GLASS Review

Nineteen years after writer/director M. Night Shyamalan's sophomore effort, Unbreakable, and two years after he confirmed his return to form with Split, the unique auteur has concocted what is the third film in an unlikely, but not so unlikely trilogy given the twist in Unbreakable was that all-along viewers were watching the origin story of a new hero and his arch nemesis yet were unaware of it. Like Unbreakable, Split was marketed under the guise of a different genre than what its true intentions held and when that original, James Newton Howard score re-emerged in those final moments of Split almost two years ago to the weekend it was one of the greatest "twists" I've ever had the pleasure of experiencing in a theater. This inadvertently created an issue for Shyamalan though, as with this trilogy-capper, Glass, there is no disguising what genre this film belongs to: this is a super hero movie through and through. And so, for a director who has made a name and a career off of the misdirect and/or "twist ending" the challenge in penning his first, unabashed sequel would be that of how might he might continue building these characters organically while integrating them into one another's respective worlds as well as framing the continuation of their story through a device that would satisfy the intrigue and sustain the investment. The idea that James McAvoy's "Beast" or Kevin Wendall Crumb as we know he truly exists is in the same world as Bruce Willis' David Dunn and Samuel L. Jackson's Elijah Price made for some exciting prospects, but where would Shyamalan actually go with things? How would these three individuals find their way across one another's paths and even if they happened to meet-what might it ultimately amount to? These are big questions that require much ambition and follow-through and while Shyamalan has been saying since Unbreakable opened in 2000 that he's had ideas or plans for a follow-up the time has finally come to put up or shut-up and for the most part, it's a good thing Shyamalan doesn't shut-up. With Glass, the filmmaker certainly has much to communicate and much he wants to say, but one will be hard pressed to figure out how all of these (broken) pieces are meant to fit together.

First Trailer for M. Night Shyamalan's GLASS

The first trailer for M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable/Split crossover, titled Glass, has hit the web and man is it a doozy. As a huge fan of Unbreakable and someone who more admired what the writer/director was doing in Split if not necessarily feeling like he fully capitalized on the premise or James McAvoy's terrific lead performance. Either way, what Shyamalan did with that last minute twist ending was fantastic and completely unexpected.Given this trailer, it looks as if Glass will not only expand on McAvoy's Kevin, but bring us up to date on what Bruce Willis' David Dunn and Samuel L. Jackson's Elijah Price have been up to in the nearly twenty years since that fateful train crash. The trailer begins by highlighting Sarah Paulson's new character, Dr. Ellie Staple, who states she is working in the ever-growing field of those real-life humans who actually believe that have supernatural abilities. It's certainly worth wondering if Shyamalan will incorporate the rising popularity of super heroes and comic book-based movies into the reasoning for Staple's consistently growing field. Whatever the case may be, it seems that there have certainly been some lines drawn as to those who think these people might actually have been blessed with powers and those who believe it to be based in psychological issues and tricks of the brain. Naturally, Jackson's titular character believes in the former and it seems his ever conspicuous Price AKA Mr. Glass will have a strong hand in driving the narrative dynamic between Kevin and Dunn's hero and villain. Furthermore, it will be interesting to see how Shyamalan balances the two different tones of the two different films that each birthed these characters. Unbreakable being more of an ominous drama whereas Split was sold completely as a horror flick. Needless to say, it's hard not to be excited for what this crossover holds as McAvoy especially seems to have taken the opportunity and run with it, Willis looks like he's actually invested in working again, and you know Jackson loves the idea he gets to be the mastermind behind all of this. Glass also sees the return of Anya Taylor-Joy, as well as starring Spencer Treat Clark, Charlayne Woodard, Rob Yang, Luke Kirby, and opens on January 18, 2019.

ROCK THE KASBAH Review

Rock the Kasbah is a film that is neither here nor there. It is an odd case of feeling completely inconsequential while using relevant aspects of our current cultural climate to try and make a statement yet only proving itself irrelevant for it. It's a strange film-an experience that isn't exactly unpleasant while you're in the midst of it, but is ultimately more forgettable than anything I've seen at the movies in recent memory. It's is a shame, really, as the production has so much going for it and could have certainly been an interesting film were someone with any kind of motivation or vision in the director's chair. It's always fun to see Bill Murray's name above the title, leading a film and especially if that film is a broad comedy (something we don't get often anymore), but while Murray is seemingly giving this his all director Barry Levinson (Rain Man, Good Morning Vietnam) looks to be on autopilot. This isn't necessarily unexpected as Levinson hasn't produced anything that's been universally loved or appreciated for some time, but to have frequent Murray collaborator Mitch Glazer (Scrooged, the upcoming A Very Murray Christmas) behind the screenplay and Murray front and center with an off the wall premise one would think there'd be more to this tale of a washed up music manager who ends up stranded in Afghanistan. Instead, Murray and a rather outstanding supporting cast that includes Bruce Willis, Kate Hudson, Zooey Deschanel, Scott Caan and Danny McBride are wasted in this meandering mess that only stays afloat for the pure intrigue of seeing where the movie might go. Turns out, Rock the Kasbah isn't worth paying much attention to even if every facet it offers up is one you would normally give enough credit to do as much. It's not horrible by any means, but it's easy to see the amount of untapped potential here that inevitably makes the final product all the more disappointing.  

SIN CITY: A DAME TO KILL FOR Review

In the spring of 2005 my newly minted eighteen year-old self highly anticipated director Robert Rodriguez's adaptation of the Frank Miller comic Sin City. Keep in mind this was a world before Christopher Nolan's genre re-defining Batman Begins or Zack Snyder's influential visual stylings of 300 and so to see something so inherently original in its take on both aesthetic and story was exciting even if I wasn't familiar with the source material. Add on to that the fact Rodriguez enlisted the creator of the comic book as his co-director and gathered up an expansive cast that included Bruce Willis, Benecio Del Toro, Clive Owen, Jessica Alba, Rosario Dawson, Brittany Murphy, Michael Madsen, Powers Boothe and the first interesting role Mickey Rourke had taken in some time (essentially the one that made him cool again) and you had something people were generally intrigued by. Almost a decade later though and the anticipation for any such follow-up to the film has long since faded and thus the original would have likely survived best if left alone rather than trying to return to the days of former glory with a sequel that doesn't really expand the world of the titular environment as much as it gives us the same things we were treated to the first time around, only this time with less of a punch to the gut. Less punch because we've seen them before, less surprise because we know the characters better, more of the same because we realize the characters weren't as developed as our first impression led us to believe. In short, the sequel more or less points out the flaws of the world in which it exists rather than enhancing or expanding the universe the original set-up and when a sequel does this it only makes its existence feel all the more forced than necessary. There are of course a few redeemable aspects here, the stark visuals still elicit a certain mood and look stunning on the big screen and the addition of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and his storyline is engaging and deserved more screen time, but these aren't enough to spice up what is overall rather boring and a flat narrative. There will always be a certain nostalgia for the original Sin City given it's place in time and my stage of life when it was released, but if there was any hope A Dame to Kill For might do the same, re-create those feelings, or even spark interest in eighteen year-olds today those hopes were dashed when Rourke's narration began and the style was more cloak and pattern than function to deepen story or theme.

First Trailer for SIN CITY: A DAME TO KILL FOR

Way back in 2005 I went to see Sin City for my eighteenth birthday and became so caught up in the visual style of the world Robert Rodriguez created as he brought the Frank Miller comics to life that I don't rightly remember much of what the story concerned itself with. I remember simply being impressed and overwhelmed by it all that the fact it was broken down into several different narratives with an insane amount of characters and a balancing act hard to get a grasp on the first time around didn't bother me much. It was one of those films that seemed to demand a sequel upon its release and it became easier and easier to forget the initial film with each passing year (instead we got Miller's horrible solo effort The Spirit in 2008). I will admit to not re-visiting Sin City much over the past nine years, but would be lying if I said I wasn't the least bit excited to finally see Rodriguez and Miller continue their tales of Basin City. This time around, Joseph Gordon-Levitt heads up the impressive roster of new and returning cast members that will weave together two of Miller's stories. With 300: Rise of an Empire out tomorrow it is only fitting we now get our first look at the other Frank Miller adaptation this year. While 300 has become the more definitive staple of Miller's visual style it was always clear Sin City was the more ambitious in terms of both style and substance and if the first trailer is any indication (according to the early reviews for Rise of an Empire) it seems the follow-up to Sin City will also be the more substantial in terms of narrative even if the visual effects look like they have a long way to come before that release date. Let's just hope this doesn't skew towards cheap knock-off more than authentic replicate as Rodriguez's Machete Kills did last year. Sin City: A Dame to Kill For stars Josh Brolin (taking over for Clive Owen) Mickey Rourke, Jessica Alba, Bruce Willis, Rosario Dawson, Jaime King, Eva Green, Dennis Haysbert, Christopher Meloni, Jeremy Piven, Ray Liotta, Juno Temple, Stacy Keach, Julia Garner and opens on August 22nd.

Worst Films of 2013

I usually include my least favorite films of the year at the bottom of my top 10 list but seeing as I will not be able to compile my top ten list this year until after January 10th (due to not having the opportunity to screen Her, Inside Llewyn Davis, August: Osage County or Lone Survivor until then) I am going ahead with publishing them separately this year. I feel out of the loop slightly as most critics have already put forth their top 10 lists but these are the drawbacks of living in a small market where you don’t get Nebraska until December 20th. In clearing that up, I don’t like to seek out movies that I think will be horrible, or even bad. I try to look for redeeming qualities in each and every film I see and these are the few this year I just couldn’t really get over or found them to be more disappointing than rewarding. Many of them were downright irritating given the potential they carried whether in cast or in filmmakers/writers. I didn’t get around to seeing many of the obvious choices such as Texas Chainsaw 3D, A Haunted House or Safe Haven and have included an alternate list of five films that are more easy targets for a list such as this rather than being as horrible as they have been made out to be by critical and box office reception. I won't get ridiculous and make a list of movies that weren't everything I wanted them to be, most falling into that category were still decent films even if they didn't meet my personal expectations. Still, while I even hesitate to make a list of what I consider some of the worse films this year as many of you who bother to look at these kinds of lists know what wasn't good and it seems pointless to single them out again, thus there were a few I took issue with and thought were given more praise than they deserved while not impressing me in the least. With that in mind, here are my top ten least favorite movies I saw this year...

RED 2 Review

In what may be the second least anticipated sequel of the summer Bruce Willis and his gang of retired master class agents return for another round. I actually really enjoyed the first film as it presented something fresh, a new spin on a genre that by 2010 had seen Willis trying tirelessly to breathe life into a new possible franchise (Surrogates) while attempting to lampoon what made him the action star he is in the first place (Cop Out). Both attempts turned in horrible to average films, but nothing stuck. That was, until he managed to find the right film that balanced the comedy and action while at the same time being able to poke fun at the fact Willis was indeed a lot older now than when he made his first Die Hard film. That the first film also managed to make Willis seem like he was invested in the material was a definite plus. An air of indifference has plagued Willis in the majority of his actioners lately (this has remained true since RED as well with The Cold Light of Day, Expendables 2, and the disaster that was A Good Day to Die Hard) and is still somewhat apparent in this ultimately unnecessary sequel, but lucky for us Willis is not the only star the makers have recruited to keep us entertained and upping the chances crowds will buy tickets to this farcical action film in a summer season so crowded it would be difficult to stand out otherwise. While some of the big names are welcome returns and the others welcome additions their true value is measured by the mass appeal they bring and how this worked to the first films advantage, making it a sleeper hit. I remember being surprised by how many older people were in the audience to watch the first film at an early show and the same remained true this time around. That the older generations show up for the roster of prestigious actors and the younger for the guaranteed mindless action that has no doubt come to be associated with Willis' face, the producers can almost guarantee a hit. The good news is that, despite these films following formula to a T, there is more going on with the characters than in most generic action films and a surprising amount of laughs per minute that, if nothing else, guarantee a pleasant time.

G.I.JOE: RETALIATION Review

Back in 2009 I was somewhat excited to see what the studios had decided to do with the G.I. Joe brand as they'd just come off a lackluster sequel to the film that proved making toys into movies could be successful. I am of course referring to Transformer: Revenge of the Fallen which was a masterpiece in my eyes compared to what G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra turned out to be. In my original review for the first G.I. Joe film I stated that, "As the subtitle may lead you to believe, this film is the set-up to be a franchise, one that I hope doesn't exactly happen, unless they completely start over." Well, after being delayed almost a year for what was said to 3D post conversion, which they did do, but also seems to be code for: Channing Tatum blew up last year so lets take some time and add in a few more Tatum scenes! If you are a Tatum fan and you are seeing this film simply to see him on the big screen, don't show up late; that's all I'm saying. On the other hand if they were going to continue this franchise they did at least go the route I hoped they might. With no mention of General Hawk or Ripcord the sequel seems to be able to continue the story of the first with Tatum's Duke leading a new team of Joe's (that still makes me laugh) and expertly wiping the slate clean so as to introduce us to a few new characters and get the ball rolling in a whole new light so as this might actually turn into a profitable series of films the producers can keep on pumping out. The fact of the matter though is that despite G.I. Joe: Retaliation being a better movie than its predecessor (it would have been hard not to be) it is still fairly cheesy and goofy and something only tween age boys will likely have a lot of fun with. If you are a day over thirteen though you will likely see through the goofiness of it all, but still try to enjoy the fun it only periodically provides.

A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD Review

A Good Day to Die Hard is not a movie, not really. There literally could not have been a script for this mess, but we are inclined to believe there was. That it was written by the same guy who penned the horrible X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Hitman makes it easier to see why this latest film in the now twenty-five year old franchise is nothing more than a few action scenes strung together by corny dialogue that hearkens back to milestones from the earlier films and a storyline that means absolutely nothing and makes almost no sense whatsoever. I've never been particularly invested in these films as the first, the one many consider an action classic, was released the year after I was born and so I was late to catch up on the earlier films until just before the 2007 sequel Live Free or Die Hard. I enjoyed that film well enough and it was directed by Len Wiseman, the guy in charge of the Underworld series and that rough remake of Total Recall last summer whose films always seem more wrapped in style and noise than any type of substance; even that movie had more of a relation to the earlier films than this. Having given the reigns of the fifth installment in the Die Hard franchise to John Moore (Max Payne, The Omen) he has frantically spliced together all the footage he was able to capture of shoot outs and car chases that were filmed for this movie in hopes that it would turn out to be more than just those sequences. Instead, at a brisk hour and a half the film has three major action pieces that come in 30-minute increments that the director hopes will fool the audience into thinking they've received everything they paid for. In reality, there is absolutely nothing about this film that will stick with you. It will disappear from your memory almost immediately with its generic plot and zero character development. It will leave no impression, and honestly that is the best thing we could ask from a movie that stinks this bad.

LOOPER Review

It is an understatement to say I was excited for Looper. As a fan of the science fiction genre it is always nice to see what seems to be a smart, legitimate sci-fi flick get good treatment from the studio system. It is clear these aren't always appealing to a mass audience but when they are made right, and with visionary directors at the charge of them they can easily be the most captivating of journeys on film. While my preference goes toward things that venture further into the cosmos, Looper is a piece of time travel bonanza that is escalated by so many different elements that are so much better than you expect them to be that the entire film rises from its own genre trappings and becomes something entirely fresh. Fresh is one of the hardest words to come by when we think of the future these days. Our ideas of what it should be, what it will look like, what it should contain have all been shaped by movies that have come before. As we now live in a future that was imagined by moviemakers twenty years ago, it only makes the task of developing an authentic, non-CG created world set even further in the future all the more challenging. Writer and director Rian Johnson has risen to that challenge, realizing that  the world develops but not with the major overhaul that most future-set films would like to imply. The world in 2044 is still very much one we recognize and can see the place we live in now transitioning to. It is all in the little details that add credibility to the films filthy landscape. Moving past that, Johnson also gives his characters quick, intelligent dialogue to ring off at one another while not getting overly wrapped up in the semantics of the consequences that will naturally come along when we begin tampering with things that should never have been touched with such hands in the first place.

Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a hired gun who kills
men sent back from the future.

While the set up of the film may sound a bit standard: time travel exists. A guy meets himself from the future. No big deal right? Seen it before, probably know where it's going. That is what makes Looper great. Though we've seen these tricks before, and in much worse fashion, Johnson has fleshed out a film where the set up incorporates time travel but doesn't allow it to drive the narrative. As an audience we are introduced to Joe in 2044 (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) a young, hired gun whose job it is as a "looper" to instantly kill anyone the mob decides to send back in time to him. You see, time travel does not yet exist in 2044 either, but it does in the future. It was immediately outlawed and is only available for use on the black market. The mobs use it to dispose of guys they need taken care of and sending a man back in time to die immediately erases him from the future leaving no body for evidence. As young Joe, Gordon-Levitt wears a mug that allows us to believe he could age into Bruce Willis. He also incorporates a nice gravel into his youthful voice that hints at the extent the actor likely went in order to help us genuinely see the evolution of a man. Naturally, things are destined to fall apart. One can only expect this to happen when mere men attempt to take on the power of Gods. When a new mob boss in the future decides to start "closing loops" i.e. sending the older version of the looper back in time to kill himself; things get messy and future Joe (Willis) no longer likes the deal he made as a young man. The loopers receive a hefty reward for closing their loop and are relieved of their duties, but are burdened by what they know is coming. Even with the trailer you may think you know exactly where the film is heading but there are several different layers to the film that as it unfolds reveals to its audience that this is more epic moral tale than a futuristic effects fest.

Joe is taken off guard when his older self (Bruce Willis)
is the one he has to kill.

Director Johnson's first feature was the well-reviewed and often underrated Brick while his second, The Brothers Bloom, was certainly underrated and I enjoyed it much more than everyone else around me seemed to. What always stood out about the two though was the fact of how different they were and as he adds Looper to his canon it is clear the diversity informs the intelligence of his scripts and their defiance to be confined to what would otherwise feel like a standard romp through script writing 101. While the design of the film is appealing and captures a perfect overall tone to the film the soundtrack feels a bit off if not flat out cheesy at some points. Other times, it's great and when a smooth jazz number slides perfectly against the tough images we're seeing on screen a sense of cool oozes off the actors. It is in more typical, action-oriented scenes that the orchestral music doesn't give a good build-up or feels as if a single loop (no pun intended) was thrown in out of nowhere to emphasize the moment. The action scenes themselves can also at times feel a bit clunky in their direction. These are minor complaints though as from the opening shot, even the opening title, we are hooked by what is unfolding on screen because the movie has style and smarts. Not to mention, the performances are great from everyone involved. Not only does Gordon-Levitt cement his status as a force to be reckoned he proves he can pretty much do anything. He makes Joe a man we don't necessarily like, but who we still understand and come to sympathize with. Willis will likely go overlooked in the smaller, less flashier role here but he does some great subdued work here. After phoning in performances in The Expendables 2 and the horrible Cold Light of Day Willis fully realizes what began as a great year with his moving turn in Moonrise Kingdom. In Looper, he plays the older, wiser version of a man who we think we already know and when it turns out we don't, the ride becomes even more exhilarating.

Sara (Emily Blunt) has a secret on her secluded farm
she is intent on keeping.

In an aspect that has been largely ignored in the marketing campaign Emily Blunt also shows up here to provide some of her best work of the year and there has been a lot of it. Though I have yet to see Your Sister's Sister others like Salmon Fishing in the Yemen and Five Year Engagement were good enough if not slightly underwhelming. Here, though Blunt pulls off a flawless American accent and stands as a pillar for what the state of society is in this time period. She is beaten down, desperate, and has likely thought about giving up and giving in multiple times yet she keeps on going looking towards a beacon of hope that might make tomorrow better than today. She is an inspiring character and for as central as the story is to Joe, Blunt's Sara feels like the heart of the film. There are also smaller appearances from the likes of Paul Dano and Jeff Daniels who add a flair to the rollicking first act of the film. In the end though, what the greatness of Looper comes down to is the originality and the unusual path the script takes. It is a witty film that though it has a very serious meaning and a hard-edged exterior never seems to take itself too seriously. It is a refreshing entry in the sci-fi realm that along with Source Code and Sound of My Voice have added real credibility and new ideas to a genre that had become quite lacking. This all lends itself to a film that when you walk out of it will leave you more than satisfied. The problem it leaves you with is that in its few shortcomings it leaves you wanting more and even though you immediately want to go back and watch it again to dig deeper into the details you secretly just want it to keep going, to keep giving. But, as the main theme of the film explains so well, sometimes we have to sacrifice our own wants and needs for the greater good. Too much of a good thing is anything but, and Looper delivers just the right amount to hold us over until Johnson creates his next film.

 

LOOPER Review

It is an understatement to say I was excited for Looper. As a fan of the science fiction genre it is always nice to see what seems to be a smart, legitimate sci-fi flick get good treatment from the studio system. It is clear these aren't always appealing to a mass audience but when they are made right, and with visionary directors at the charge of them they can easily be the most captivating of journeys on film. While my preference goes toward things that venture further into the cosmos, Looper is a piece of time travel bonanza that is escalated by so many different elements that are so much better than you expect them to be that the entire film rises from its own genre trappings and becomes something entirely fresh. Fresh is one of the hardest words to come by when we think of the future these days. Our ideas of what it should be, what it will look like, what it should contain have all been shaped by movies that have come before. As we now live in a future that was imagined by moviemakers twenty years ago, it only makes the task of developing an authentic, non-CG created world set even further in the future all the more challenging. Writer and director Rian Johnson has risen to that challenge, realizing that  the world develops but not with the major overhaul that most future-set films would like to imply. The world in 2044 is still very much one we recognize and can see the place we live in now transitioning to. It is all in the little details that add credibility to the films filthy landscape. Moving past that, Johnson also gives his characters quick, intelligent dialogue to ring off at one another while not getting overly wrapped up in the semantics of the consequences that will naturally come along when we begin tampering with things that should never have been touched with such hands in the first place.

THE COLD LIGHT OF DAY Review

After several delays it became more and more evident exactly what the The Cold Light of Day really was. There is nothing that could have made this film look any less inspired except for the possibility that rising star Henry Cavill chose it as an opportunity to put his stamp on a good little chase film. The new Superman will have to continue trying though as this forgettable little action film from unknown director Mabrouk El Mechri reaches the pinnacle of generic. There is no depth to the script and no real time to even get to know the motivations of the stock characters that wander across the screen. One has to be curious as to how these kinds of movies continue to get made and with such impressive casts. As you watch the film you cannot help but to wonder who read this and thought it stood a chance of rising above an already crowded season of drudge and bland action flicks. Dropped in the wasteland that can be late August and early September the film will still have trouble finding an audience. What stood out besides an easy paycheck and free vacation to credible actors like Bruce Willis and Sigourney Weaver who show up, do what they are accustomed to and leave without even caring what the circumstances of their characters are? Probably that paycheck and free vacation, but still despite the lovely tour of Madrid the film does provide in spots I can't help but to feel I'm going to take out all my frustrations on the studio system for dumping this type of generic crap on unsuspecting moviegoers who will pay their good money to see Willis and Cavill in a good old fashioned action film when Willis is dead less than twenty minutes in.

Martin Shaw (Bruce Willis) and Sigourney Weaver's
typical CIA agents confront one another.

The paperthin plot of the film concerns Will Shaw (Cavill) who is fresh off the plane in Spain and not all that ready to spend a week sailing with his family. This family consisting of a father (Willis) he has clearly never had a strong relationship with and a mother played by Caroline Goodall who wants to put a nice blanket over everything. There is also a younger brother and his girlfriend who serve absolutely no purpose other than to have more people in peril. Even as we learn that why our protagonist isn't exactly excited to be reunited with the family we wait to see how it will affect the overall plot of the film. It doesn't. I even went to the lengths in my brain of wondering if I missed something in the film because of the fact that important facets of our characters were exposed with no reference to them later on. They were simply stated as a fact about that purpose and used in no way further to even develop the character. It's not even a spoiler to say that Will's small business is bankrupt because there is no more to it than that. He's a little stressed out and understandably, but things only get worse when he leaves the boat to go into town to get some supplies and arrives back to find the boat ransacked and his family missing. His dad shows back up and informs his oldest son of the truth about him and his career, that he is a CIA agent and owes some other angry intelligent agents a briefcase (which we seriously never find out the contents of) that he has from a mission a few months ago. Sigourney Weaver then shows up and it gets really ridiculous and twisted just to the point that you know exactly whats coming next.

Will (Henry Cavill) gets in deeper than he ever imagined
after his family disappears.

I kid you not when I say that the story is that straight forward and there are no layers to it. At one point in the film Will finds a companion in Lucia (Veronica Echegui) and when she asks him what he does he tells her he is a business consultant. No more, no less. The script is so vague with its action film cliches it doesn't even bother to give us reasonable explanations for how Will is so suddenly able to defend himself against government trained agents who have years of experience on him. Other than his size and an early reference to his domination in high school sports, we have nothing and are led to believe his broad physique and obvious intelligence (he has his own business, duh!) will help carry him through these traumatic experiences. Let us not forget the tagline though, "instinct is his only weapon". The film at least realizes its own gaping hole in logic and therefore attempts to chock it up to the genetic bad-assery of Willis being the guys dad. Oh please, don't try to brainwash me with your poster before I walk into the theater and call you out. Will goes onto discover many things about his father that before his death had made him the mysterious and brutal figure he never got along with. What bugs me most about the film is likely this fact though. Willis is obviously a big pull for the film, likely more even than the fact its serving as a precursor to Cavill's turn as the man of steel, but even his character is nothing more than a cameo and after he is gone there is no justification for why all of the running, shooting, and conflict in general had to take place. What was in the suit case? What drove a man who is made out to be a stand up guy in parts to betray his country? We don't know because we are provided as many facts to think the guy is a scumbag as we are to think he did this for the benefit of someone other than himself. I honestly hope that the screenplay was much thicker than the film it has produced because once everyone is safe here the credits roll with no explanation as to what was really going on.

The Shaw family are the only one's held in real
suspense in The Cold Light of Day.

"Thanks for helping us clean up our own mess," and "your father was an honest man," are the closest things we get to any kind of explanation before the film wraps up two minutes later with another one of those unresolved plot lines laying in a hospital bed. There is a line included in there somewhere as well that hints at the fact someone, somewhere actually thought this movie might warrant a sequel and that Will Shaw would become some kind of franchise but if they were going to cut anything from the film it should have been that line as this film stands no chance of seeing a future beyond its limited first week of September release. I will be surprised if it even makes it into the top ten at the box office this weekend. I don't usually wish ill will on a film, but the urge to do so here has overcome me. Not because I particularly hated the movie that much but because of what this movie represents. A straightforward action movie that has combined elements of every film like this we have ever seen before and dumped it on unsuspecting audiences on a slow weekend at the movies where people will see it because they like Willis and they like Weaver or they want to know what this Cavill kid is all about because they haven't watched The Tudors. It's like serving crap to someone who's never had chocolate and telling them it's chocolate. It's messed up and will forever derive their opinion of a genre that can sometimes be so exhilarating and intelligent at the same time. The Cold Light of Day is neither of these things and deserves to have stayed on that shelf it sat on for so long. If we don't see the films they won't keep making them. Let's use this generic piece of dumbed-down entertainment to make a point rather than prove them right.

THE COLD LIGHT OF DAY Review

After several delays it became more and more evident exactly what the The Cold Light of Day really was. There is nothing that could have made this film look any less inspired except for the possibility that rising star Henry Cavill chose it as an opportunity to put his stamp on a good little chase film. The new Superman will have to continue trying though as this forgettable little action film from unknown director Mabrouk El Mechri reaches the pinnacle of generic. There is no depth to the script and no real time to even get to know the motivations of the stock characters that wander across the screen. One has to be curious as to how these kinds of movies continue to get made and with such impressive casts. As you watch the film you cannot help but to wonder who read this and thought it stood a chance of rising above an already crowded season of drudge and bland action flicks. Dropped in the wasteland that can be late August and early September the film will still have trouble finding an audience. What stood out besides an easy paycheck and free vacation to credible actors like Bruce Willis and Sigourney Weaver who show up, do what they are accustomed to and leave without even caring what the circumstances of their characters are? Probably that paycheck and free vacation, but still despite the lovely tour of Madrid the film does provide in spots I can't help but to feel I'm going to take out all my frustrations on the studio system for dumping this type of generic crap on unsuspecting moviegoers who will pay their good money to see Willis and Cavill in a good old fashioned action film when Willis is dead less than twenty minutes in.

THE EXPENDABLES 2 Review

In my review of the first Expendables film I ended it by saying that the film was nothing more than a good time and I imagine that is all Sylvester Stallone really desired for his audience to have. That he did a fine job at achieving that goal and that I couldn't wait for the sequel, quipping that maybe Jean-Claude Van Damme would show up next time. One can imagine my excitement when it was actually announced that the Muscles from Brussels would not only be showing up in The Expendables 2, but would be playing the bad guy. Perfect! It is easy to criticize these films for their lack of any kind of ambition outside of the bad 80's action flicks they intend to pay homage to, but that is their purpose and if you go in wanting or expecting anything more than that you will be sorely disappointed. If you know what to expect at all though I can't see how one could not thoroughly enjoy themselves as this sequel is everything the sequels of that action hey day aspired to be. Bigger, louder, and packed with even more action heroes with more bullets to hand out than you could ever imagine. While I looked forward to the first film for the reasons of seeing Stallone's old school style and ideals mix with someone leading the new school such as Jason Statham that excitement has passed and so to find something to actually look forward to and invest in with the sequel we find it to be the fact that there is an even bigger palette of action stars than the first one offered. We look to see the minor cameo roles of Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger expand to where these three titans of the genre stand together on the front lines. The last twenty minutes is worth the price of admission alone and to boot, this is so ridiculously entertaining you'll find your self surprised at how much you can't wait to see The Expendables 3.

From left: Maggie (Yu Nan), Caesar (Terry Crews), Barney
(Sylvester Stallone), Road (Randy Couture) and Gunner
(Dolph Lundgren) are the Expendables.

While story only matters so much in a movie like this, there is a surprising amount of attention paid to the details here. We open this time with a major action set piece, something I wanted from the first film that felt a little underwhelming. Barney Ross (Stallone) and his crew that includes Lee Christmas (Statham), Yin Yang (Jet Li), Gunnar Jensen (Dolph Lundgren), Hale Caesar (Terry Crews), Toll Road (Randy Couture) and newcomer Billy the Kid (Liam Hemsworth) bust through some poor little Nepal town where the old school mercenaries blow holes in everyone who gets in their way, busting down structures with their parade of tanks all in order to rescue a Chinese businessman for God knows what reasons. It is purely the set up to re-introduce us to the wide cast of characters while putting on display exactly how outlandish and graphic the violence of the film is going to be. Li's character is dismissed early as he escorts the businessman back to their hometown so we are treated to some nice bonding moments and a hint at a storyline that is never further explored that has Barney disliking Christmas's plans to move forward in his relationship after the cheating episode of part one. This is minor to the introduction of little Hemsworth though who is an expert sniper and slowly taking that place of Barney's right hand man from Christmas. That is, until Billy admits the life isn't for him. The thick of the plot begins when Willis's Church comes a callin' for the payback Barney and his boys owe him. Church sends them on a seemingly simple mission that asks them to take along female tech genius Maggie (Yu Nan) and retrieve an item from a safe on an airplane that crashed in Albania. The mission is completed quickly, but the victory is short lived as Jean Vilain (Van Damme) and yes, that's seriously his characters name, kidnaps one of the Expendables and demands the item from the plane. Barney is hesitant, but gives in while Vilain takes the life of his captive anyway. It is now personal, and you know they're going to make sure they get revenge.

Trench (Arnold Schwarzenegger), Barney, and Church
(Bruce Willis) let loose on their enemies.

As far as summer blockbusters go, it will be hard to beat this one in terms of pure enjoyment. There is a sense of carelessness, of fun that goes along with the ride the film takes you on while still containing some nice attempts at genuine emotional moments as well as several hilarious bits, some of which are even intentional. In this aspect I think I may have laughed at The Expendables 2 more than any other comedy that came out in the past three or four months. There is a point in the film where the team is trapped, surrounded by members of Van Damme's gang known as the Sangs. Naturally, there is no way all of these guys can bite the bullet and so who else is there to come to the rescue but Chuck Norris? Literally every time Norris appears on screen as the lone wolf Booker I was smiling. It completely epitomizes the cheesiness of the series yet perfectly captures the tone that Stallone established in the first one and director Simon West carries over so well in this one. West is no stranger to big, giant action films as he's made a few successful ones of his own including Con Air, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, as well as working previously with Statham on The Mechanic. The director not only improves on the way in which they convey the intentional, almost satiric tone of the films but he also stages the action pieces with a more brutal force. Whereas under Stallone's direction there were clearly a few messy edits and sloppy action sequences built on great ideas that didn't transition as well to the screen as I would have hoped, they seem all the better choreographed here while still allowing each character a moment to shine. There is no shortage of action here though, and the whole thing is completely relentless in its goal to create an all-out, over the top action movie they just don't make anymore. If they were made more often The Expendable  films likely wouldn't have as much charm as they do, so the film ultimately benefits from being one of a kind in this day and age.

Bad guy Vilain (Jean-Claude Van Damme) faces off against
Barney in the finale.

In my initial reaction to the first film I was so in love with the idea of the film and was satisfied enough with the final product that I gave it a rating of three and a half stars. That was my initial gut in what I would rate this film as well. Looking back I would probably take away the half star or maybe even a whole from the original. That speaks bad for the first film, but it means well for this second entry in the series as it shows the potential for what that first movie should have reached. Does it mean there isn't room for the third one to grow and be even better? Of course not, with this series there will seemingly always be room for improvement and they are far from perfect, but they serve their purpose as well as any Oscar bait drama. There is plenty of bad acting and horrible dialogue here, but Hemsworth lends the movie a bit of credibility while Van Damme is living it up, making what could have been a stale role this juicy experiment as this ridiculous villain who plays up every cliche of a foreign bad guy you could imagine. The final showdown between Van Damme and Stallone will elicit several cheers while the corny dialogue exchanges between Willis and Schwarzenegger in the heat of battle will have you rolling in the aisles. I can only imagine Stallone intended to have another successful franchise on his resume when he began to shape this idea of an orgy of action heroes rolled into one film together into an actual reality and he has delivered what he promised, only improving on the formula this time around. I really am excited about part three coming down the tube. I hear Eastwood may show up next time or we may even get a trip inside the Cage on top of what will no doubt already be the most bombastic chapter yet.

THE EXPENDABLES 2 Review

In my review of the first Expendables film I ended it by saying that the film was nothing more than a good time and I imagine that is all Sylvester Stallone really desired for his audience to have. That he did a fine job at achieving that goal and that I couldn't wait for the sequel, quipping that maybe Jean-Claude Van Damme would show up next time. One can imagine my excitement when it was actually announced that the Muscles from Brussels would not only be showing up in The Expendables 2, but would be playing the bad guy. Perfect! It is easy to criticize these films for their lack of any kind of ambition outside of the bad 80's action flicks they intend to pay homage to, but that is their purpose and if you go in wanting or expecting anything more than that you will be sorely disappointed. If you know what to expect at all though I can't see how one could not thoroughly enjoy themselves as this sequel is everything the sequels of that action hey day aspired to be. Bigger, louder, and packed with even more action heroes with more bullets to hand out than you could ever imagine. While I looked forward to the first film for the reasons of seeing Stallone's old school style and ideals mix with someone leading the new school such as Jason Statham that excitement has passed and so to find something to actually look forward to and invest in with the sequel we find it to be the fact that there is an even bigger palette of action stars than the first one offered. We look to see the minor cameo roles of Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger expand to where these three titans of the genre stand together on the front lines. The last twenty minutes is worth the price of admission alone and to boot, this is so ridiculously entertaining you'll find your self surprised at how much you can't wait to see The Expendables 3.

MOONRISE KINGDOM Review

In many ways Wes Anderson is a director very cautious not to wander outside his comfort zone. He has carved out a pleasant little niche for himself and has remained there for several years only venturing out slightly with his last effort The Fantastic Mr. Fox in 2009. Since that release and even in parts of that film it felt like Mr. Anderson has been running low on steam. That might explain the three-year hiatus from behind the camera, but in his absence it seems the writer/director has been working on something rather special. I have always been a fan of Anderson's dry humor and intimate portraits of odd yet perfectly flawed characters. Here he puts these two personal touches to great use as Moonrise Kingdom finds a way to make those most human elements of humor translate flawlessly from our world around us to his golden saturated world. These little moments add up to something that ultimately feels like one of the most epic of love stories. Anderson has rounded up a couple of his frequent collaborators as well as some new friends to tell a story that at first glance is a simple story of boy meets girl. What the film ends up being is a concise and intricately made film that documents the personal journey of love in all its different forms and stages. There is a theme behind his khaki tones and direct dialogue and it is something he has explored many times before, but it seems every time Anderson is able to elicit a fantastic response because he has such beautiful ways of saying it differently.

Suzy (Kara Hayward) and Sam (Jared Gilman) plot
their escape route in Moonrise Kingdom. 

Moonrise Kingdom tells the innocent tale of an isolated oldest child and an abandoned boy scout who find comfort in one another's arms. The story first introduces us to Suzy as played by wonderful newcomer Kara Hayward. Suzy is the oldest of four children with her three younger brothers forming a kind of isolated group that excludes their bookworm, troubled sister. It is clear Suzy has trouble adapting to kids her age and so when Sam (Jared Gilman) stumbles upon her at a church play and becomes immediately infatuated with her, she finds him interesting. Sam is introduced to us without us actually seeing him and in doing this it gives us the biggest inclination of who he is. He is a mischief maker, but not of the intentional breaking-the-rules nature, more because he is a free thinker. The boy is a total independent and he has no problem taking the world in and doing with it how he sees fit. Anderson along with collaborator Roman Coppola write these young characters with such reality and honesty it is completely believable that these two kindred spirits could come together and understand one another on a level that would make them want to run  away with each other. It works to the utmost and we buy into it and believe it. They are fleshed out by the cast Anderson has surrounded them with but not because of the characters they are playing but more for the roles they play, the influence they have upon our two main characters. Isolated on a little New England island Suzy's lawyer parents Walt and Laura Bishop (Bill Murray and Frances McDormand) are disconnected from their kids communicating with them through bullhorn and only calling on them when necessary. Sam has lost his parents and relies on Scout Master Ward (a hilarious Edward Norton) to serve as a kind of parental figure. This role shifts between he and the local police captain Sharp (Bruce Willis) as the story evolves. Jason Schwartzman, Tilda Swinton, Harvey Keitel, and Bob Balaban show up from time to time as well and infuse great moments of that signature Anderson dry wit.

From Left: Walt (Bill Murray), Laura (Frances McDormand),
Scout Master Ward (Ed Norton) and Captain Sharp
(Bruce Willis).

While all of this ultimately makes up for a surprisingly thrilling adventure story it is the small details, the extra tid bits, or simply the care that seems to have been taken in telling this story that really stands out. Whether they be about the bubble of a world in which the movie takes place or the specifics of the time period everything about this production seems to have been touched with the same bit of care that Sam has taken to make sure everything about he and Suzy's escape works. While the plan for Sam and Suzy's love story doesn't exactly go the way they likely planned it, the film hits the strides of its story with perfect measure. I loved the opening scene where Anderson introduces us to the Bishops with a series of camera movements set to the music of a young person's guide to the orchestra. There is not a word of dialogue spoken, yet in mere minutes we fully comprehend what kind of person Suzy is and even more important, why she has become that way. I adored the complex relationships that were taken on by Coppola and Anderson in the script that were each given a respective angle while still allowing the overall flowery feel of the production to never succumb to some of the more weighty issues being explored. That is the magic trick of Moonrise Kingdom, it is the clever manipulator you don't realize you've experienced until days later when you still can't get the effect of the story out of your mind. That this quirky little indie film that at first glance seems so innocent doesn't only tell the cute, humble story of two kids in love but instead explores an emotion that will forever be up for interpretation. The sadness of Captain Sharp's realizations and the tragedy of the what the Bishops have become. The longing, yet ultimately fulfilling quest of Scout Master Ward. To each is their own meditation on the subject and with an optimistic outlook Anderson brings us back to our main characters that reassure each of the adults where that feeling of love originates from.

Coousin Ben (Jason Schwartzmen) lead the runaways
to safety in their quest for true love.

Anderson  has always had his signature style to rely on and he still milks that quirky tone mixed with his painting-esque visuals to tell a poignant story of flawed characters here. Maybe it is the fact he has been away for longer than usual (he really hasn't, it just feels that way because his last film was animated despite being undoubtedly Anderson) that I embrace his latest with a warmer sense of eager excitement. Maybe because this was the slowest expansion of a well reviewed indie I've ever had to experience and the anticipation has just trumped my judgement a little bit, regardless Moonrise Kingdom is a wonder to behold. I thoroughly enjoyed every minute of the film and at a mere 90-minute run time it is impressive to go on such a detailed quest that brisks by at a pace that doesn't also drag you down into the sorrow and pain some of the characters feel for good amounts of that time. Much of this relayed feeling to the audience can be accredited to the wonderful performances that populate the film. Whether it be Bruce Willis who diverges from his beaten path and fills a role in Anderson's world with such gusto or another newcomer like Ed Norton who completely embraces the nerdiness of his character that he ends up wearing it like a cool style. Murray is in classic form with only a limited number of scenes and McDormand is grand in her small but necessary role as Suzy's emotionally crippled mother. As for the two leads who embrace their first film roles with as sweet and innocent a nature as their characters love for another, it is lovely to experience. It is fresh, and real and elevates this to what will certainly be one of the best films of the year.

MOONRISE KINGDOM Review

In many ways Wes Anderson is a director very cautious not to wander outside his comfort zone. He has carved out a pleasant little niche for himself and has remained there for several years only venturing out slightly with his last effort The Fantastic Mr. Fox in 2009. Since that release and even in parts of that film it felt like Mr. Anderson has been running low on steam. That might explain the three-year hiatus from behind the camera, but in his absence it seems the writer/director has been working on something rather special. I have always been a fan of Anderson's dry humor and intimate portraits of odd yet perfectly flawed characters. Here he puts these two personal touches to great use as Moonrise Kingdom finds a way to make those most human elements of humor translate flawlessly from our world around us to his golden saturated world. These little moments add up to something that ultimately feels like one of the most epic of love stories. Anderson has rounded up a couple of his frequent collaborators as well as some new friends to tell a story that at first glance is a simple story of boy meets girl. What the film ends up being is a concise and intricately made film that documents the personal journey of love in all its different forms and stages. There is a theme behind his khaki tones and direct dialogue and it is something he has explored many times before, but it seems every time Anderson is able to elicit a fantastic response because he has such beautiful ways of saying it differently.