Sleight of Film

Today’s quick review: Deja Vu. When a ferry boat explodes in New Orleans, killing hundreds of people, ATF Agent Doug Carlin (Denzel Washington) is recruited to a special federal task force led by FBI Agent Pryzwarra (Val Kilmer). Using sophisticated satellite technology, the task force is able to reconstruct events from four days in the past to investigate a crime linked to the bombing, the murder of Claire Kuchever (Paula Patton).

Deja Vu is an action thriller with sci-fi elements. For the most part, Deja Vu is a standard investigative thriller, with a trail of clues leading to the culprit. But the vivid satellite reconstructions give the investigation a sense of immediacy, showing fleeting glimpses of Claire’s life before her murder. The rolling window into the past also helps keep the urgency up, as any event more than four days into the past is lost to the team forever.

Watch Deja Vu if you are in the mood for a tidy, competent thriller with an atypical premise, moderate amounts of action, and a good puzzle at its core. The execution is decent if not outstanding, but the dash of sci-fi provides a welcome bit of variety to an otherwise standard entry into its genre. Sci-fi fans who dislike thrillers won’t get much out of Deja Vu; thriller fans who can bear a little sci-fi will have a good time.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it the same for competent execution of a good premise.

Today’s quick review: The Constant Gardener. Justin Quayle (Ralph Fiennes), a British diplomat to Kenya, embarks on a dangerous investigation after the murder of his wife Tessa (Rachel Weisz), a political activist who was on the trail of a major scandal. His investigation forces him to confront a pattern of abuse and neglect from the companies and aid organizations he once trusted.

The Constant Gardener is a political thriller about corruption within the British aid efforts to Africa. Tessa’s death serves as the catalyst for Justin to involve himself in problems he once turned a blind eye to, tugging at the loose ends of her life to determine what she knew and why she was killed. The Constant Gardener is headlined by a pair of capable actors and characterized by a sober portrayal of real-world issues.

But for all of its potential, The Constant Gardener suffers from a few significant flaws. The most noticeable of these is that it lacks a sympathetic protagonist for most of its first half. Tessa’s character is undermined by her strident, politically radical personality and signs of her infidelity, while Justin is a bland character who does not begin to develop until his wife leaves the picture.

Once the lengthy setup is out of the way and Justin begins his investigation, the movie straightens out into a decent political thriller. The clues are well-crafted, and Justin makes for a fine protagonist once he has something active to do. But The Constant Gardener is as much a propaganda piece as it is a thriller, and it tackles issues that are too weighty to allow for any sort of catharsis.

For those who are interested in politics in general or African affairs in particular, The Constant Gardener is a grim look at the potential for abuse among international aid efforts, all wrapped around a competent thriller plot. The execution is sound, and those who are on board with the tone and subject matter will find it to be a fine watch.

Those who are simply looking for a good thriller are better off looking elsewhere. The Constant Gardener has a slow start, unlikable characters, and a current of real-world politics that drags down an already-dark thriller plot. The Constant Gardener offers little action, little catharsis, and almost no entertainment value.

7.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 for a bleak, unappealing story.

Today’s quick review: The Wolf of Wall Street. Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio), a Wall Street stock broker, concocts a dubiously legal plan to make a fortune hyping low-value stocks with his best friend Donnie Azoff (Jonah Hill). His scheme propels his trading firm all the way to the top, but his wealth sows the seeds of his downfall: rampant drug abuse, preposterous expenses, and a bitter wife Naomi (Margot Robbie).

The Wolf of Wall Street is a business comedy with dramatic elements that is based on a true story. Director Martin Scorsese dramatizes the life of Jordan Belfort, the man who took Wall Street by storm in the 80s, growing rich off his questionable business practices. Scorsese holds the audience’s interest admirably, switching between scenes before any get stale, dropping in plenty of spectacle, and stitching it all together with DiCaprio’s amusing narration.

Leonardo DiCaprio brings his role to life with a peculiar sort of charisma. His Jordan Belfort is one part machiavellian con man, one part sympathetic narrator, and one part wealthy degenerate who deserves every ounce of suffering coming his way. This ambivalence lets The Wolf of Wall Street play both sides of the hedonism coin, gaily showing the comedic aspects of excessive drugs and money alongside the horrific toll they take, occasionally even at the same time.

The juxtaposition makes The Wolf of Wall Street an unusual and captivating watch. Those who despise hedonism will find it distasteful at best; the film oozes drugs, prostitution, and profanity from every pore. Those who dislike party films may find more substance than they expect: the superficial comedy masks well-placed lessons about the unsustainability of hedonism, while the film’s capable craftsmanship also gives it some value as a drama.

The film is not without its flaws, even for those comfortable with its content. As with most true stories, the plot as a whole is so-so, despite the strong individual scenes that comprise it. Scorsese does a better job than most at handling the denouement, but the ending is still a letdown after its larger-than-life build-up.

Watch The Wolf of Wall Street if you are looking for a well-crafted, unpredictable comedy all the more unbelievable due to how much of it is real. Those sensitive to drug use, nudity, or swearing should stay far away, while those who merely not sold by them may want to try it out anyway. Despite an overall plot that lacks the tidiness of fiction, The Wolf of Wall Street is a raucous film that blurs the line between hedonistic escape and cautionary tale.

8.2 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it 8.0 for unexpected entertainment value and an outstanding performance from DiCaprio.

Today’s quick review: The Big Short. Before the onset of the 2008 financial crisis, several investors had the luck or foresight to predict the collapse of the housing market and bet against the market. Among them were Michael Burry (Christian Bale), an eccentric hedge fund manager; Mark Baum (Steve Carrell), an irascible fund manager with a keen sense of justice; Jared Vennett (Ryan Gosling), an agent of a big bank; and Charlie Geller (John Magaro), Jamie Shipley (Finn Wittrock), and Ben Rickert (Brad Pitt), a duo of small-time fund managers and their ex-banker friend.

The Big Short is a financial drama centered around the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. The film follows the travails of the handful of investors who saw the crisis coming, including their investigations of the bubble, their attempts to short the real estate market, and their difficulties holding their positions until the bubble burst.

The Big Short is one part movie and one part documentary. Apart from its details, the film is non-fiction, chronicling real events and real investors with an impressive cast and stylized presentation. The documentary aspects enter in with the film’s direct, extensive explanations of the financial aspects of the bubble and its focus on the market more than its characters.

To its credit, The Big Short is punchier than the typical documentary. The story aspects of the film and its wide cast of characters give it a touch of humanity and show off the peculiarities of the housing bubble firsthand. The acting is strong, the language is colofrul, and the investors’ parallel efforts provide several complementary perspectives on the bubble.

However, The Big Short is not satisfying as a story. The characters take back seat to the crisis itself, and the movie’s limited attempts to peak into the characters’ personal lives are not all that compelling. The thesis of the movie is not dramatized well, making much of the story the repetition of one central point rather than a gradual build-up to a moment of truth.

The Big Short does do a good job of illustrating the housing bubble using helpful analogies, fourth-wall-breaking narration, and gratuitous celebrity cameos. The technical aspects of the film can still be hard to follow, but The Big Short manages to convey the gist of complex financial instruments to a lay audience, which is no easy feat.

The film’s stylization is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, its informal style and self-aware humor spice up the financial industry to significant degree. On the other hand, it relies a little too much on gimmicks. Pop culture references, news clips, stock photos, and arbitrary songs are shoehorned into the film without much subtlety or vision. These stylistic choices make The Big Short come across as cheap and eclectic.

How much you like The Big Short will depend on how compelling you find its core message. The neglect and abuse leading up to the crisis are shocking, and The Big Short does a good job of hammering home this point. But for someone already convinced of this, most of the movie is redundant. The crisis is front and center, and while this lets the movie explore it in more detail, it also negates any chance of a compelling story outside the crisis.

Watch The Big Short if you are interested in learning more about the 2008 financial crisis through the eyes of those who saw it coming. The Big Short is a very good summary of the event and is well worth a watch for informational purposes. But as entertainment, The Big Short falls somewhat flat. Skip it if you are looking for a satisfying story or any sort of escapism.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 for offering a thorough look at real events but very little entertainment value; your rating will be higher if you enjoy documentaries for their own sake, appreciate good acting even without a story to house it, or are interested in finance.

Today’s quick review: The Road to El Dorado. After a series of mishaps, Miguel (Kenneth Branagh) and Tulio (Kevin Kline), a pair of 16th-century Spanish rogues, find themselves bound for the New World with a map to El Dorado, the legendary city of gold. Following the map, they manage to find the city, where they are hailed as gods. Together with Chel (Rosie Perez), a local woman who sees them as her meal ticket, they scheme to use their newfound divinity to fleece the locals out of as much gold as they can carry back to Spain.

The Road to El Dorado is an animated family adventure film from Dreamworks. Set during the early stages of the Spanish conquest of South America, The Road to El Dorado follows the misadventures of two con men as they stumble into the score of a lifetime. For all their faults, Miguel and Tulio are not bad men. The delicate balance of power in El Dorado offers them moral choices as to how to profit from the situation without empowering the bloodthirsty priest claiming to speak on their behalf.

The Road to El Dorado offers a trio of fun protagonists, comedic writing, and a soundtrack by Elton John. Miguel and Tulio have a great dynamic; they are charming, friendly, and loyal to each other, but their differing personalities occasionally cause them to bicker. The plot is a competent con artist tale with El Dorado’s high priest as antagonist.

For all this, The Road to El Dorado does not quite live up to its potential. None of the songs are particularly catchy or memorable. The Spanish conquest of South America is left in the background, in spite of its dramatic potential. The early stages of the adventure are driven mostly by chance, while the search for El Dorado is relegated to a single travel montage.

Watch The Road to El Dorado if you are in the mood for a light adventure. Though outclassed by many other animated films, The Road to El Dorado is a fine, breezy watch that will surely catch some of its viewers the right way. But for most, it will offer nothing exceptional and can be skipped or put off without much loss.

6.9 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for decent execution with a couple of moderate flaws.

Today’s quick review: The Emperor’s New Groove. Kuzco (David Spade), the vain, spoiled prince of a South American empire, has it all. But when his chief advisor Yzma (Eartha Kitt) and her right-hand man Kronk (Patrick Warburton) turn him into a llama in an attempt to claim the throne, Kuzco is left on his own. His only ally is Pacha (John Goodman), a kindly peasant Kuzco had previously thought beneath him. To make it back to the palace and return to his human form, Kuzco must first earn the good will of the man he scorned.

The Emperor’s New Groove is an animated family comedy from Disney featuring great voice acting, cartoonish humor, and a nice moral about selfishness. The characters are excellent: simple, entertaining, and brought to life by talented voice actors. The animation is lively and colorful. The premise is fun, the writing is seasoned with jokes, and the story is topped off with a couple of nice emotional moments.

But for all its virtues, The Emperor’s New Groove lacks some of the quality of other Disney films. The film relies too much on cartoon slapstick, overt humor, and its hip attitude to ever be a classic. Its one song is a great one, but the movie lacks the detail, length, and polish of Disney’s musicals. The result is an entertaining watch that misses out on the replay value of its fellows.

Watch The Emperor’s New Groove if you are looking for a light family comedy with plenty of color. The Emperor’s New Groove has the cast and writing for a very fun time, even if it is missing a bit of substance. Skip it if you are hoping for another Disney classic.

7.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for color, character, and humor.

“What we do in life echoes in eternity.” —Maximus

Today’s quick review: Gladiator. After the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Richard Harris) is slain by his son Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix), Aurelius’s favorite general Maximus (Russell Crowe) is betrayed and sold into slavery. He is taken to the outskirts of the Roman Empire, where an aging entertainer (Oliver Reed) forces him to fight as a gladiator. There his prowess in the arena earns him the favor of the crowd and a chance to return to Rome.

Gladiator is a historical drama from director Ridley Scott. Featuring violent action, a rich atmosphere, strong dramatic performances, and an impressive soundtrack by Hans Zimmer, Gladiator is a polished film that offers a fictionalized glimpse into Ancient Rome. Though it takes some liberties with historical events, the setting feels authentic and the movie works in snippets of Roman history in natural ways.

The combat in gladiator is gory, tense, and fairly realistic. Maximus is a formidable warrior but not infallible, and his success as a gladiator is as much a result of teamwork and clever tactics as it is his skill as a swordsman. The perils of the arena offer plenty of variety to keep action fans satisfied, while the skilled worldbuilding and character development offer more depth than a typical action movie.

Watch Gladiator if you are in the mood for a well-executed, action-packed historical drama. Steer clear if you dislike violence or you are looking for a light watch.

8.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for overall high quality.

Today’s quick review: Catwoman. Patience Phillips (Halle Berry) is a mild-mannered artist working for a beauty company who accidentally learns the dark secret behind her company’s new beauty cream. The company’s unscrupulous head George Hedare (Lambert Wilson) has her killed to keep her quiet, but a mystic cat revives her and grants her catlike powers. With new abilities and new confidence, Patience sets about bringing Hedare to justice as the vigilante Catwoman.

Catwoman is a superhero movie loosely based on the DC comic book character. Catwoman follows the pattern of most superhero origin stories, but its execution leaves much to be desired. Halle Berry’s Catwoman has little in common with her predecessors beyond a whip and a cat motif. The classy cat burglar of previous incarnations is replaced by an edgy vigilante with murky motivations who behaves like she is possessed.

The intended transformation is from meek, ordinary Patience to confident, unrestrained Catwoman, but the character gets lost somewhere in between. The Catwoman persona seems to shunt Patience’s aside for nocturnal adventures, a protagonist that doesn’t grow so much as get rewritten. Patience is not a satisfying character, while the Catwoman persona is too erratic to take seriously.

Furthermore, the movie embraces all aspects of being a cat, resulting in a bizarre heroine who is vulnerable to catnip and is distracted by shiny objects. These moments could have been played for humor, but the film plays them just straight enough that it is hard to laugh. With a stronger protagonist, these would just be seen as quirky side effects of the transformation, but instead they just contribute to the impression that Patience is not right in the head.

The action should be the film’s saving grace, and to some extent it is. Apart from some peculiar leap physics, slightly dated CGI, and too much twirling, Catwoman does not have terrible combat. The heroine’s acrobatics are used in a few clever ways, and a better movie could have been built around the fight scenes. Even these fights lack vision, though: Catwoman rarely fights anyone significant or challenging, putting the half-decent choreography to waste.

The rest of the film is a series of lackluster choices. The evil cosmetics corporation plot is uncompelling. The love interest ranges from dull to awkward. The characters are unsympathetic. The writing borders on cringeworthy. The supernatural elements are handled poorly and add little to the plot. The moral is muddied by Catwoman’s split personality. The outfit is tasteless. The “hip” soundtrack just sounds cheap. Catwoman goes the wrong direction on nearly everything.

Watch Catwoman if you want to see Halle Berry lose her mind and start behaving like a cat. As a superhero movie, Catwoman offers very little. As a trainwreck, it is mildly amusing. Skip it if you are looking for a good film, especially if you are a fan of the superhero genre.

3.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 4.0 for a reasonable concept ruined by a series of bad choices.

Today’s quick review: Armageddon. When NASA discovers an asteroid the size of Texas about to collide with the Earth, NASA official Dan Truman (Billy Bob Thornton) calls on Harry Stamper (Bruce Willis), an expert oil driller, to help with a last-ditch scheme to save the planet. He and his crew (Owen Wilson, Michael Clarke Duncan, and Steve Buscemi) must travel to the asteroid and drill a hole deep enough for a nuclear warhead to split the rock in half. But NASA has their work cut out for them whipping the clownish drillers into shape, and Stamper must come to grips with the fact that his protege A.J. (Ben Affleck) is in love with his daughter Grace (Liv Tyler).

Armageddon is a fast-paced disaster thriller from director Michael Bay. For a genre that should be back-loaded, Armageddon manages to pack in an astonishing amount of action. Explosions are frequent, and even the parts of the film without an immediate catastrophe are filled with humor, emotional drama, or plot development to keep things moving.

Armageddon is a movie that wears its heart on its sleeve. Everything is big, from the meteor shower that devastates New York to the spending spree Stamper’s men go on before heading into space. Armageddon runs the full gamut of emotion, from blue collar fun and over-the-top action scenes to grim determination and tragic farewells. It is an emotional thrill ride with clear conflicts, clean execution, and big payoffs.

The cast is every bit as lively as the rest of the film. The main trio of Bruce Willis, Ben Affleck, and Liv Tyler form the emotional core of the film, while Owen Wilson, Michael Clarke Duncan, Steve Buscemi, and the rest of Stamper’s crew provide comic relief. The characters are drawn in simple, satisfying strokes that give their talented actors plenty to work with.

Skip Armageddon if you are looking for a sophisticated movie, a subversion, or anything but a fun time. It embraces its genre and plays it to the hilt, and the only winking at the camera is done through the film’s good-natured comedy. It is packed to the gills with cheap tricks to keep the audience interested, from the crew’s comic antics to transparent emotional subplots to dramatic camera work. None of this will appeal to the cerebral viewer.

But it will appeal to the emotional viewer. Watch Armageddon if you enjoy action films and are in the mood for one with skillful execution and unusual amounts of heart. Armageddon takes a decent premise, a great cast, and explosions aplenty and weaves them into a film that is entertaining at every level.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 to 8.0 for entertainment, emotional richness, and overall quality.

Today’s quick review: Lethal Weapon. Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover) is a reliable police officer with a loving family and a home in the suburbs. Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson) is a cop on the edge who channels his grief over his wife’s death into dangerously effective police work. When the daughter of one of Murtaugh’s army buddies is murdered, the two are assigned as partners and tasked with tracking down the killer.

Lethal Weapon is a buddy cop movie with a strong leading duo and fun writing. Riggs and Murtaugh are both great characters in their own right, but the dynamic between the two gives Lethal Weapon a solid core to work with. The film has plenty of jokes to go with the action, and the combination of action, humor, and character makes it a very entertaining watch.

Lethal Weapon does have a few deficiencies, even within the template of 80s action movies. The plot and villain are almost entirely forgettable. The action is plentiful but offers nothing too impressive. Action movie cliches are frequent if not omnipresent, although whether this is a strength or a weakness is a matter of taste.

But for anyone who enjoys the genre, Lethal Weapon’s strengths are more than enough to make up for its weaknesses. Lethal Weapon is perhaps the quintessential action movie, and any 80s action fan will love it. Watch it when you are in the mood for an entertaining popcorn flick. Skip it if you are looking for something less conventional or with a bit more plot.

7.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.5 for two great leads and surprisingly skillful writing.