Sleight of Film

“Pretty sure we’re all going to live to regret this.” —Martin

Today’s quick review: A Long Way Down. Martin (Pierce Brosnan), a disgraced talk show host, decides to end his life by jumping off a building on New Year’s Eve. But when he gets there, he finds three other people about to do the same thing: Maureen (Toni Colette), Jess (Imogen Poots), and JJ (Aaron Paul). At a loss for what to do, the four of them sign a pact that they will hold off on suicide for a few more weeks.

A Long Way Down is a drama with comedic elements about four suicidal strangers who meet accidentally. Martin is a celebrity haunted by a sex scandal, Maureen is a lonely woman struggling to support her handicapped son, Jess is the rambunctious daughter of a politician, and JJ is a delivery man with inoperable cancer. In the weeks following New Year’s, they form an unlikely friendship as they share their troubles with one another.

A Long Way Down’s best feature is its character work. Martin, Maureen, Jess, and JJ come from very different walks of life, and their personalities show in everything from their speech and mannerisms to the way they react to stress. None of the characters are perfectly likable, but they all act like real people, and one of the biggest rewards of the story is seeing them open up.

A Long Way Down has a harder time with its plot. After a promising start, the story has to resort to artificial drama to keep things moving forward. News about the pact is leaked to the press, forcing Martin, Maureen, Jess, and JJ to deal with unwanted fame while working through their suicidal tendencies. The result is a story with strong character arcs but weak connective tissue to tie everything together.

Give A Long Way Down a shot when you are in the mood for a character-driven rumination on life with flashes of comedy. The movie does not have the same narrative artistry and thematic depth as other dramas in the same vein, but its characters make it a worthwhile watch for anyone who is interested.

For a black comedy about suicide, try Dead in a Week (Or Your Money Back). For a character-driven drama that handles similar conflicts with more skill, try 21 Grams or Hard Surfaces. For a drama about the intersecting lives of strangers that has shakier execution and a more serious tone, try Powder Blue.

[6.4 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458413/). I give it a 6.5 for engaging character work missing the vision to pull it all together.

Today’s quick review: Man on a Ledge. Framed for stealing a diamond from David Englander (Ed Harris), ex-cop Nick Cassidy (Sam Worthington) breaks out of prison and perches on a ledge 20 stories above the streets of New York. As disgraced police negotiator Lydia Mercer (Elizabeth Banks) tries to talk Nick down, his brother Joey (Jamie Bell) and Joey’s wife Angie (Genesis Rodriguez) try to steal the evidence they need to prove Nick’s innocence.

Man on a Ledge is a crime thriller about an ex-cop who stages a fake suicide attempt as a distraction for his family to clear his name. The movie has good building blocks. Nick uses a variety of tricks to delay the police, manipulate the public, and generally keep all eyes on him. Lydia senses that something is wrong and begins to question the official story of his arrest. And throughout it all is the dangerous possibility that Nick will fall.

Still, Man on a Ledge is not as robust as similar thrillers. There is only really one layer to Nick’s plan, apart from a few minor deceptions that buy him time. Joey’s heist is not as creative as the best the genre has to offer, although it does feel more plausible than the norm. And while the rapport between Nick and Lydia works well enough, it is not tense or personal enough to give the movie a strong emotional core.

Give Man on a Ledge a shot when you are in the mood for a tidy thriller with a unique premise. Man on a Ledge does not have the far-reaching plot or narrative finesse of some of its competition, but it delivers a well-constructed story with enough of a hook to keep the audience invested. Check it out if you want a nice mix of crisis negotiation, crime mystery, and heist. Skip it if you’re looking for something truly mind-bending.

For a more proactive story about a police officer forced to engineer a crisis to clear his name, try The Negotiator. For a wry crime movie about an imprisoned cop trying to solve the case that put him in jail, try Spenser Confidential. For a hostage standoff with more pathos, try Dog Day Afternoon. For a more personal story about a man poised to jump from a building under unusual circumstances, try Ledge.

[6.6 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1568338/). I give it a 6.5 for solid fundamentals but not much else.

Today’s quick review: Phone Booth. Stu Shepard (Colin Farrell), a self-absorbed publicist, steps into a New York phone booth to call Pamela (Katie Holmes), the woman he wants to have an affair with. Instead, he receives a call from a stranger (Kiefer Sutherland) who threatens to shoot him if he puts down the phone. As the phone call escalates into a police incident, it falls to Captain Ramey (Forest Whitaker) to decipher what is going on.

Phone Booth is a crime thriller about a man trapped in a phone booth by a brilliant sniper. Stu finds himself outmaneuvered at every turn and forced to play the sniper’s game: confessing his infidelity to his wife Kelly (Radha Mitchell). Phone Booth spins this premise into a passable thriller, with a nice cat-and-mouse game between Stu and the man holding him hostage. However, the movie’s tenuous plot and busy presentation won’t appeal to everyone.

Phone Booth’s strengths lie in its particulars. It takes the movie a while to get Stu to a point where he understands his situation and interact with the man on the other end of the line, but once the movie gets there, it comes up with some clever ways for Stu to get into and out of trouble. Kiefer Sutherland does a great job as the caller, who is always two steps ahead, while Colin Farrell makes the most of his role.

But even with its best efforts, Phone Booth is a hard sell. The movie has to bend over backwards to make its premise feasible, using a combination of the caller’s planning and bad luck to cut off the many ways Stu has to defuse the situation. Stu is not a likable character and never really becomes one, even at his most contrite. The movie also uses an aggressive presentation style to ramp up the intensity of an otherwise static situation.

Phone Booth is a fine pick for anyone in the mood for a thriller with a unique premise. Neither the scope of its story nor the depth of its characters is enough to be game-changing, but the movie does have enough plot twists to keep the audience on their toes. Check it out if you want something short, to the point, and reasonably creative. Skip it if you’re looking for a gracefully orchestrated thriller or one with a deeper story.

For a similar thriller about a man trapped in a public place by a sniper, try Grand Piano. For a higher-adrenaline phone-themed thriller, try Cellular. For a more personal drama about a man on the phone dealing with the fallout of his infidelity, try Locke. For a crime thriller that takes a similar premise in a different direction, try Shattered. For a more human police standoff, try Dog Day Afternoon or Mad City.

[7.0 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0183649/). I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for a decent plot with hit-or-miss characters and style.

Today’s quick review: Abduction. Nathan Harper (Taylor Lautner), a high school senior, discovers his picture on a missing persons website and learns that his father (Jason Isaacs) and mother (Maria Bello) are not who they claim to be. When killers come after his parents, Nathan and his friend Karen (Lily Collins) flee from home, aided by his psychiatrist Dr. Bennett (Sigourney Weaver) and pursued by CIA agent Frank Burton (Alfred Molina).

Abduction is an action thriller about a teenager who goes on the run to discover the secret behind his family. Unsure of who to trust, Nathan and Karen find themselves caught in a web of international espionage. Abduction offers some modest action as Nathan and Karen stay one step ahead of the people after them and piece together the truth about who Nathan is. However, plot holes and missed potential make the movie a modest success at best.

The best aspect of Abduction is its mystery. Nathan’s entire life is a sham, and his questions about who he really is are what drive the plot. Abduction also offers a fair amount of action, courtesy of Nathan’s martial arts training and a few gunfights. The movie never really goes beyond the basics of the action thriller genre, but they are executed competently and there are a few minor twists to keep the story from getting too stale.

The catch is that Abduction plays fast and loose with logic. Plot holes of all sizes abound, ranging from minor inconsistencies in the way scenes fit together to major gaps in the structure of the story. The plus side is that none of these issues get in the way of the excitement, but they do make the movie paper-thin. Questioning even small portions of the story damages it, and for critical viewers, this will be a dealbreaker.

How much you get out of Abduction will depend on what you are looking for. Viewers looking for a light thriller with a dash of teenage romance will find it to be a breezy watch. Those in it for the mystery or the action will find it outclassed by any number of other films. Give it a shot if you are not feeling too picky. Otherwise, check out any of its competition.

For a sharper spy thriller with a better mystery, try The Bourne Identity. For a more subdued thriller about a man learning the truth about his spy father, also with Sigourney Weaver, try The Cold Light of Day. For a similar style of teen romance with a sci-fi twist, try I Am Number Four or Jupiter Ascending.

[5.1 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1600195/). I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for a decent plot that doesn’t bear close scrutiny.

Today’s quick review: Catch .44. Tes (Malin Akerman), Kara (Nikki Reed), and Dawn (Deborah Ann Woll) travel to a remote diner to intercept a drug deal on behalf of their boss Mel (Bruce Willis). When the meeting time comes and goes with no sign of the driver, they decide to hold up the diner to get some answers. But the standoff is interrupted when Ronny (Forest Whitaker), an unstable killer, tries to get in on the score.

Catch .44 is a crime drama about three women trying to get back in their boss’ good graces after a disastrous mistake. What looks to be a second chance soon turns into another catastrophe when a simple hold-up goes awry. Catch .44 aims to be a stylish crime movie in the vein of Pulp Fiction or True Romance. The setup of the movie has potential, but its execution leaves much to be desired, with a jumbled plot, weak dialogue, and flat stylization.

Catch .44’s main issue is its lack of context. The story starts in media res with Tes, Kara, and Dawn holding up the diner, then fills in the details one flashback at a time. The problem is that the movie focuses on the wrong details. Instead of fleshing out how Tes and her friends messed up the last job or who Mel actually is, Catch .44 spends its time on how Tes got to the diner, what Ronny has been up to, and aimless conversations.

Moreover, the nonlinear storytelling means that Catch .44 is always late giving the audience a reason to care. The twists are tied to information that has not been revealed yet, forcing the movie to play catch-up. The movie tries to paper over these holes with stylistic flourishes: jaunty music choices, character introductions, and cliffhangers. But without a strong hook to keep the audience’s interest, all of these devices fall flat.

Catch .44 has genuine potential. The suspicious job that immediately goes wrong, the wildcard of Ronny’s involvement, and the acting abilities of Bruce Willis and Forest Whitaker could easily be the foundation of a solid crime movie. But the execution falls short almost everywhere it counts, leaving the best features of the movie without proper support. Dedicated fans of the crime genre may want to try it, but most will want to steer clear.

For a much more successful take on the same formula, try Pulp Fiction, True Romance, or Reservoir Dogs. For a stylized crime thriller in the same vein with more sex, violence, and black humor, try 68 Kill. For a darker crime thriller about a criminal sent to a remote area on an unknown mission, try The Bag Man. For a more interesting take on small-town crime, try No Country For Old Men, Fargo, or Cut Bank.

[4.6 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1886493/). I give it a 5.0 for passable ideas and a story that never comes together.

Today’s quick review: Assault on Precinct 13. The last night of operation for a decommissioned Los Angeles police station turns into a bloodbath when a gunfight between a bereaved father (Martin West) and a local gang spills over into the station. Lt. Ethan Bishop (Austin Stoker) rallies a ragtag group of survivors to repel the attack, including prisoners Wilson (Darwin Joston) and Wells (Tony Burton) and Leigh (Laurie Zimmer), the station secretary.

Assault on Precinct 13 is an action movie written and directed by John Carpenter. The story follows a group of police officers, prisoners, and staff as they weather an hours-long siege from a murderous street gang. The survivors must put aside their differences and come to the aid of the man the gang is after, a stranger none of them have ever met. The movie is nicely scoped and cleanly executed, but what it has to offer won’t satisfy everyone.

Assault on Precinct 13 plays out something like a zombie movie. The gang members throw themselves at the station with no regard for their own safety, creating an endless shooting gallery for the survivors. What keeps the action from getting stale is the clever tactices the gang members use to cover their tracks, cutting the survivors off from backup and wearing away at their manpower and ammunition.

The movie supplements its action with elegant storytelling. The story explores two central themes: the unlikely alliance between cops and prisoners, and the decision to protect the life of a perfect stranger, even at the cost of one’s own. Assault on Precinct 13 does not bother with detailed character arcs or subplots. Instead, it focuses on the main plot and builds up its characters through small interactions and moments of sacrifice.

How much you get out of Assault on Precinct 13 will depend on your taste in action. For the right viewer, it is a streamlined movie that explores a couple of well-chosen themes and never strays from the conflict it sets up. For a viewer more used to modern action movies, its plot and character development can seem sparse. Check it out if you are a fan of straightforward action, crisp storytelling, or John Carpenter’s style of direction.

For an updated take on the same basic premise, try the Assault on Precinct 13 remake starring Ethan Hawke and Laurence Fishburne. For a more exaggerated portrait of dystopian crime from the same director, try Escape from New York. For a deeper look at simmering violence under a facade of civility, try Falling Down or Taxi Driver.

[7.4 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074156/). I give it a 7.0 for focused and cleanly executed action.

“Nothing like a bloodbath to start the day.” —Peacemaker

Today’s quick review: The Suicide Squad. Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) recruits the mercenary Bloodsport (Idris Elba) to lead the latest incarnation of Task Force X, a black ops team made up of super-powered prisoners. Bloodsport takes a team consisting of Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie), Peacemaker (John Cena), King Shark (Sylvester Stallone), and a handful of other misfits to destroy a research facility on the South American island of Corto Maltese.

The Suicide Squad is a violent superhero action comedy written and directed by James Gunn. The story follows a team of expendable criminals on a covert mission for the United States government. The Suicide Squad features stylized direction, a high body count, and an ensemble cast that shows off some of DC Comics’ least beloved characters. The movie’s particular flavor of black humor will appeal to some viewers, but others will find it hollow.

The Suicide Squad’s greatest strength is its ability to explore ideas that would never fly in a conventional superhero movie. Excessive gore, a large cast of joke characters, a plot that lurches from catastrophe to catastrophe, and an endless stream of macabre humor make the movie a treat for anyone whose tastes skew that way. The movie is also stylized throughout, playing some clever games with the way it presents its events to the audience.

The cast is another major draw of the film. Margot Robbie reprises her role as Harley Quinn and delivers some of the film’s best lines. Idris Elba acts as the reluctant team leader and keeps the mission on track. John Cena is his foil as Peacemaker, a soldier with a skewed sense of patriotism. Notable supporting roles include Viola Davis as Amanda Waller, Daniela Melchior as Ratcatcher 2, and David Dastmalchian as Polka-Dot Man.

The Suicide Squad fares somewhat worse with its story. The central plot thread works just fine: Task Force X embarks on a covert mission where nothing goes according to plan. But the movie takes a lot of detours along the way, many of which do not pay off. Side characters take the spotlight for long stretches, minor jokes take minutes to set up, and even major characters like Harley Quinn get sidetracked with subplots that don’t really matter.

The Suicide Squad also faces the unenviable challenge of making a cast of murderers and misfits into characters the audience can root for. The handful of sympathetic characters carry the story in this regard, but the movie is short on character development where it counts. By the time the audience has a reason to care, most of the cast has died and the heroes have made several grim mistakes.

How much you get out of The Suicide Squad will vary wildly. For the right viewer, it is a rare superhero movie that gets to take risks and indulge in graphic violence. Its black humor, artistry, and cast will make it an entertaining and unconventional watch. But for the wrong viewer, The Suicide Squad will have too much grisly humor and not enough heroism, resulting in a dim parody of the genre with little emotional weight behind it.

For a more conventional superhero movie drawing from the same source material, try the original Suicide Squad. For a superhero movie with more sharply honed black comedy, try Deadpool or Deadpool 2. For a more grounded subversion of the superhero genre, try Kick-Ass and its sequel. For a more heartfelt superhero movie about a band of misfits from the same director, try Guardians of the Galaxy.

[7.5 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6334354/). I give it a 7.0 to 7.5 for a strong cast, a distinctive style, and hit-or-miss storytelling and humor.

“Don’t you know? I’m Electro.” —Max Dillon

Today’s quick review: The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Haunted by the risks of his life as a superhero, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) contemplates breaking up with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) to keep her safe. As the two try to make sense of their relationship, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), Peter’s childhood friend, inherits his father’s corporate empire, and Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx), a lonely Oscorp engineer, gains electric powers in a freak accident.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is a superhero action movie that picks up several months after the events of The Amazing Spider-Man. The sequel builds on the foundation laid by the original, ramping up Peter’s activities as Spider-Man, playing out his relationship with Gwen, and digging deeper into his father’s past with Oscorp. Colorful action, a packed story, and a strong cast make the film a worthy sequel for fans of the original.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 fully embraces the superhero genre. Where the previous film was grounded and visually moody, carefully building up to the status quo, the sequel dives in with no hesitation. Bright visuals, joyful web-swinging, and even more creative uses of Peter’s powers all contribute to a world that combines the rich backdrop of live-action with the energy of a cartoon.

As far as story goes, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 continues in the same vein as the first film. Peter and Gwen are front and center again, giving Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone the chance to show off more of their chemistry. The plot delves into the secrets of Oscorp, including the project that Peter’s father worked on and the ones Harry’s father kept quiet. The plot wanders a little but generally does a good job of tying together its different threads.

Still, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has some quirks. Its villains—Electro and an increasingly unstable Harry Osborn—are offbeat, exaggerated characters. The light tone of the movie is at odds with the collateral damage of the action. The story plays fast and loose with comics continuity, staying true to the themes while rearranging a lot of the specifics. And, like before, anyone who dislikes Peter or Gwen will find their enjoyment crippled.

How much you get out of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 will depend on your taste in superhero films. Fans of the bright, exuberant side of the genre will find it to be a breath of fresh air, even if it does have its share of drama. Fans of the more grounded side of the genre may get stuck on some minor plot holes and odd character choices. Give it a shot if you enjoyed the original, and approach with caution otherwise.

For an animated Spider-Man movie that takes its comic book influences even farther, try Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. For a Spider-Man movie that attempts to juggle even more plot threads, try Spider-Man 3.

[6.6 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1872181/). I give it an 8.0 for bright, creative action and a larger-than-life story; your score will vary.

“I’m gonna throw you out the window now.” —Spider-Man

Today’s quick review: The Amazing Spider-Man. While on a tour of Oscorp, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), a socially awkward high school student, is bitten by a genetically modified spider and given superpowers. Spurred by a personal tragedy, Parker dons a costume and becomes Spider-Man. Not long afterward, Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), an Oscorp scientist who used to work with Peter’s father, transforms himself into the monstrous Lizard.

The Amazing Spider-Man is a superhero action movie that delivers a new take on the classic Marvel hero. Andrew Garfield takes over the reins as Peter Parker, a high school student given the burden of being able to make a difference. The Amazing Spider-Man features flashy special effects, an updated look for Spider-Man, and a story that weaves together Peter’s origin as Spider-Man and the work his father did at Oscorp before his death.

First and foremost, The Amazing Spider-Man delivers on action. The graphics are another improvement over the previous iterations of the character, and everything from the way he moves in combat to the way he swings around New York feels polished and right. The film pays close attention to the details of its action, showing off Peter’s unique fighting style in countless little ways, and his bouts with the Lizard are framed well.

The Amazing Spider-Man does not slouch on story either. The centerpiece of Peter’s personal arc is his relationship with Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), a brilliant classmate who happens to be the daughter of Captain George Stacy (Denis Leary) of the NYPD. Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have excellent chemistry. Their banter helps keep the tone light, while the trust they build up helps ground Peter’s character development.

Still, not everyone will like the changes The Amazing Spider-Man makes. Spider-Man’s origin story is streamlined compared to the comics, with a greater focus on Oscorp and the legacy of Peter’s father. Lizard is a decent villain for story purposes but does not leave as much of a mark as the Raimi villains. And while Peter and Gwen are one of the big draws of the movie, their tongue-in-cheek banter will not appeal to everyone.

The Amazing Spider-Man is a strong choice for fans of the superhero genre. It carves out a slightly different niche than the Raimi films, playing up different aspects of Spider-Man’s story, but it stays true to the spirit of the character and delivers even more web-swinging action. Give it a shot when you are in the mood for a nice mixture of drama, wisecracks, and spectacle.

For a younger and more comedic take on the character, try Spider-Man: Homecoming. For a Spider-Man movie with a similar villain dynamic, try Spider-Man 2.

[6.9 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948470/). I give it a 8.0 for a great cast, polished action, and a nicely layered story.

Today’s quick review: The Green Hornet. Britt Reid (Seth Rogen), the hard-partying son of a newspaper magnate (Tom Wilkinson), inherits a fortune when his father dies. Left with nothing else to do with his life, Britt teams up with Kato (Jay Chou), his father’s ingenious mechanic, to fight crime as the Green Hornet. Their escapades soon put them on a collision course with Chudnofsky (Christoph Waltz), the head of organized crime in Los Angeles.

The Green Hornet is a superhero crime comedy based on the classic radio and television series. The story follows a rich slacker and his canny assistant as they cobble together a crime-fighting career. The Green Hornet aims to be a comedy-infused adventure that focuses on the unlikely friendship between Britt and Kato. But even though the movie makes a credible effort, its story and character work fall short of the mark.

The Achilles’ heel of The Green Hornet is Britt Reid. The protagonist of the story is loud-mouthed, selfish, and incompetent, relying on Kato to do all of the heavy lifting. With a lighter touch or a fuller character arc, this dynamic could have worked. Britt is poised for growth, and Seth Rogen would have fit a more serious version of the character just fine. But as he is, Britt detracts from almost every scene where he gets going.

Apart from this key weakness, The Green Hornet is a competent crime movie. Britt and Kato work their way up Chudnofsky’s organization, partly by accident and partly by following the advice of Lenore Case (Cameron Diaz), Britt’s secretary. The action is a mixture of gunplay, martial arts from Kato, and gadgets installed in the Hornet’s car. None of it is jaw-dropping, but it is enough to give the movie some spectacle.

Ultimately, The Green Hornet has a viable premise that does not work in practice. The story hinges on Britt and his growth as a person, but Britt ends up too obnoxious to like and grows very little throughout the movie. As such, the rest of the framework—Kato’s character, Chudnofsky’s villainy, and a minor mystery surrounding Britt’s newspaper—largely goes to waste. Interested viewers should approach with caution. Most should skip.

For a similar adaptation of a classic adventure hero, try The Phantom or The Shadow. For a quirkier and more stylized one, try The Spirit or Dick Tracy. For a somewhat more involved story about self-made superheroes, try Mystery Men or Kick-Ass. For a more serious superhero movie about a rich man spurred to heroics by the death of his father, try Batman or Batman Begins.

[5.8 out of 10 on IMDB](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0990407/). I give it a 6.0 to 6.5 for a decent setup undermined by poor character choices and flaky humor.