val’s best friend and (literal) partner in crime.

    With Doc’s George to Val’s Lenny, the two embark on a day and night on the town, including several trips to a local brothel, to Doc’s favorite diner, a raid on a closed pharmacy, a couple of unplanned trips to a nearby hospital so Julianna Margulies can show up as a nurse, and even a cemetery. This film is more of a due than a trio; Guys is mostly a showpiece for the two actors, with Pacino exercising his frenetic side, although not inappropriately, and Walken in a sadder, more contemplative role that benefits from very careful modulation and restraint. Arkin, whose character, Hirsch, enters and exits the film pretty much exactly as you might predict, takes a (not literal) backseat to his two co-stars. Addison Timlin shines in the small but significant role of a waitress at Doc’s diner. (Which brings to mind a logistical question: how many times in the course of a night can these guys scarf down all that food and coffee?

    The thrill of the movie is to sit back and watch these veterans do their thing. It’s a bittersweet victory lap, as age allows them to inject a greater gravitas into every moment but also tinges their scenes with a sense of finality. Decades ago these talented men represented a new guard of vitality and realism in acting. We’re now reminded me that all things, even the most illustrious and door-opening of careers, must come to an end. Guys aches with decay and loneliness, and even Doc, Hirsch, and Val know their days are numbered. Stevens lays on the pathos a bit too thick, though – these flawed guys are so sympathetic and omniscient that they begin to adopt the deity-like qualities we all want to attribute to their portrayers.

    And as long as Guys remains full of hero worship, this star vehicle isn’t doing its job. It’s looking backward when it should be moving forward. Haidle’s script includes many moments that wink back to the past, including a joyride in a speeding car and Pacino dancing with a stranger in a bar, both of which call back to Martin Brest’s Scent of a Woman. Guys also loves quoting Rowdy Roddy Piper’s big line from John Carpenter’s They Live. And the film is consumed by tropes involving these randy men getting their rocks off – think Cocoon meets Porky’s.

    And after a while, Guys’ jejune humor takes its toll. Pacino’s shamelessness begins to feel, well, shameful, especially as he swallows Viagra by the fistful, not unlike his Tony Montana once dove into a hill of cocaine. 40 years ago we were introduced to a young Pacino as Michael Corleone struggling with a gun. Now he’s popping Viagra to load a very different kind of pistol. Is that how Pacino really wants his career to climax?

  • 43 reasons to NOT bother seeing ‘Movie 43’

    43 reasons to NOT bother seeing ‘Movie 43’

    Naomi Watts as the mother home-schooling her son in 'Movie 43'
    Naomi Watts as the mother home-schooling her son in ‘Movie 43’

    In case it matters, the following contains spoilers.  Lots of spoilers.  If you want to avoid the spoilers, don’t read any further.  Did I mention there are spoilers?  Okay, here goes:

    Reason 1.  There just aren’t enough laughs in Movie 43.

    Reason 2.  Low-brow humor is fine, until it goes just too low.

    Reason 3.  The moments when the temptation to get up and demand a refund becomes almost overwhelming.

    Reason 4.  Sometimes the old adage that too many directors and writers spoil the movie is at play here.

    Reason 5.  There are much better uses for one of Halle Berry’s breasts than to dip it in guacamole.

    Reason 6.  What idiot says “dare” on a blind date with a hot woman?

    Reason 7.  When George Clooney turns down a project, that’s a clear sign it is going to stink.

    Reason 8.  When Richard Gere tries to get OUT of a project, it’s going to really stink.

    Halle Berry's breasts are worth more than a bad joke
    Halle Berry’s breasts are worth more than a bad joke

    Reason 9.  There’s something wrong with animated male cats masturbating like human males.  It’s just wrong.

    Reason 10. Even with the face and body of Hugh Jackman, there’s no way a woman like Kate Winslet would have anything to do with a man who has a pair of balls dangling from his throat.

    Reason 11. The pubic hair in the food bit has been done to death.

    Reason 12. Mentally messed-up teen boys don’t make fake girlfriends out of mops, they buy blow-up dolls.

    Reason 13. Even if she asked, would you “poop” on Anna Faris?

    Reason 14. Most of this movie’s target audience can’t spell coprophiliac.

    Reason 15. Even if you were dumb enough to say yes to Anna Faris, you wouldn’t eat a bunch of Mexican food and then take a laxative before going to fulfill her fantasy.

    Reason 16. While the iBabe is hot, a portable MP3 player that weighs over 100 lbs won’t sell well.

    Oh, Richard Gere, what were you thinking?
    Oh, Richard Gere, what were you thinking?

    Reason 17. Didn’t “Dukes of Hazzard” the movie version prove that Sean William Scott and Johnny Knoxville don’t make a good pairing on screen?

    Reason 18. Ten years of outright rejection by movie studios is another clear sign of an impending stinker of a movie.

    Reason 19. We should have believed Richard Roeper when he said “Movie 43 is the Citizen Kane of awful.”

    Reason 20. Who is going to buy Greg Kinnear as a guy named Griffin?

    Reason 21. Movies that make reference to Howard the Duck automatically suck.

    Reason 22. Going back to the balls hanging from Hugh Jackman’s neck, Kate Winslet on a blind date?  Really?  That requires serious suspension of disbelief.

    Reason 23. We’re supposed to believe that a Hollywood studio security guard will let Dennis Quaid onto the lot in return for an unwanted blow-job?

    Elizabeth Banks, you should be horrified
    Elizabeth Banks, you should be horrified

    Reason 24. No one will ever believe that Terrence Howard’s team would let the white team score even one point.

    Reason 25. Josh Duhamel as a man named Anson?

    Reason 26.  In what universe would a woman who looks like Emma Stone be dating Kieran Culkin playing a dork?

    Reason 27. Only one person is working the graveyard shift in a busy 24 hour grocery store?

    Reason 28. Okay, the cooling fan in the vagina of the iBabe was moderately funny.

    Reason 29. There is no one named Abrahams or Zucker connected with Movie 43.

    Reason 30. The Kentucky Fried Movie was hysterical.  Movie 43 was not.

    Reason 31. Adam Sandler is nowhere to be found.

    Hugh Jackman had balls... literally... for being in this flick
    Hugh Jackman had balls… literally… for being in this flick

    Reason 32. There’s nothing sexy or funny about a mother trying to seduce her teen son as part of home-schooling.

    Reason 33. Uma Thurman as “Lois Lane” and Kristen Bell as “Supergirl”?  That just doesn’t make sense.

    Reason 34. Okay, Batman giving Robin a rough time while Robin is trying to meet a woman on a speed-date is moderately funny.

    Reason 35.  The Penguin and the Riddler?  Can’t we get some funnier Batman villains like Egghead or King Tut?

    Reason 36. There’s nothing funny about a teen girl’s first period.

    Reason 37. Cursing leprechauns and a fairy that does blow-jobs for gold coins?

    Reason 38. Studio heads don’t carry bigger guns than manic screenwriters trying desperately to sell a movie.

    Kate Winslet must still be wondering why she appeared in 'Movie 43'
    Kate Winslet must still be wondering why she appeared in ‘Movie 43’

    Reason 39. Guys who get hit by cars don’t “poop” all over the road in mass quantities.  Even if they stuffed themselves with Mexican food and drank laxatives.

    Reason 40. When a woman asks you to “poop” on her, is she really going to demand foreplay that doesn’t involve feces?

    Reason 41. You don’t want to help the poor soul who approved spending $6 million on this crap.

    Reason 42. When a movie grosses less than $1,000 per screen in its second week of release, that’s a clear sign.

    Reason 43. You can use the money you would have spent on this dreck to rent The Kentucky Fried Movie and have a lot more fun and laughs.