Sleight of Film

Today’s quick review: The Sixth Sense. After a violent encounter with a former patient, child psychologist Dr. Malcolm Crowe (Bruce Willis) struggles to pick up the pieces of his professional life and his marriage. Hoping to make up for his failure, Crowe takes the case of Cole Sean (Haley Joel Osment), a moody nine-year-old boy who shows signs of abuse. But as he grows closer to Cole, Crowe uncovers a secret that’s stranger than he could have imagined.

The Sixth Sense is a mystery thriller from writer and director M. Night Shyamalan that examines the relationship between a psychologist and a troubled child. Precise acting, tight cinematography, and a careful plot allow The Sixth Sense to hook the audience and draw them into the film’s mystery. The reward for their invesment is a well-told story with masterful plot twists, sympathetic chracters, and a tone that’s unnerving and touching in turn.

The Sixth Sense assembles a fascinating story out of mundane pieces. The movie’s bread and butter are the thoughtful, lonely, and occasionally beautiful moments of everyday life. Malcolm and Cole spend the bulk of the movie just talking. But slipped in among these ordinary moments are hints at something mysterious and frightening. Cole’s odd habits and the inexplicable incidents that surround him all point to a deeper truth, if only Crowe can find it.

Like many of Shyamalan’s movies, The Sixth Sense is a slow burn. The movie takes its time to establish its characters and situation before it lets slip any major revelations. It is a testament to the quality of the film’s execution that it is able to keep the audience’s interest long enough to reach its payoff. But the hooks are strong, the characters are nuanced, and the writing is meaningful, making the film’s slow build-up feel just right.

Also like Shyamalan’s other work, The Sixth Sense walks a fine line between thriller and horror. The movie does dip into horror territory as it shows what Cole is going through, including one or two shocking moments and some effective suspense. But The Sixth Sense never takes the plunge into pure horror, instead using it as a tool to tell a personal, dramatic story. The resulting watch does have tension but won’t overwhelm most viewers.

Give The Sixth Sense a shot when you’re in the mood for a deliberate mystery with excellent craftsmanship and effective emotional core. The Sixth Sense is M. Night Shyamalan at his best, delivering a combination of thoughtful writing, artistic presentation, and keen plot twists in just the right proportions. Those looking for a fast-paced thriller, a full-blown horror movie, or a feel-good watch should hold off.

For a darker mystery from M. Night Shyamalan, try The Village. For one with a slightly lighter tone and a focus on family, try Signs. For an even tenser psychological thriller, try Shutter Island. For another unusual, heartfelt relationship between a psychiatrist and a patient, try K-PAX.

8.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for a great story and polished execution.

Today’s quick review: The Five Venoms. Obeying the wish of his dying master, Yang Tieh (Sheng Chiang), the last student of the House of Five Venoms, sets out to hunt down the school’s five other pupils and keep them from using their extraordinary martial arts prowess for evil. His search takes him to a village where the five incognito warriors have gathered, each one with his sights on a fortune guarded by an old friend of their master.

The Five Venoms is a martial arts action movie that pits five fanciful styles of kung fu against one another. The plot revolves around one unassuming warrior’s quest to uncover the identities of his master’s other students, determine which ones have become corrupt, and ally with the good ones to stop them. The movie combines fast-paced martial arts action, impressive stunt work, and a surprisingly intricate story to make for a solid popcorn watch.

The Five Venoms is at its best when it’s actually embroiled in martial arts. The fights are fast-paced and cleverly choreographed, while the unique skills of the five wayward pupils add some flavor to the combat. The film is on shakier ground when it’s actively trying to impress. The pupils’ skills work just fine in combat, but the flashy demonstrations of them fall flat. Fortunately, The Five Venoms lets its fighters prove themselves directly.

The Five Venoms also does more with its story than might otherwise be expected. The movie takes a contrived premise and weaves it into a satisfying mystery revolving around the unknown identities of the House’s students. The students’ attempts to learn the identities of their colleagues, gain an advantage over each other, and locate the money lead to some good twists. The plot is not high art, but it manages to be engaging throughout.

Watch The Five Venoms when you’re in the mood for some martial arts action with a dash of plot. Neither the story nor the characters can match the best the martial arts genre has to offer, but they do make The Five Venoms a viable pick for fans of the genre. For another martial arts movie in the same vein, try Sword Masters: Two Champions of Shaolin. For one with even more high-flying stunts and better execution, try Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

7.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for a good mix of action and plot.

Today’s quick review: Four Weddings and a Funeral. Charles (Hugh Grant) and his friends are frequent guests at weddings but never seem to have any of their own. With Charles’ history of failed long-term relationships, he doubts that will ever change, at least for him. But when Charles hits it off with Carrie (Andie MacDowell), a charming American woman, he finally finds someone to spend the rest of his life with, if only he can get the timing right.

Four Weddings and a Funeral is a British romantic comedy about love, marriage, and the obstacles in their way. As the title suggests, the movie takes place primarily at weddings, jumping forward months at a time to pick up with Charles and his friends at the next one. The romance involves Charles and Carrie, a natural match who only get to see each other on these rare occasions, making it hard for them to establish any sort of relationship.

Four Weddings and a Funeral is built on a sharp and observant script. The movie has a firm grasp on what’s funny, what’s not, and when to switch between the two. It puts this talent to good use in portraying the speeches, the awkwardness, and the minor crises that come with attending weddings. The result is a movie that sparkles in even the most mundane situations. Each wedding is imbued with the life, humor, and charm it needs to stay interesting.

The script is backed by a vivid and likable cast. The film rotates between characters frequently, flitting between Charles, his friends, and the guests of each wedding. The characters are easy to get a feel for even with limited exposure. Their personalities shine through clearly and provide the film with a reliable source of humor. The extended cast also helps flesh out the story and provide other perspectives on romance than just Charles’.

Watch Four Weddings and a Funeral when you’re in the mood for a funny, optimistic look at romance. A witty script and a skilled cast give the movie what it needs to tell an engaging story, while its musings on romance are broad and insightful enough to make the movie fulfilling. Skip it if you’re looking for something dramatic or cynical.

For another British romantic comedy with a similar sense of humor, try Love Actually. For a tamer romance starring Hugh Grant, try The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain. For a classic romantic comedy with similar wit and characters, try The Philadelphia Story. For a somewhat more bitter take on modern romance, try 500 Days of Summer.

7.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for a pleasant blend of character, humor, and heart.

Today’s quick review: Three. After being shot in the head by a police officer, Shun (Hon-Leung Chung), a brainy criminal, is taken to a hospital for treatment. Refusing surgery, Shun bides his time until he can stage an escape attempt with the help of his associates on the outside. As Dr. Qian Tong (Wei Zhao), a driven neurosurgeon, urges him to accept treatment, Inspector Ken Chan (Louis Koo) resorts to unethical means to cover up the shooting.

Three is a Chinese crime drama about a criminal whose head injury poses a problem for doctor and police officer alike. Three is a complex, deliberately paced movie whose premise weaves in a number of interesting plot threads. A tense situation, clever twists, and competent moment-to-moment execution provide lots of raw potential, but the big picture leaves something to be desired. The result is a promising film with mediocre follow-through.

Three has a set of interesting puzzle pieces, but it doesn’t know how to assemble them. Chan’s cover-up of police misconduct, Shun’s manipulation of his captors, and Tong’s struggle with her conscience give the film plenty of drama to work with. The mystery surrounding the shooting, Shun’s ambiguous goals, and the looming threat of the breakout heighten the tension even more. Three has the makings of a complex and delicate thriller.

But Three fails to fully capitalize on this potential. Slow pacing and the lack of a clear source of danger render the film’s drama toothless, at least for the bulk of its lengthy build-up. Shun’s shaky medical condition makes him hard to take seriously as a mastermind, while the plan to rescue him is half-baked. Three also has a tendency to drift into medical drama when nothing else is going on, taking focus away from the criminal side of the plot.

Give Three a shot when you’re in the mood for a slower, more complicated sort of crime movie. Many of its best ideas go to waste, but their novelty, coupled with the sound execution of its individual scenes, make it a reasonable pick for those who are interested. For a minimalistic cat-and-mouse game with a more sinister mystery, try The Interview. For a heist movie about a brilliant criminal, try Inside Man.

6.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for an interesting premise and mixed execution.

Today’s quick review: Sword Masters: Two Champions of Shaolin. Tung Chien-Chen (Meng Lo), a bold young graduate of the Shaolin Temple, joins forces with fellow Shaolin warrior Hu Wei-Chen (Sheng Chiang) to fight the Wudang Clan, a rival school that has sided with the ascendant Qing Court against the Ming loyalists. Tung, Hu, and their allies must use all their skills to defeat the champions of the Wudang Clan and their dangerous fighting styles.

Sword Masters: Two Champions of Shaolin is a martial arts action movie about two feuding martial arts schools and the skirmishes between their students. Sword Masters features skilled, theatrical-style martial arts and a tragic plot that takes place during the rise of the Qing Dynasty. It provides a fair amount of spectacle and showcases genuine athletic skill. However, its eclectic plot and mediocre characters leave something to be desired.

Fittingly enough, Sword Masters’ biggest draw is its action. The film’s distinctive fighting style is more flashy than weighty. Each fight is a rhythmic and elegant series of poses, and the athleticism and choreograhpy on display are impressive. The film does have the genre’s usual conceits, the extraordinary abilities that supposedly come with mastery of kung fu, but its bread and butter is dance-like fighting that relies on pure skill.

Sword Masters does not have as much to offer on the story side. The cast is sprawling, with half a dozen significant characters on each side of the fight, not all of whom deserve the attention they receive. The structure of the plot is an escalating series of episodes in the war between Shaolin and Wudang. The movie has less of an overarching plot that comes to fruition than a point at which each side has played all of its cards.

Fans of the martial arts genre may want to give Sword Masters: Two Champions of Shaolin a shot. The movie does not stand out from its peers, but its athletic prowess and artistic style of fighting give it some appeal. Those looking for gritty, hard-hitting action or rich, character-driven drama will want to look elsewhere.

For a more down-to-earth martial arts movie with a more dramatically effective story, try Ip Man. For a tragic martial arts drama that deals with loyalty and rebellion, try House of Flying Daggers. For a martial arts flick of a similar caliber, try The Five Venoms. For a goofy spoof of the genre, try Kung Pow: Enter the Fist.

6.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it the same for graceful stunts and middling story.

Today’s quick review: Year One. After eating the forbidden fruit, Zed (Jack Black) is kicked out of his primitive tribe with his friend Oh (Michael Cera). The two cavemen wander into an unfamiliar world and meet its strange inhabitants, including Cain (David Cross), Abraham (Hank Azaria), and Sargon (Vinnie Jones). But when their former tribemates are enslaved, Zed and Oh must journey to the hedonistic city of Sodom to save them.

Year One is a comedy set in a pastiche of the ancient world. Zed and Oh blunder from one quasi-Biblical situation to another, encountering a number of familiar names and places along the way. Year One’s loose premise and talented leads give the film some legs, setting it up to be a clever, irreverent spoof of mankind’s early days. However, its rambling story, aggressively lowbrow humor, and unlikable characters keep it from realizing its potential.

Year One’s cast is its best feature. Jack Black and Michael Cera play off each other well. Both comedians adopt their usual roles: Zed is a liar and a womanizer with an inflated opinion of himself, while Oh is a shy, intelligent young man with poor social skills. David Cross joins them as their on again, off again companion, the unstable murderer Cain. The three are a natural fit together, and their interactions give the film its best comedy.

However, the movie’s execution leaves something to be desired. The jokes are split between cracks about sex and shots at the Old Testament, but Year One doesn’t have anything clever to say about either. The tone is crass throughout. On the story and character side, Year One is insubstantial. The film’s meandering plot and unserious setting are fine for comedy purposes, but they don’t give it much to fall back on when its comedy misses the mark.

Year One might be worth a shot for fans of Jack Black’s loose comedic style, but other viewers will want to steer clear. Year One has modest comedic value, but its many missteps leave it badly outclassed by other comedies. For a comedy with a similar setting and a soccer bent, try Early Man. For an ancient action adventure, try 10,000 B.C. For a Jack Black comedy with more heart, try Nacho Libre or Be Kind Rewind.

4.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 5.5 for a good cast working with crude material that misses the mark.

Today’s quick review: The Whole Ten Yards. Mild-mannered dentist Oz Oseransky (Matthew Perry) has another brush with the world of crime when a vengeful Lazlo Gogolak (Kevin Pollak), freshly released from prison, kidnaps Oz’s wife Cynthia (Natasha Henstridge). Oz flees to Mexico to ask for the help of his friend Jimmy “the Tulip” Tudeski (Bruce Willis), a retired hitman now living a quiet, domestic life with his wife Jill (Amanda Peet).

The Whole Ten Yards is a crime comedy that reunites two couples with a tangled criminal history. The Whole Ten Yards picks up several years after The Whole Ten Yards, with the release of mob boss Lazlo Gogolak from prison. The movie has some of the same charm as The Whole Nine Yards, but it lacks the original’s intricate plot and delicate comedic touch. The result is a decent comedy with a good cast but not much vision.

The Whole Ten Yards shifts to a more overt style of comedy that comes at the expense of its characters. Where the first film was careful to keep a dry edge on its humor, the sequel opts for cheaper jokes and more exaggerated characters. Oz and Jimmy shift into caricatures of their former selves, while newcomer Lazlo is a quirky, over-the-top version of his son Janni from the first film. The plot also has less of a clear direction than the first one.

Still, the cast and the character dynamics partially make up for some of the film’s missteps. Neither the story nor the humor is quite as sharp as in the original, but Oz and Jerry make a fun duo, the supporting cast adds nicely to the chaos, and the film’s many absurd situations earn some laughs. The Whole Ten Yards lacks the nuance it needs, but it still has something to offer as a comedy, thanks primarily to a good cast in interesting roles.

Watch The Whole Ten Yards when you’re in the mood for a light comedy with vivid characters that doesn’t take itself too seriously. The story won’t make much sense to those who haven’t seen the original, but those who have may want to give the sequel a shot. Steer clear if you’re looking for a comedic masterpiece. For a more robust take on the same characters, try The Whole Nine Yards. For a crime spoof, try Johnny Dangerously or Mafia!.

5.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 6.5 for a credible but noticeably flawed attempt at recapturing the spark of the original.

Today’s quick review: The Whole Nine Yards. Oz Oseransky (Matthew Perry), a Montreal dentist trapped in a bad marriage, gets an unpleasant shock when notorious hitman Jimmy “the Tulip” Tudeski (Bruce Willis) moves in next door. Oz soon finds himself caught between his new neighbor and Janni Gogolak (Kevin Pollak), the Chicago crime boss who wants him dead. Oz must decide whether to side with Jimmy or Janni while trying to not to get himself killed.

The Whole Nine Yards is a crime comedy that pairs a hapless dentist with an incognito hitman. The two strike up an odd friendship made even stranger by Oz’s thoroughly justified fear of Jimmy. The Whole Nine Yards takes an otherwise simple premise and spins it into a nicely complicated story with a large cast, plenty of humor, and the craftsmanship to back it up. The result is a well-judged comedy that plays directly to its actors’ strengths.

The Whole Nine Yards’ greatest strength is its cast. Matthew Perry stars as Oz, a nice man whose panic gives the film much of its comedy. Bruce Willis co-stars as Jimmy, a dangerous hitman with a friendly demeanor and a curious set of principles. They are joined by a talented supporting cast that includes Jimmy’s estranged wife Cynthia (Natasha Henstridge), Oz’s assistant Jill (Amanda Peet), and Janni’s muscle Frankie (Michael Clarke Duncan).

The plot is a complicated affair involving schemes, shifting alliances, a life insurance policy, dental fraud, a couple of tangled romances, and $10 million that’s only a few murders away. The Whole Nine Yards uses its chaotic plot to drag Oz deeper into a world of crime that he’s ill-equipped to navigate. Oz’s chivalry, his sense of self-preservation, and his feelings for the people around him all contribute to a protagonist who’s easy to like.

Watch The Whole Nine Yards when you’re looking for well-balanced comedy with a good mix of plot, character, and humor. The Whole Nine Yards doesn’t excel in any area in particular, but its honest comedy and sense of proportion make it a pleasant, entertaining watch. For a spy comedy with a similar comedic pairing, try The In-Laws. For a goofier crime comedy with a similar sense of humor, try Johnny Dangerously.

6.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 for putting a great cast to good use.

Today’s quick review: Cold Pursuit. Following the death of his son, Nels Coxman (Liam Neeson), a quiet, upstanding citizen of Kehoe, Colorado, sets out to get his revenge on the drug dealers responsible. Nels methodically works his way up the chain of command towards Viking (Tom Bateman), the man in charge of the operation. But his actions have unexpected consequences for Colorado’s criminal underworld and soon escalate into a full-blown drug war.

Cold Pursuit is a crime drama and a black comedy about one man’s sprawling quest for revenge. The movie’s linear premise and dry style gradually give way to a complex plot that pits half a dozen factions against each other in a conflict fueled by greed, misinformation, and revenge. Cold Pursuit delivers plenty of twists and a steady stream of understated, somewhat macabre humor. However, its slow start and odd tone make it an unusual pick.

To its credit, Cold Pursuit puts together a story that’s fascinating to track and difficult to predict. The plot is not a tightly wound masterpiece of foreshadowing and revelation, but rather a chaotic free-for-all with just enough serendipity to tie everything together. The episodes of the plot are short, quirky, and usually punctuated with murder. Their effects ripple through the rest of the cast, prompting another round of actions and consequences.

Cold Pursuit makes for an odd watch. It is not an action movie, in spite of its revenge-based premise. It does qualify as a black comedy, but it seems to ease into its humor of the course of the film, starting with subtle incongruities and ramping up into outrageous situations driven by its plot. Liam Neeson makes for an unusual protagonist in Nels Coxman, a helpful but socially awkward man who takes a brutal but practical approach to his mission.

Give Cold Pursuit a shot when you want to taste the peculiar side of the crime genre. Its understated humor, lack of action, and slow pacing make it a poor fit for the usual crime fan. But those willing to venture off the beaten path will appreciate its complex plot, quirky tone, and touches of dark comedy. Cold Pursuit lacks the artistry to stand with the best of the genre, but it’s a fine pick for fans of what it’s offering.

For an understated black comedy in a similar vein, try Fargo. For a punchier crime comedy with a similarly convoluted plot, try Snatch or Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. For a crime comedy with more of a master plan, try Lucky Number Slevin. For a more action-packed Liam Neeson thriller, try Non-Stop.

6.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for an odd but effective mix of criminal escapades and dry humor.

Today’s quick review: The In-Laws. Dr. Jerry Peyser (Albert Brooks), an uptight podiatrist, has his hands full preparing for his daughter’s wedding when he finally meets the father of the groom: Steven Tobias (Michael Douglas), a spontaneous man who claims to be a deep cover CIA agent. Due to a string of accidents, Jerry gets roped into Steven’s latest mission, brokering a deal with an international smuggler (David Suchet) for a stolen nuclear submarine.

The In-Laws is a spy comedy about a risk-averse doctor who’s dragged into the world of espionage when his daughter marries the son of a spy. The movie pairs Albert Brooks and Michael Douglas as two complete opposites who have to work together to complete a dangerous mission, stay ahead of the FBI, and make sure the wedding goes off without a hitch. The In-Laws features an interesting premise and a decent plot, but its actual comedy is a mixed bag.

The In-Laws does better in the broad strokes than in the particulars. Michael Douglas and Albert Brooks are cast reasonably well, with Douglas as a charismatic but unreliable spy and Brooks as his nervous, unwitting partner. The story focuses primarily on Steven’s mission, but it saves room for some wedding jitters and a touch of action. The bulk of the humor comes from Jerry being thrust into situations he’s unprepared for, with the expected results.

However, The In-Laws doesn’t have the delicate touch needed to make the most of its premise. The comedy consistently aims for low-hanging fruit, opting for obvious, accessible gags rather than anything deadpan or subtle. Neither Jerry nor Steven is likable enough to give the film much heart; Jerry in particular is more of a walking punchline than a full character. The spy side of the world works well enough, but it’s neither original nor clever.

Watch The In-Laws when you’re in the mood for some breezy, popcorn comedy and aren’t too concerned about imperfections. The In-Laws does not have the skill it needs to follow through on its comedic setup, and its lowbrow humor won’t appeal to everyone. But those looking for a quick, simple romp may want to give it a shot.

For a more skillful, deadpan take on the same premise, try the original version of The In-Laws. For a crime comedy with a similar premise, try The Whole Nine Yards. For a spy comedy that dabbles in similar territory, try The Man from U.N.C.L.E. or Get Smart.

5.7 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for decent comedy that’s lacking finesse.