Sleight of Film

Today’s quick review: Gamer. In the future, death row inmates are given a second chance at freedom through a lethal game called Slayers, where their bodies are used as player characters in a live-action version of a shooter video game. Injected with nanobots and controlled remotely by players, the inmates win their freedom if they survive thirty death matches. At the top of the charts is Kable (Gerard Butler), a man who wants his freedom so he can reunite with his family, and his controller Simon (Logan Lerman), a teenage gamer with dreams of wealth and glory. With only a few matches left until Kable goes free, Ken Castle (Michael C. Hall), the wealthy and sociopathic creator of Slayers, pulls out all the stops to ensure that Kable dies in a ratings-boosting blaze of glory.

Gamer is a violent sci-fi thriller that explores the question of what happens when humans turn their bodies over to external control. While the main emphasis of the film is on the action of Slayers and Kable’s attempts to escape it, Gamer actually manages to deliver on some of the speculative aspects of its premise. The decadence and perversion of the Internet are extrapolated to the real world through Society, a Sims-like game where players control real people who rent out their bodies for the purpose. Gladiatorial combat makes a comeback through Slayers under the fig leaf that death row inmates are given a chance at freedom. There are valid points here about the inhumanity of our entertainment, rooted in violence and freedom from consequence, or perhaps about the necessary boundary between fiction and reality to prevent the entertainment from becoming inhumane.

But for the most part, Gamer uses its far-fetched premise as an excuse for a death game. Slayers is a fairly generic FPS-style urban warfare game, mostly a vehicle for gun-toting action sequences, gory deaths, and shock value. Apart from one or two clever moments, the combat is unremarkable box-checking, mostly there to satisfy the action requirement and acquaint the viewer with Slayers. Gamer does earn style points for its music choice: the film has two or three standout tracks that add a lot to the atmosphere of the world. The acting similarly supports the tone of the movie: Gerard Butler plays one of the only normal characters in the film, Terry Crews plays a menacing and psychotic rival to Kable, and Michael C. Hall plays a sadistic billionaire who has the world fooled. Everything from the camera work to the characters to the violence contributes to the surreal sensation of a world gone amok.

Gamer suffers from a number of problems that act as barriers to enjoyment. The premise is geared heavily towards an action movie, but the action in Gamer is merely adequate, not outstanding. The premise also works as a social commentary and area for sci-fi speculation, but the purposeful distastefulness of the world directly impacts its plausibility. Gamer has the tone of a critique and the back story of an action movie, and neither of these are enough to support Gamer as serious speculation. Its entertainment value as an action movie is damaged by its mediocre combat and emphasis on an inhuman future. The film is left to coast on its style and its dark but consistent view on humanity.

Watch Gamer if you are willing to spend some time with the seamy side of humanity for the sake of violence, style, and intellectual bubblegum. Gamer does not stand out as an action movie, a sci-fi movie, or a social commentary, but the combination of elements makes for an interesting watch. Those who find the tone or style enjoyable will get something out of this movie, but most others will not. The ideal viewer is desensitized to violence, attracted to spectacle, and willing to chew on what speculation and commentary Gamer has to offer. Those who are sensitive to violence, have an optimistic view of humanity, or prefer their action unadulterated and guilt-free should skip the film entirely.

5.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for interesting concepts and stylization, but others will find it closer to 6.0 or 6.5 according to their tastes.

Today’s quick review: The Tournament. Every seven years, a tournament is held between thirty of the greatest assassins in the world. A small town is sealed off and equipped with surveillance cameras, and the assassins engage in a fight to the death, with the last survivor earning a huge cash prize. The tournament is organized and sponsored by a cabal of wealthy gamblers who use the contest for their own twisted amusement. Father MacAvoy (Robert Carlyle), a civilian priest with a drinking problem, gets dragged into the tournament when a competitor plants his tracker on him, effectively dropping off the grid while Father MacAvoy unwittingly takes his place. An assassin by the name of Lai Lai Zhen (Kelly Hu) comes to his aid, and together they brave the death game, hoping to survive long enough to get MacAvoy out of the competition. Their greatest obstacle along the way is Joshua Harlow (Ving Rhames), the legendary assassin who won the previous tournament, now back to take revenge on one of the contestants.

The Tournament is a low-budget action movie centered around a brutal death game between assassins. The premise, even if not entirely original, has good potential for an action movie, and The Tournament lives up to this potential quite well for a movie on a budget. While as shallow as one would expect from the premise, the plot has a few good twists to keep the action moving and the stakes in flux. The characters are not particularly strong or memorable, but they get the job done, with just enough depth to set up their motivations and prepare for plot twists. The action is surprisingly fun and serves as the main draw of the movie. The combat is fast-paced and violent, given variety by the various fighting styles of the assassins. Everything from parkour to brute-force shootouts makes an appearance among the fighters, and the film does a good job balancing its stunts’ cost and their impact.

The Tournament is a surprisingly enjoyable popcorn film when you’re in the mood for a bit of action. Watch it if you enjoy violent action movies with little in the way of plot or character depth. Skip it if you dislike violence or you are looking for recognizable actors, deep characters, or a meaningful plot.

6.1 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7 for solid action, if not much else.

Today’s quick review: Bandits. Joe Blake (Bruce Willis) and Terry Collins (Billy Bob Thornton) are a pair of bank robbers with a novel approach to robbing banks. Rather than trying to beat the banks’ security systems directly, they go to the bank manager’s house the night before the robbery, hold the manager and his family hostage until the morning, then take the manager to get them the money when the bank opens. Their crime spree hits a snag when Terry inadvertently kidnaps Kate Wheeler (Cate Blanchett) during a bungled carjacking. Kate is a housewife in a dying relationship who finally finds the excitement she craves with Joe and Terry. But the feelings she develops for both men threaten to split the duo apart.

Bandits is a crime comedy with a romantic plot. Bruce Willis plays the confident, dangerous Joe, who sweeps Kate off her feet. Billy Bob Thornton plays his best friend and partner in crime, the neurotic Terry, whose sensitivity endears him to Kate. This love triangle is standard enough fare and forms the heart of the movie. The characters are moderately entertaining but not particularly deep or interesting. The plot is similarly straightforward: the duo pulls off a string of heists until the public cottons to their technique, leading to greater challenges from without even as the love triangle is tearing them apart from within. The comedy is amusing in places but not particularly memorable.

Watch Bandits only if you’re in the mood for a light, romcom-esque crime comedy and don’t care too much about quality. The film manages to be amusing in places, and it has a couple of good ideas that it does not properly capitalize on, but ultimately it is not satisfying as either a romance or a comedy. Skip it if you prefer a film with a bit more meat on its bones.

6.6 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for having mild charm but ultimately being a forgettable watch.

Today’s quick review: Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol. IMF agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is languishing in a Russian prison, a pseudo-retirement brought about by an incident months earlier. When his expertise is needed for the IMF’s latest mission, Hunt’s new team stages a breakout. Together they infiltrate the Kremlin looking for information on Hendricks (Michael Nyqvist), a terrorist who wants to kick off World War III using Russian nuclear weapons. The operation goes south when a bombing at the Kremlin is pinned on Hunt’s team, and the President enacts Ghost Protocol, disavowing the IMF and leaving Hunt’s team out in the cold. Now wanted fugitives, Ethan, Brandt (Jeremy Renner), Jane (Paula Patton), and Benji (Simon Pegg) are the only ones who can stop Hendricks before he starts a nuclear war.

The fourth installment in the Mission: Impossible series, Ghost Protocol pushes the franchise in an excellent new direction. As usual for the series, the film is built around big stunts, futuristic gadgets, and high-stakes, globe-trotting spy action. Ghost Protocol adds humor, gadget failure, and a bevy of new locations. Newcomers Jeremy Renner and Paula Patton fit right into the team, and their characters each have important arcs in the story. Benji is promoted from his supporting role in Mission: Impossible 3 to the main cast, bringing Simon Pegg’s excellent comedy to the fore. When added to Ethan’s affable interactions with his teammates and repeated failures from mainstay gadgets, this introduces a strain of overt humor to the series that boosts its enjoyability without diminishing its intensity.

Ghost Protocol amps up the entertainment value of an already strong series. Watch it if you’re in the mood for a light and entertaining spy thriller with high-stakes action and a welcome touch of humor. Skip it if you prefer a more realistic spy movie or a more grounded thriller. Ghost Protocol is an excellent place to jump into the Mission: Impossible series for new fans and an excellent addition to the series for old ones. Give it a shot.

7.4 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for creative stunts, high intensity, and good use of humor.

Today’s quick review: Con Air. Cameron Poe (Nic Cage) is a former Army Ranger who was imprisoned for manslaughter after a bar fight. After years in jail, his release is interrupted when fellow prisoner Cyrus “The Virus” Grissom (John Malkovich) hijacks the prison transport plane that was taking Poe to freedom. Trapped aboard a plane full of dangerous convicts, Poe must go along with their escape while engineering their capture from within if he is to have any hope of meeting Casey, the young daughter he has never seen, as a free man. Helping him from without is Vince Larkin (John Cusack), a U.S. Marshal tasked with catching the runaway plane and capturing its wayward prisoners.

Con Air is an entertaining action flick with a great cast and a surprising amount of heart. Nic Cage, John Malkovich, and John Cusack are joined by Danny Trejo, Dave Chappelle, Ving Rhames, and Steve Buscemi in a lineup that perfectly fits the tone of the movie: intensity laced with sentimentality and a sense of fun. The plot is fairly straightforward: Cyrus orchestrates the hijacking, then uses the plane to lead the convicts on a journey to freedom. Mechanical problems, pursuing Marshals, and internal strife set back their escape, with the smallest of margins separating success from disaster.

Watch Con Air if you’re in the mood for a light thriller that mixes tense moments with snatches of humor and cheap but effective emotional drama. Any fans of the cast should check out the movie as well, as it is a rare chance to see so many familiar faces in one place. Skip Con Air if you are looking for something deep or serious. While Con Air has serious and emotional moments, the overall blend of elements is geared towards entertainment rather than gravitas.

6.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for sheer enjoyability.

Today’s quick review: The Shawshank Redemption. Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins), an accountant and amateur geologist, is imprisoned for the murder of his wife and her lover, a crime he maintains he didn’t commit. While in jail he meets Red (Morgan Freeman), a long-time inmate who can procure nearly anything from the outside through his connections, and the two form a fast friendship. Andy must overcome abusive guards, predatory inmates, a corrupt warden, and simple despair to make a life for himself in prison. He learns to confront his enemies, help his fellow inmates, and find meaning even in the most limited of circumstances.

The Shawshank Redemption is a dramatic masterpiece. Adapted from a Stephen King novella, The Shawshank Redemption explores the human spirit and the dreams that keep it alive even in the face of adversity. Its themes are brought to life by powerful acting and memorable writing, coupled with a story that turns the large and small events of Andy’s life into a gripping progression. The resourcefulness and resilience that Andy exhibits are truly moving. The friendship between Andy and Red is a delight to watch develop, and their conversations are some of the most meaningful in movie history. Morgan Freeman’s narration is the icing on the cake, tying together the story and bringing its themes to the fore.

You should watch The Shawshank Redemption. It is a heavy movie but a rewarding one. Do not undertake it lightly, but watch it when you can afford to give it your full attention. The investment is well worth it. The Shawshank Redemption is a masterwork of storytelling, a fulfilling journey that touches on the deepest aspects of human existence. Watch it.

9.3 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 9.5. The film is a modern classic and my personal favorite.

Today’s quick review: Kung Fu Hustle. In a town terrorized by the notorious Axe Gang, a poseur named Sing (Stephen Chow) and his best friend set off a conflict between the gang and a peaceful slum. A trio of kung fu warriors reveal themselves from amidst the slum’s occupants and fend off the Axe Gang temporarily, but the slum’s landlady and her husband fear the gang’s retaliation. Sure enough, the Axe Gang comes back with more muscle, triggering an escalating struggle between the slum, the gang, and each side’s allies. As the fighting grows more dangerous and more outlandish, Sing embarks on his own journey to join the Axe Gang, hoping to gain all the respect and benefits afforded to a criminal. But being bad isn’t as easy as it sounds, and Sing soon finds events spiraling out of his control.

Kung Fu Hustle is a martial arts comedy from Shaolin Soccer director and star Stephen Chow. Equal parts CGI-fueled action, ridiculous slapstick, and down-to-earth character humor, Kung Fu Hustle delivers a hilarious and entertaining martial arts experience. The main character is Sing, a perennial loser whose dreams of becoming a respected criminal are thwarted by his own incompetence and soft heart. His greatest talent is his knack for fast talk, but his lies and posturing get him into trouble more often than they get him out of it.

The rest of the cast is filled with strong comedic characters. Sing’s accomplice and best friend is fat, dumb, and sweet, often Sing’s voice of reason by virtue of not overthinking things. The landlady of the slum is a bossy, loudmouthed woman who walks around in slippers, hair curlers, and a nightgown, yells at her tenants for rent, and can run at blinding speeds when she needs to. Her husband lounges around in his pajamas, mooches off his tenants, and is a relentless flirt. The head of the Axe Gang and his second in command are a competent comedic duo in their own right, capable of great villainy yet vulnerable to bullying, surprises, and intimidation.

Kung Fu Hustle’s action is surprisingly strong for a parody. Intense and beautifully directed martial arts fights blossom into creative CGI stunts that grow in scale as the conflict escalates. Iron-fisted tailors clash with axe-wielding henchmen, and staff-wielding porters take on deadly musical assassins. Even outside the fight scenes, cartoonish slapstick gives the film a persistent sense of elasticity and kinetic energy. These gags and stunts are backed by the hidden gem of the movie: its sound mixing. Every punch and slap has a rich and satisfying sound that makes the action engrossing as well as visually interesting.

Kung Fu Hustle is an excellent choice for fans of martial arts, over-the-top action, and visual comedy. The movie is a lovingly crafted peek into a genuinely silly world, where cigarette-smoking landladies hector kung fu masters and hand-to-hand fights are destructive spectacles. However, the tone may not be right for some: the slapstick can border on the grotesque, the action includes a bit of actual violence, and the characters are affable losers. Those who enjoy the tone or take the time to get used to it will be rewarded with stellar fights, great humor, and a thoroughly entertaining experience. Those who prefer their humor normal, their characters successful, or their fights realistic won’t get much out of Kung Fu Hustle. Everyone else should give it a shot.

7.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it an 8.0 for its success with both action and comedy.

Today’s quick review: The Cheap Detective. Peter Falk stars as Lou Peckinpaugh, a Bogart-esque private eye in 1940s San Francisco, in this pastiche of Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon. While investigating the death of his partner, Lou stumbles into a decade-long hunt for a valuable set of stolen jewels. His search is complicated by a veritable arsenal of femmes fatales, including his partner’s obsessive widow (Marsha Mason), a jewel hunter in a series of obvious aliases (Madeline Khan), an old flame with a tendency to drone about liberty (Louise Fletcher), and a low rent lounge singer (Eileen Brennan). Along the way, Lou is tasked with retrieving a restaurant license for a hero of the French Resistance. Dogged by the police for his partner’s death, Lou must solve the case, clear his name, find the jewels, and get the girl(s).

At first The Cheap Detective appears to have a confusing, nonsensical plot designed to string together a series of scenes directly spoofing Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon. But beneath this facade is a skilled and goofy comedy that manages to weave a wide range of characters and plot elements into an entertaining whole. Peter Falk plays an excellent Humphrey Bogart, hard-boiled on the outside yet comedically flappable. His supporting cast is magnificent, with standout performances by passionate, troublesome Marsha Mason and never-say-die con woman Madeline Khan.

The comedy is a blend of sight gags, over-the-top characters, and on-the-nose parodies of noir conventions. Lou puts his gun to the phone when a stranger calls him in the middle of the night. Paul DuChard, the French hero, dreams not of escaping to the United States but of opening up a French restaurant. The Nazis he faces are not German officers but members of the Cincinnati Gestapo. The widow of Lou’s partner talks openly of their affair while the police are listening in. The gags are frequent, silly, and clever, making The Cheap Detective a comedy that

Fans of Murder by Death should definitely give The Cheap Detective a watch. Neil Simon writes both films, and several members of the cast are carried over, including Peter Falk, Eileen Brennan, and James Coco. Murder by Death has a stronger cast and broader comedy, but The Cheap Detective is less macabre and acts as a worthy comedic successor. Much like Murder by Death, The Cheap Detective gets stronger on subsequent viewings as the idiosyncrasies of its plot fade away and the strong humor comes to the fore. Fans of Peter Falk, Humphrey Bogart, and silly comedy should check out The Cheap Detective. If this isn’t your brand of humor, skip it.

6.5 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for comedic genius hiding in a confusing plot. As with Murder by Death, its quality varies with how its humor catches you, ranging from 6.0 at the low end to 8.0 on a good day.

Today’s quick review: Unstoppable. When a train engineer gets out of his cab to flip a switch at a train yard, the unmanned train accelerates past him and begins a perilous journey across Pennsylvania. Connie (Rosario Dawson), the manager of the yard, discovers that the train is carrying several tons of explosive chemicals and is set to derail in the populous town of Stanton. Her plan to derail the train in the countryside are overruled by Galvin (Kevin Dunn), her company-minded superior, in favor of a riskier but less expensive plan. But when this fails, it falls to Frank (Denzel Washington), a veteran train engineer, and Will (Chris Pine), a rookie conductor, to risk life and limb to bring the runaway train to a stop.

Unstoppable is a realistic thriller with peculiar construction. The nature of the runaway train is that no incremental progress can be made in stopping it: each attempt is either a success or a failure, and a success would end the movie. With no villain to track down, bomb to find, or puzzle to solve, Unstoppable spends much of its time on more immediate threats than the train derailing in Stanton, such as a train of children heading in the opposite direction, a horse trailer stalled on the tracks, or Frank and Will trying to get their train off the line in time. These incidents keep the adrenaline up between attempts to stop the train, but ultimately their outcomes boil down to luck more than quick thinking or folly. This lack of meaningful agency is mirrored in the appearance of Frank and Will, the nominal heroes of the story, who only get involved late in the film.

In spite of all this, Unstoppable is an entertaining film with good characters and a refreshingly realistic premise. Chris Pine and Denzel Washington are as charming as ever, and Rosario Dawson is cool and competent in the face of a terrible situation and an unjust boss. The chain of events leading to the runaway train is shown in detail, giving the impression of an inside look at how railroads operate. The story is based on a real incident, and the embellishments are all plausible, especially by thriller standards. The film also doesn’t overstay its welcome, clocking in at 98 minutes.

Unstoppable is a fun film notable for its strong cast and realism. Watch it if you’re in the mood for a thriller with a realistic premise, okay execution, and a leading cast of Denzel Washington, Chris Pine, and Rosario Dawson. Skip it if you’re looking for a thriller with more action or a more conventional progression.

6.8 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it a 6.5 to 7.0 for its enjoyable characters and premise, hindered by its abnormal progression.

Today’s quick review: Non-Stop. Liam Neeson stars as Bill Marks, an air marshal with a troubled past and alcohol problems. An ordinary flight to London turns deadly when Marks begins receiving text messages from a passenger threatening to kill one person on the plane every 20 minutes unless he receives $150 million. Marks’s investigation is at first hindered by a skeptical captain and a distrusting colleague, but soon a sinister pattern appears: Marks is being framed for the threat, and his own erratic actions and checkered past have cemented him as the culprit in the eyes of his colleagues. Now Marks must find the terrorist hiding on the plane and clear his own name before it’s too late.

Non-Stop is a slow-burning thriller with an unconventional setting and a good premise. The action scenes are infrequent but impressive, with fast-paced close-quarters combat. For the most part, the investigation proceeds logically, although Marks does make a few bone-headed decisions that make his job harder. The supporting cast is a mixed bag: a few of the characters are interesting, but most are shallow if not entirely unlikable. The film suffers from its dedication to air travel: the opening 10 minutes are a laborious chronicle of boarding a flight, air marshals are inexplicably the center of public debate, and the film seems to have a checklist of plane-related elements that have to be made relevant before the movie is out.

These quibbles aside, Non-Stop is a satisfying thriller that delivers on its premise. Watch it when you’re in the mood for a tense investigation with a few contrived elements and a sprinkling of action. Skip it if you’re looking for a deep movie or something with lots of action.

7.0 out of 10 on IMDB. I give it the same for being a watchable thriller that delivers on its premise.