Sleight of Film

Today’s quick review: Layer Cake. Daniel Craig stars as a cocaine dealer whose plans for retirement are interrupted by two last requests from his overbearing boss, Jimmy Price. The first request involves a shipment of ecstasy that a wannabe criminal named Duke has managed to get his hands on. Craig’s attempts to buy the pills are delayed by Duke’s overestimation of the pills’ value, then are sent into chaos by the interference of Dragan, the agent of the pills’ rightful owners. The second request involves the disappearance of the daughter of Eddie Temple, one of Price’s friends. Craig is tasked with finding the wayward girl, but his investigations paint a different picture than that given to him by Price. Surrounded by danger and still hoping to make it out of the game alive, Craig must use all of his cunning to pull himself clear of the mess he has found himself in.

Layer Cake is an excellent crime drama with a complicated plot, nuanced characters, and a touch of gallows humor. Matthew Vaughn’s direction is clean and capable, and his previous work producing Guy Ritchie’s films shows in the construction of the plot and the characters. Much like Snatch and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels, Layer Cake is a crime film with a complicated plot and multiple factions set in London. Unlike those movies, Layer Cake is not explicitly a comedy, and the humor that does come up is more a product of the characters than the genre. The structure of Layer Cake also differs slightly from the Guy Ritchie movies in that Daniel Craig’s character is the glue that holds the movie together. Unlike the round robin format of the Ritchie movies, most of the factions’ key interactions in Layer Cake occur through Craig, and his attempts to deal with each of them in turn are the chief drama of the film.

The complicated plot can be a barrier to enjoying Layer Cake, but the movie stands up well to multiple viewings. The two subplots are each intricate operations for Craig, one the sale of stolen drugs that are still being pursued by their owners, the other a winding missing persons case where Craig has not been given all the information. Between these two plots and the initial setup for the movie, the cast quickly becomes enormous: Craig and his band of accomplices, Jimmy Price and his right-hand man Gene, Duke and his gang of incompetents, Duke’s nephew and his nephew’s girlfriend, Eddie Temple and his men, Craig’s potential buyers for the ecstasy, Dragan, and more. The payoff for tracking all these factions and their interactions is a tense and well-crafted tale of negotiation, quick thinking, and betrayal.

Daniel Craig’s character in Layer Cake is a truly fascinating one. He treats his job as a drug dealer with the caution and foresight it deserves. He understands that getting drawn in too far will make it impossible for him to leave, so he has a fixed amount of money to save before he retires. He takes care never to get his hands dirty, and he keeps an ex-con on staff to handle the dangerous parts of the job for him. Yet cleverness and planning are not the same as power, and he finds himself drawn into the schemes of more powerful men simply because he lacks the power to walk away. His role as a middleman makes enemies for him on all sides when events do not go according to plan, and he has to dive in deeper than ever to get himself out.

Layer Cake is a clever, tense crime drama with interesting characters and an elaborate plot. Watch it when you’re in the mood for a crime movie you can sink your teeth into. Skip it if you’re looking for something light or easy to follow. 7.4 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: Super Mario Bros. Mario Mario (Bob Hoskins) and Luigi Mario (John Leguizamo) are a pair of New York plumbers who get more than they bargained for when they run into Daisy (Samantha Mathis), an archeologist working on an excavation in the heart of New York. When corporate goons sabotage the dig site, the brothers are called in for some emergency plumbing. But while they are busy, the goons kidnap Daisy and drag her through a rock wall into another dimension. The brothers follow right behind and dive into an alternate universe where humans evolved from dinosaurs instead of mammals. They find themselves in Dinohattan, a hectic and dystopian version of New York. There they uncover a plot by King Koopa (Dennis Hopper) to use his de-evolution ray to invade New York and solve Dinohattan’s water shortage by force.

People often speculate about how video games would look on the silver screen. Certain concepts could be transferred directly, but others would have to be adapted heavily or dropped to work in a live-action movie. Super Mario Bros. is what happens when these discussions take place in Hollywood board rooms instead of on Internet discussion forums. The Mario Bros. franchise is an unusually difficult series for adaptation. Born in the early days of gaming and adapted only ten years into their thirty-year history, Mario games have minimalistic storylines, a fantastical setting designed around gameplay elements, and iconic concepts, such as stomping on enemies or bumping into item blocks, that have no real-world analogues.

Super Mario Bros. handles these issues by constructing a new setting and plot around a few core concepts, then dropping other familiar elements from the game into them. The brothers’ Italian heritage is explained by having them hail from real-world New York rather than the Mushroom Kingdom. Toad becomes a free spirit with a harmonica who is turned into a tiny-headed “goomba” by Koopa’s de-evolution ray. Birdo becomes a heavyset woman at a nightclub who dances with Mario and later helps the brothers out. Jumping appears in the form of jet boots powered by Bullet Bill-shaped cartridges. The list goes on. A surprising amount of care is taken to ensure that most of the iconic parts of the games appear in one form or another, however fleeting or distorted.

Quality-wise, Super Mario Bros. is a terrible movie and a fantastic watch. As a video game adaptation, Super Mario Bros. badly twists the source material. Dinohattan and its surrounding plot are cut from whole cloth and have little to do with the games. The words “Mario” and “urban dystopia” are a terrible fit for each other, and while the Easter egg hunt for game elements can be entertaining, the adaptations themselves are bizarre mirrors of the originals.

As a standalone movie, Super Mario Bros. is a chaotic mess with a far-fetched premise even by the standards of 90s kids movies. The camp setting and colorful characters are reminiscent of The Fifth Element, but where The Fifth Element offers a complicated adventure tied together by skilled direction and memorable performances, Super Mario Bros. struggles to bring its elements into a coherent whole.

But as an experience, Super Mario Bros. hangs with the best. The combination of cheesy sci-fi elements, lame jokes, and off-the-wall pacing are enough to keep you entertained throughout the movie, and whether you are laughing at the movie or with it is of secondary concern. To its credit, Super Mario Bros. does not take itself too seriously, and as a cheesy romp taken on its own terms, this makes it quite enjoyable. While it lacks the redeeming qualities that make other campy movies worth watching, it also lacks the banality of other kids movies of the era. Its misguided creativity leads it to a number of cringeworthy decisions, but they are creative, interesting decisions nonetheless and can be enjoyed as such.

Super Mario Bros. is worth watching if you are looking for a spectacular bastardization of a familiar video game series. It is also worth watching if you are looking for an innocent kids film with unusual creative daring. To what degree Super Mario Bros. will fill either of these roles for you depends on your personal tastes, but both require a willingness to be entertained, to suspend disbelief and not take the movie too seriously. With the right attitude, Super Mario Bros. can be quite an enjoyable watch. 4.0 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: The Spirit. Denny Colt, a young cop in Central City, is given a second chance after he dies in the line of duty. He returns from the grave and dons a mask, becoming the immortal vigilante known as the Spirit. The Spirit aids the police in bringing the criminals of Central City to justice. Chief among these is the Octopus, an offbeat mastermind whose plan for absolute power is coming to fruition. Now the Spirit must fight his way through a tangled web of vat-grown henchmen, old flames, and all-around psychos to stop the Octopus before he brings the city to its knees.

The Spirit is a bizarre movie. Its roots are in the 40s comic of the same name by Will Eisner, but it is directed by Frank Miller and has similar visuals as Sin City, while the tone is something else altogether. Straight-laced heroic justice meshes with over-the-top acting, ironic comedy, and gritty villainy to form something that is not quite noir, not quite drama, not quite superhero film, and not quite comedy. The sensibilities of each are present, but they twist and compete with each other. The Spirit’s heroic monologues are frequently followed by embarrassing setbacks, yet his perseverance is rewarded. Likewise, the Octopus pushes the farthest boundaries on cartoon villainy, yet never wraps back around into sympathy. The Spirit has all the trappings of a deconstruction but never quite pulls the trigger. Its mishmash of sensibilities allows The Spirit to poke fun at the ideals and conventions of the early superhero genre while ultimately affirming them.

Everything about The Spirit is exaggerated, from its acting to its monochrome color palette. Fans of Frank Miller’s Sin City will be pleased to see the return of that movie’s stylish black-and-white visuals. The tone, however, is rather different from its spiritual predecessor. The Spirit has much less violence than Sin City, and while it features a similar gritty style, this style is layered on a base of conventional morality that is missing from Sin City. Where Sin City’s heroes are nearly as terrifying as its villains, The Spirit reaches far towards both ends of the morality spectrum: its heroes are righteous and self-sacrificing, and its villains are unabashedly evil.

The acting in The Spirit is intentionally extreme. Gabriel Macht as The Spirit talks to himself in dramatic terms almost continuously and falls madly in love just by setting his eyes on a woman. Samuel L. Jackson delivers a positively ridiculous performance as the Octopus, at various points clobbering The Spirit with a toilet, ranting feverishly about “getting egg on [his] face”, and dressing up in Nazi paraphernalia to emphasize a point about his master plan. Scarlett Johansson plays Silken Floss, a brilliant scientist who runs the Octopus’s organization, while Eva Mendes appears as Sand Saref, The Spirit’s jewelry-obsessed lost love.

The combination of its many exaggerated elements makes The Spirit a unique and polarizing movie. Fans of gritty crime movies will be turned off by its black-and-white morality and grandiose acting. Fans of adventure stories will struggle with its constant subversions and grimy exterior. But for those who like to dabble, those who enjoy stylistic ambiguity, and those for whom ironic subversion and earnest affection go hand-in-hand, The Spirit offers a delightful buffet of style and creativity. Expect little depth or seriousness but plenty of spectacle and fun. Just how well The Spirit’s peculiar flavor will sit with you is hard to know ahead of time, but those who are intrigued by stylized adventure should definitely give it a shot. 4.8 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: Secondhand Lions. A young boy, Walter, is sent to live on his uncles’ farm for the summer while his mother runs off with her new boyfriend. His uncles Garth and Hub, played by Michael Caine and Robert Duvall, occupy their time with eccentricities: brawling with neighborhood punks, buying an old circus lion, flying a biplane, and fending off greedy relatives. Their peculiar retirement is backed by a rumored fortune in gold located somewhere on their farm. As Walter gets to know his uncles, he becomes enraptured by their stories of the past, tall tales of adventure, love, and fortune in the French Foreign Legion. But the adventures strain credibility, and Walter must choose whether to believe the uncles he has come outside or the cynical world outside that says they must be lying.

Secondhand Lions is a charming and optimistic coming-of-age story. The characters are drawn in quick sketches that nonetheless capture real humanity. Walter arrives at the farm as a shy boy with a troubled home life. As he learns more about his uncles, he starts to see the adventure in life and grows more confident and self-assured. Hub is a gruff, bull-headed grouch with a good heart. A lifetime of loss has worn him down, and even his peculiar hobbies have little meaning until Walter comes along. Garth is level-headed and observant. He is the one who tells Walter about the brothers’ past, offering the boy insight into the closed-off Hub.

From a technical perspective, the execution of Secondhand Lions is not very tight. The plot is more episodic than anything. Events that are truly integral to the story only happen in a few places, and the bulk of the movie is simply an exploration of life on the farm and the relationship between Walter and his uncles. The acting is adequate but not outstanding. The tall tales are adventurous but not heavily stylized. Conflict arises but rarely lingers.

But because Secondhand Lions does not rely on its execution, none of these qualities detract from the movie all that much. The emotional heart of the movie is rock-solid, and this basic fact carries through to all other aspects of the film. As such, Secondhand Lions is an excellent choice for those looking for a light, optimistic movie with a coming-of-age story and a bit of adventure. Those who need a bit more to chew on in terms of plot, style, or themes should look elsewhere. 7.6 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: The Brothers Bloom. Bloom and Stephen were once a troublesome pair of brothers in the foster care system. When Stephen noticed that his shy brother was having a hard time getting what he wanted out of life, he began to dream up elaborate cons for Bloom to play a part in. The cons worked: not only did they fool their targets, but they fooled Bloom as well, offering him a fleeting happiness that he could not find otherwise. Thus began the successful careers of the duo of lifelong con artists. Now, as an adult, Bloom (Adrien Brody) finds himself living a life without authenticity. Stephen (Mark Ruffalo) promises him that after one last con, Bloom can walk away from the game forever. Their target is Penelope (Rachel Weisz), a wealthy and charming shut-in who “collects” hobbies and has little in the way of common sense. As their convoluted con takes them all the way around Europe, Bloom begins to fall for Penelope. Soon he must decide whether his feelings are genuine or just another one of Stephen’s cons, and whether the written life can have any meaning.

The Brothers Bloom sets out to explore the boundary between reality and fiction and accomplishes this stunningly. As the con grows more complex, so does the question of how much of it was scripted. Stephen’s clear motive of making his brother happy supports the hypothesis that everything was planned, but there are twists in the con’s execution that even Stephen could not have seen coming. Eventually, the line between written and unwritten blurs to the point where the audience must draw its own conclusions: Has Bloom finally stumbled into an unwritten life or, as Penelope says, “only a badly written one”?

The Brothers Bloom mixes literary themes with light comedy, a dash of drama, and heaps of style to produce a unique gem of a movie. The film has immense replay value. Each viewing reveals a little bit more: unnoticed background gags, extra bits of foreshadowing, or hidden depths to the movie’s themes. The actors fit the tone of the world perfectly and vividly bring the script to life. Adrien Brody plays a sullen, passive Bloom who is gradually drawn out of his shell by Penelope. Rachel Weisz brings a sense of innocence and adventure to Penelope that Bloom badly needs. Behind it all is Stephen, his glib, outgoing brother. Mark Ruffalo plays the part with charm and nuance, a self-interested con man who nonetheless cares deeply for his brother. The trio are accompanied on their adventures by Bang Bang, the brothers’ mute and sarcastic assistant. Rinko Kikuchi does an excellent job with the role, and her peculiar activities and playful jabs at the brothers add yet another layer of subtle comedy to the film.

The execution of the film is just as strong as its acting and writing. The direction emphasizes the light-hearted comedy of the film while deepening its dramatic moments. The camera lingers on the little moments of absurdity that permeate the brothers’ lives, but the consistent tone of the universe allows the movie to be serious when it needs to be. The upbeat jazz soundtrack gives the movie extraordinary flavor. Roaring trumpet, playful clarinet, and rollicking snare drum herald the brothers’ glorious cons, while a sweet theme for piano and harp underscores the movie’s more sentimental moments.

Even the smallest details of the movie add to its style and charm. Bloom pantomimes blowing his brains out, then heads to the roof for some air, where a large piece of graffiti depicts a man with two fingers to his head; his reflection is interrupted by a loud bang as Stephen opens the door to join him on the roof. In another scene, Penelope describes her insulated childhood and how she learned to “cheat” while showing off a card trick, pulling four aces and four queens off a shuffled deck. In yet another scene, Stephen nearly blows the entire con by slipping in a too-cute literary allusion that Penelope catches. Every scene has details like this, layers of symbolism, humor, or coincidence, that make The Brothers Bloom a delight to watch. The brothers are every bit as stylish as con artists should be, yet every bit as fallible as characters in a comedy need to be.

The Brothers Bloom is a phenomenal film with a fun, stylish tone and a deep, rewarding story. However, stylized as it is, the movie is bound to be hit or miss. Those who enjoy its style will delight in all its little details, while those less enamored of it will find the film to be a waste of time. Those looking for just a comedy may also be disappointed by the movie’s dramatic elements. While justified by the story, the more serious moments of the movie do put a damper on the otherwise light-hearted tone. The ambiguities of the plot may be another turnoff. Although the ending is not a cliffhanger, not every question receives a concrete answer, and the audience must supply its own resolution by filling in the gaps.

But for those who like their comedies with a bit of depth, who like their movies with a bit of style, and who enjoy piecing together puzzles, The Brothers Bloom is an excellent choice. The themes about storytelling, the connections between meta-levels of the story, and the subtle gags and symbolism provide ample intellectual meat for the observant viewer, while the wry comedy, upbeat style, and sweet romance provide plenty of sentiment for the heart as well. Give it a watch, and decide for yourself whether there really is such a thing as an unwritten life and whether, in the end, the question really matters. 6.9 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: Primal Fear.  Richard Gere stars as a hotshot defense attorney who takes on the case of an altar boy, played by a young Edward Norton, who is accused of murdering a priest.  The trial unearths a number of secrets in the priest’s life, including shady real estate deals, but Gere is fighting an uphill battle against the physical evidence of the case.  What’s more, his simple, stuttering client is hiding a few secrets of his own.  Primal Fear is an excellent legal drama that goes heavy on plot twists and character development.  The revelations are fast-paced and hard-hitting, alleviating some of the drag typical in legal dramas.  The movie is, to a large degree, still limited by its genre: the case is the beginning and the end of the movie, and the world outside of it is secondary.  Within these boundaries, Primal Fear manages to set up two very compelling main characters.  Edward Norton delivers a jaw-dropping performance as a sweet defendant who is in over his head, while Richard Gere works through all the stages of an arrogant lawyer trying to convince both the jury and himself that his client is innocent.  It should be noted that the details of the case are far less interesting than the way they play out in the trial.  The movie derives its strength from its plot twists and characters, not the substance of the case or the richness of the universe.  Primal Fear is well worth a watch for anyone who enjoys high tension, twisting plotlines and strong acting, even those who normally dislike legal dramas.  When you are looking for something tense and heavy, give Primal Fear a shot.  7.7 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: 2 Guns. Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg star as a pair of criminals whose dealings with a Mexican drug lord lead them to rob a bank. But when the money lands them in hot water, and soon they find themselves hunted by both the drug lord and the U.S. government. 2 Guns is an action comedy that relies on a variant of the buddy formula for its humor. At various points in the movie, Washington and Wahlberg are close friends, rivals, or mortal enemies, but their repartee is always entertaining. Their characters are vivid and dynamic, each prone to petty gamesmanship and self-aggrandizement but competent in a pinch. The actors handle their roles with confidence and charm, and their interactions are the greatest strength of the movie.

The plot has several major twists that keep the action moving. The twists add unpredictability but little in the way of depth: despite its detours, the plot can still be recognized as a fairly typical action movie plot. Likewise the action consists of standard gunplay with only a few unusual moments. Overall, 2 Guns is standard action movie fare with a slightly more intricate plot and a uniquely strong duo of lead characters. Watch when you’re in the mood for an action movie with a little something extra in the humor department. 6.7 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: Push. Chris Evans stars as Nick, a down-on-his-luck telekinetic hiding out in Hong Kong from a government agency called Division that specializes in paranormal research. His life gets thrown into chaos when Cassie, a precognitive girl played by Dakota Fanning, shows up with the claim that their fates are bound together. The reappearance of Chris’s ex-girlfriend, an escapee from Division and the sole survivor of its power-augmentation experiments, sets both Division and a Hong Kong crime family on their trail. The outmatched trio must extricate themselves from an ever-tightening web of precognitive dead ends before they find themselves outwitted and trapped.

Push came out at the beginning of the modern superhero craze and was overshadowed by both the beginning of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Jumper the previous year. However, Push is a diamond in the rough, containing both a well-structured world of underground superpowers and one of the most elaborate precognition-based plotlines that has appeared in a movie. Unlike other entries into the genre, Push defines its superpowers rather closely. Each of the ten or so superpowers that appears in the movie falls into a known category and has a colloquial name for its practitioners: Mover, Shade, Stitch, Pusher, etc. Powers are a struggle to master, especially for poor Nick, and misapplication of them can land a person in hot water. But when they are applied correctly, they are glorious. Nearly every main power in Push gets used and abused in all the ways the audience could hope for, from levitating guns to illusory money.

The plot revolves heavily around a precognitive trap that the main characters fall into. As a Watcher, Cassie has reliable but uninformative visions of the future. When she predicts death for Nick and herself, that is what will happen unless they can find a way to change it. However, she is not the only Watcher, and every conscious decision the group makes can be tracked by others. This puts the group in a near-hopeless situation, and their only reprieve is the services of a tracking- and precognition-blocking Shade.

The result is a tense thriller with an exceedingly complicated plot. Just understanding who knows what, what can be changed, and what is predestined requires a good deal of concentration on a first watching. This makes Push somewhat inaccessible at first but quite rewarding for those who are willing to stick it out. Even the small portion of the world shown in the story is rich with color, and the plot forms a very clever puzzle whose pieces are interacting superpowers and competing plans. Push is a tense and creative superpowered thriller…if you can follow it. Watch it if you’re looking for a mentally challenging movie with high stakes and flashy action. 6.1 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: The Boondock Saints. Sean Patrick Flanery and Norman Reedus star as a pair of Irish brothers in Boston who take up vigilantism after surviving a violent encounter with a couple of thugs. With the help of their friend, a low-level criminal with inside information, they hunt down and kill the worst members of the mob. While their crusade earns the approval of the public, it also catches the attention of the authorities, and an eccentric FBI forensic specialist played by Willem Dafoe is assigned to their case. As law enforcement closes its noose and the mob gears up for war, the brothers’ journey nears its end.

The Boondock Saints is a clever, engrossing thriller that has earned its reputation as a cult classic. The quality of its direction can be seen in its fight scenes. The fights are shown after the fact, as Dafoe examines the crime scenes to piece together what happened. His reconstructions blend with flashbacks to the actual fights in a highly satisfying cinematic conceit. The violence in the movie hews closer to the crime genre than the action genre. Despite a fair amount of gunplay and a few brutal melee fights, the focus is on the presentation of the fights and their ramifications, not stunts or spectacle.

Appropriately, the movie walks the line between serious and comedic. Violence and high stakes keep the movie gritty and grounded, but the world around the brothers retains a slightly surreal quality to it, from Dafoe’s flamboyant style to the brothers’ amateurish tactics. The brothers’ success is shown as a result of ballsiness and good luck more than planning or good sense, and the intersection between comic book vigilantism and crime movie realism leads to a very unique tone. While the movie shows its low budget in places, the storytelling is phenomenal, and the overall blend of elements is something you won’t find anywhere else. The Boondock Saints is a crime classic with a quirky tone, smart direction, and satisfying action. Give it a watch if any of this sounds appealing to you. 7.9 out of 10 on IMDB.

Today’s quick review: Howl’s Moving Castle. Howl’s Moving Castle is considered one of the best works from Hayao Miyazaki, a famed Japanese animation director whose films are known for their charm, creativity, and attention to detail. Howl’s Moving Castle tells the tale of Sophie, a young and levelheaded hatmaker who runs afoul of a witch and is cursed to become an old woman. Unable to speak of the curse, she goes to seek the aid of the capricious wizard Howl, who lives in a castle that walks about the wilderness on giant mechanical legs. While Howl does not immediately help her, he does let her stay in the castle as his maid, and she becomes part of a small family: Howl’s captive fire demon, his young apprentice, and a helpful turnip-headed scarecrow who followed Sophie to the castle. As she delves deeper into Howl’s life, she finds that the powerful wizard is harboring secrets of his own.

Howl’s Moving Castle is a strange and interesting movie. The magic that permeates it gives the movie a sense of wonder and mystery while allowing Miyazaki’s imagination to frolic on the screen. From a scarecrow hopping along on its post to a door that opens on four different locations to the enormous walking castle itself, the movie is filled with quirky visuals and creative portrayals of magic. At the same time, the centrality of magic to the plot introduces several holes that wouldn’t exist otherwise. The rules of magic are only explained as they are encountered, making it very difficult to predict the effects of characters’ actions. Furthermore, some rules aren’t explained fully, so that the events that do happen are difficult to understand.

The heart of the movie involves the relationship between Howl and Sophie. Sophie brings kindness and responsibility into Howl’s life and sets about cleaning up both his house and his soul with common sense and diligence. Howl, for all his power, has been running from his obligations, and his inability to face them is eating away at him inside. Toss in a curse or three, a kingdom waging a pointless and destructive war using steam-powered airships, and a few magical adversaries, and you’ve got a rich fantasy in the classic Miyazaki style. The aforementioned confusion regarding the rules of magic in the universe undermines a few key moments in the plot, but overall Howl’s Moving Castle is an excellent movie with gorgeous animation, a richly-textured world, and traces of real insight into the human heart. Give it a watch if you’re looking for top-notch animation with a lot of magic. 8.2 out of 10 on IMDB.