Month: September 2017

Today’s quick review: Clue. Six strangers (Eileen Brennan, Madeline Kahn, Christopher Lloyd, Michael McKean, Martin Mull, and Lesley Ann Warren) are invited to a New England mansion for a dinner party. The butler Wadsworth (Tim Curry) informs them that they have been brought there by Mr. Boddy (Lee Ving), who has been blackmailing each of them. But when Mr. Boddy is murdered, everyone becomes a suspect.

Clue is a “dinner and a murder” whodunit with a comedic twist. Based on the classic board game, Clue sees a cast of colorful characters navigate their way through a tangled web of means, motive, and opportunity to find the identity of the killer. The movie is a faithful adaptation of the board game, plausibly working in its characters, its weapons, its mansion, its premise, and its ambiguity.

Tim Curry as Wadsworth holds the movie together, acting as host and de facto leader of the group. His performance as the polite, sarcastic, and resourceful butler is the high point of the movie. His costars are a talented crop of actors and comedians in their own right, including Eileen Brennan, Christopher Lloyd, and Madeline Kahn. The characters bounce off each other well, and enough are always onscreen at a time to keep the dialogue rolling.

Clue’s greatest weakness is its devotion to its premise. The movie has three different endings, each shown in a different group of theaters during the film’s initial release. To make sure that each of its endings makes sense, Clue has to jump through hoops, withholding information and working to give each character motive and opportunity. Combined with its long setup, these decisions make the plot of Clue feel messy and arbitrary.

Still, Clue funnels these efforts into a chaotic, entertaining second half with an excellent sense of comedic rhythm. Watch it if you are a fan of eccentric comedies. The humor is hit-or-miss, so those with a different taste in comedy should not expect too much. For a very similar movie with an all-star cast of comedians, check out Murder by Death.

7.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for good comedy and an unusual premise.

Today’s quick review: Moon. Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), a technician for Lunar Industries, is nearing the end of his three-year stint at a Helium-3 harvesting station on the far side of the Moon. His only companion is Gerty (Kevin Spacey), his doting robotic assistant. But the solitude is beginning to affect his mind, manifesting as disorientation and strange visions. To make it back to his family on Earth, Sam just has to keep himself together for three more weeks.

Moon is a minimalistic science fiction drama with psychological thriller elements. With a simple sci-fi premise and an excellent twist early in the film, Moon shows off the dramatic potential of the science fiction genre. The movie captures the eeriness of being alone and offers up a tantalizing mystery, all without descending into horror. The writing exhibits focus, attention to character, and rock-solid progression, eliminating the need for much action.

Sam Rockwell pulls off a difficult feat with his performance as Sam Bell, carrying the movie almost entirely by himself. Everything from the way Sam talks to the way he spends his free time paints a picture of an ordinary man doing his best under taxing circumstances. Sam comes across as a person, not an archetype, a feat all the more impressive given that the movie does not focus on emotional drama.

Watch Moon if you are in the mood for realistic science fiction with a well-developed mystery. Fans of the story side of sci-fi should go out of their way to see Moon, particularly fans of The Martian, Interstellar, and Oblivion. Skip it if you dislike sci-fi or prefer the action side of the genre.

7.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for minimalistic, engaging science fiction.

Today’s quick review: Surrogates. In the near future, remote-controlled robotic duplicates called Surrogates have all but eliminated face-to-face interaction. But when the son of Dr. Lionel Canter (James Cromwell), the inventor of Surrogates, is murdered, FBI agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) is faced with a terrifying prospect: a weapon that can kill humans remotely through their Surrogates.

Surrogates is a science fiction action movie with a strong concept and moderate execution. The premise of Surrogates is quintessential sci-fi: the extrapolation of the effects of a hypothetical technology on society. The safety and convenience of robotic doubles have turned the world into addicts and shut-ins, robbing society of its soul even as crime and disease rates plummet.

Tom Greer makes for a useful perspective character, a law enforcement officer who comes to view Surrogates with skepticism as a result of his investigation. On one side is his wife Maggie (Rosamund Pike), who mourns the death of their son with pills and a shallow, Surrogate-fueled lifestyle. On the other hand is the Prophet (Ving Rhames), the leader of an aggressive faction of anti-Surrogate protesters. With neither extreme appealing, Tom must make up his own mind.

Surrogates’ main failing is its length. Clocking in at barely an hour and a half, Surrogates hits the plot points it wants to and then wraps up. The result is a complete but not very deep murder mystery. What character development there is gets handled well but offers no surprises. The action sequences are fast-paced and take advantage of the superhuman Surrogates, but are limited in frequency and scope. As such, Surrogates reaches only some of its potential.

Watch Surrogates if you are an action sci-fi fan looking for a short, decent watch. For a more entertaining, action-packed take on a similar premise, check out I, Robot instead.

6.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for the framework of a good sci-fi film with only some of the execution.

Today’s quick review: U.S. Marshals. After the crash of his prison transport plane, prisoner Mark Roberts (Wesley Snipes) escapes from custody. Samuel Gerard (Tommy Lee Jones), a respected U.S. Marshal who was on the plane when it crashed, calls in his team to hunt Roberts down. But the situation gets complicated when the State Department takes an interest in the case and assigns Agent John Royce (Robert Downey, Jr.) to keep an eye on Gerard.

U.S. Marshals is an action thriller and an indirect sequel to The Fugitive. Tommy Lee Jones returns as Samuel Gerard, along with the rest of his team of Marshals. His task this time around is to catch Mark Roberts, a dangerous, highly-trained man accused of murder. With tight pacing, decent star power, and a healthy dose of action, U.S. Marshals makes for an entertaining if somewhat shallow watch.

Fans of action movies will find U.S. Marshals to be a worthy sequel. Samuel Gerard receives more character development than in the first film, an opportunity that Tommy Lee Jones makes the most of. The action receives a boost in flash and quantity, swapping the realistic, desperate chase scenes of the original with more typical action fare. The main plot kicks in earlier, a competent spy mystery that goes well with the actual chase.

Fans of the personal side of The Fugitive will be disappointed. The premise of U.S. Marshals is lifted almost directly from its predecessor. But where Richard Kimble is a sympathetic, resourceful man, Mark Roberts has little in the way of character. The action lacks the realism of the original, opting instead for Hollywood stunts and shootouts.

Watch U.S. Marshals if you are an action fan looking for a solid entry into the genre. Though not as nuanced as The Fugitive, U.S. Marshals remains an entertaining watch in the typical action thriller mold.

6.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for being an entertaining if conventional action thriller.

Today’s quick review: The Fugitive. When his wife is murdered, Dr. Richard Kimble (Harrison Ford) is charged with the crime and wrongfully sentenced to death. The crash of his prison bus offers him a chance at freedom. But to find the real killer and clear his name, Kimble will have to stay one step ahead of Samuel Gerard (Tommy Lee Jones), the hard-nosed United States Marhsal tasked with bringing him in.

The Fugitive is an action thriller based on the TV series of the same name. The Fugitive features a coherent plot, a pair of accomplished lead actors, and just the right amount of tension. Everything that happens in the movie is plausible, if not always probable, giving the movie a sense of realism that other thrillers tend to skimp on. Even with this restriction, the action manages to be flashy in satisfying yet tonally consistent ways.

The premise is a strong one for a thriller: a wrongfully convicted man must flee from the law to prove his innocence. The first half of the film focuses on Kimble’s escape, a breathless sequence of clever dodges and close calls where Kimble is reacting rather than acting. The second half of the film returns to the murder mystery, an interesting tangle of leads. While the sharp boundary between them can be jarring, both halves are excellent thriller material.

The Fugitive’s main characters are stronger than the typical thriller’s. Richard Kimble is resourceful but not superhuman, capable of throwing his pursuers for a loop but not ditching them altogether. His conscience leads him into trouble, as he stops to help people even at the risk of getting caught. Samuel Gerard is an efficient, no-nonsense law enforcement officer, an honest and dedicated man, but single-minded in his hunt for Kimble.

Watch The Fugitive if you are in the mood for a better-than-average thriller. With solid plot progression, a healthy mix of tension and real action, and two familiar faces at the helm, The Fugitive makes for a surprisingly credible watch in a genre known for guilty pleasure. Skip it if you are looking for raw action, a superhuman protagonist, or deep mystery or drama.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for a well-constructed plot and two strong leads.

Today’s quick review: Death Race 2000. In the year 2000, five of the best drivers in America gather for a cross-country road race where they earn points by running down pedestrians. The favorite is Frankenstein (David Carradine), a masked racer whose many crashes have left him disfigured. With his new navigator Annie Smith (Simone Griffeth), he goes up against his hotheaded rival Joe Viterbo (Sylvester Stallone), a scheming band of rebels, and 3,000 miles of open road.

Death Race 2000 is an action movie that pushes the trend of violence in films to sadistic extremes. The movie combines tacky cars, gory kills, and a barebones plot to produce an odd yet moderately influential entry into the action genre. Remade in 2008 as Death Race, starring Jason Statham, the original introduces such concepts as Frankenstein, the patchwork racer, and a grim future where violence and racing meet to entertain America.

Beyond its premise, Death Race 2000 has little going for it. The race proper has no twist to it, just a cavalcade of empty miles of highway, unfortunate pedestrians, and sabotage attempts by a gang of rebels. The characters fare a little better, at least once the focus shifts from the field of gimmick racers to Frankenstein and Annie. The story, though short and predictable, is adequate by the standards of the genre.

As for the action, Death Race 2000’s bark is worse than its bite. The driving offers speed but little else, and even then the accelerated footage is obvious. The kills are bloody but brief, flashes of gore that shock but do not linger. One or two other action scenes give the movie a bit of variety, but none are enough to make the film satisfying as an action film, putting undue weight on the mediocre plot and characters.

Though billed as a satire, Death Race 2000 sends mixed messages about violence. On the one hand, it skewers media violence by robbing it of its satisfaction. The kills are senseless and brutal, with none of the glamor or justification they normally receive in action films. On the other hand, the movie relies on violence for most of its excitement. What humor there is is too dry to act as tiebreaker, so these conflicting trends are never reconciled.

Watch Death Race 2000 if you are interested in an old school entry into the death game genre. Though outclassed by its spiritual successors and its remake, Death Race 2000 offers a glimpse into the early days of a thriving family of action movies, translating into cult appeal for some. Viewers looking for action violence are better off watching Death Race, Battle Royale, or Smokin’ Aces, while those looking for satire should check out Demolition Man or Judge Dredd.

6.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.5 for decent execution with significant flaws.

“One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas, I don’t know.” —Captain Spaulding

Today’s quick review: Animal Crackers. Freshly returned from an expedition to Africa, the intrepid Captain Jeffrey Spaulding (Groucho Marx) attends a high society party hosted by Mrs. Rittenhouse (Margaret Dumont) as the guest of honor. He is joined by his aide Horatio Jamison (Zeppo Marx), the musician Emanuel Ravelli (Chico Marx), and Emanuel’s pal the Professor (Harpo Marx), who all cause quite a stir among the party’s distinguished guests.

Animal Crackers is a zany comedy from the Marx Brothers. As with most Marx Brothers comedies, the movie is dedicated to showcasing the brothers’ unusual talents. What plot there is involves a valuable painting that two separate pairs of guests get the idea to replace, throwing the party into chaos when the replacement is discovered. But the movie stops frequently along the way for songs, comic interludes, and bouts of slapstick, a menagerie of entertainment.

The movie’s humor is unique to the Marx Brothers, a whirlwind of wordplay and slapstick that almost always earns a laugh. The jokes are so densely packed that they become difficult to catch, a problem exacerbated by the brothers’ willingness to embark on lengthy tangents given the slightest opportunity. The story mostly serves as an excuse for various flavors of comedy routines, a perfectly reasonable decision given the strength of the humor.

Animal Crackers does have a bit more to it than just Groucho’s fast-paced verbal barbs, Chico’s crafty tricks, and Harpo’s mute antics. Chico and Harpo both have the chance to show off their respective talents at piano and harp, while the supporting cast serves up a pleasant love song and one or two group numbers. For her part, Margaret Dumont, the boys’ perennial straight woman, keeps up with Groucho admirably, grounding his elaborate routines.

Watch Animal Crackers if you are in the mood for a frenetic classic comedy with a light, jovial attitude. While not much for story or character, Animal Crackers delivers an excellent variety of entertainment, from puns to physical humor to virtuoso musical performances. Hold off if you are in the mood for a comedy with a more modern approach to timing, emphasis, and storytelling.

7.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for outstanding, if somewhat overwhelming, humor.

Today’s quick review: The Adjustment Bureau. After his failed Senatorial campaign, David Norris (Matt Damon) discovers the existence of the Adjustment Bureau, an organization that controls fate by making small adjustments to the course of history. Richardson (John Slattery), an agent of the Bureau, warns David that his romance with Elise (Emily Blunt), a captivating stranger, has been forbidden, prompting David to pursue an impossible dream for the sake of love.

The Adjustment Bureau is a science fiction thriller based on the story by Philip K. Dick. The Adjustment Bureau takes an intriguing premise and plays it out through a simple, personal story of forbidden love. David’s attempts to fight his fate produce a tense, unusual take on the thriller genre: every decision David makes can be turned against him, while doing nothing simply plays into the Bureau’s hands.

The Adjustment Bureau does a decent job with its fundamentals. David Norris has just enough depth to be an interesting protagonist, while Elise provides chemistry and mystery in equal parts. Their romance balances right on the edge of viability: letting the Bureau have its way is always the smart option but never the satisfying one. David could quit at any time, but his heart pushes him on.

The plot unfolds at a healthy clip. Early setup gives way to David’s increasingly ambitious attempts to overcome the Bureau. The events of the film are unpredictable enough to be interesting while still fitting together well. The action sequences are almost entirely chases, an appropriate decision given the film’s story. The chases have a few clever twists that make them interesting, and they are enough to give the film an action feel without any combat.

The Adjustment Bureau’s basic implementation of its premise is a mixed blessing. The only major elements onstage are David, Elise, and the Bureau itself, resulting a clean and understandable take on an inherently mind-bending concept. At the same time, letting the concept run wild would have resulted in a tantalizingly complex sci-fi puzzle. The Adjustment Bureau takes the safer option, sacrificing depth for accessibility.

The Adjustment Bureau lives up to some, but not all, of its considerable potential. Watch it if you are in the mood for a competent thriller with a unique premise. Skip it if you are looking for a more conventional action thriller.

7.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for workmanlike execution of an interesting premise.

Today’s quick review: Safe House. When Tobin Frost (Denzel Washington), a rogue CIA agent, is captured in South Africa, the Agency takes him to a nearby safe house for interrogation. But an assault on the facility leaves only Matt Weston (Ryan Reynolds), the rookie agent in charge of the safe house, alive to look after Tobin. On the run from the attackers, Matt must keep his dangerous prisoner alive and in custody until the CIA can send backup.

Safe House is an action thriller with a strong lead duo and solid execution. While the plot revolves around the same elements as most spy thrillers, Safe House tweaks the formula just enough to make it feel novel. Matt Weston is much lower on the Agency totem pole than most spy protagonists, and the simple task of taking care of a prisoner proves much more complicated than it first appears.

The two lead actors give Safe House a bit of star power and make its characters a cut above the standard action thriller’s. Ryan Reynolds plays Matt Weston, a novice agent who has trouble coming to grips with the moral ambiguity of actual spy work. Denzel Washington plays opposite him as Tobin Frost, a former spy who has enough tricks up his sleeve to make him a troublesome prisoner. Their relationship is a complicated sort rarely attempted in action films.

The action is standard for the genre: car chases, gunfights, and visceral hand-to-hand struggles. While not particularly innovative, the sudden bursts of violence keep the tension level high, an external source of uncertainty to add to Weston’s own niggling doubts. The plot has a nice progression, a focused look at one CIA agent and the mission that has been thrust upon him.

Watch Safe House if you are looking for a well-executed thriller with just enough quality to separate it from its peers. Though not a deep or groundbreaking movie, Safe House has enough entertainment value to be worth a watch when a craving for its genre hits.

6.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for a satisfying, tidy take on the thriller genre.

Today’s quick review: Vantage Point. While speaking at a terrorism conference in Spain, the President of the United States (William Hurt) is shot and a bomb is detonated at the plaza where he was speaking. In the aftermath of the attack, the eyewitnesses attempt to piece together exactly what happened in time to catch the attackers. These witnesses include a bodyguard to the president (Dennis Quaid), a tourist (Forest Whitaker), and a local cop (Eduardo Noriega).

Vantage Point is an action thriller with an unusual premise. The film shows the same events from multiple perspectives, replaying the same hour over and over but following a different character each time. As the characters’ paths branch and intersect, a picture begins to emerge of just who was responsible for the assassination and whether they can still be caught.

Most of Vantage Point’s appeal comes from this premise: a puzzle thriller that draws the audience along with the promise of revelations yet to come. The movie controls its information carefully, ordering its characters to save the best revelations for last. The action helps keep the adrenaline level up, mostly chase scenes and races against the clock rather than actual combat.

All these virtues run aground on the same problem: the central mystery is weak. The unconventional storytelling structure prevents the movie from having much in the way of setup or character development, and without these elements, the drama falls flat. The point of the movie is never all that clear: the damage has been done, the characters are acting on instinct, and there are enough fake-outs and coincidences to rob the movie of its sense of satisfaction.

Watch Vantage Point if you are in the mood for a decent thriller with an experimental premise. The movie falls well short of its potential, but it builds up a good sense of momentum by the end, and both Forest Whitaker and Dennis Quaid deliver solid performances. Most thriller fans will be better off watching Salt, Deja Vu, or a more conventional thriller with better execution.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for an interesting premise with mediocre execution.