ARKANSAS Review

Right off the bat I'd like to acknowledge the fact I live in Hot Springs, Arkansas which is situated about forty-five minutes north east of Glenwood where writer/director and actor Clark Duke was born; his experiences in the area clearly informing his connection to and desire to adapt John Brandon's best-selling book of the same name. And yes, the climactic scene of the movie takes place on historic bathhouse row, and was shot about five minutes from my house in downtown Hot Springs National Park. I say all of this not to try and convince you of how cool I am (unless it's working, then yes-I'm very cool), but instead to make it clear there will be no playing favorites here simply because the movie takes its name from the state I've called home for nearly three decades and because I recognized a few locations. In fact, despite the title of the film Duke and his crew shot the majority of his directorial debut in Alabama rather than in or around the Little Rock area as the movie suggests. So while there is certainly a layer of appreciation and affection for some of the sites we see and the accents we hear, there was almost more of an eagerness to see these things serve as a backdrop for what is a genre of movie we're all very familiar with whether from the natural state or not. Arkansas pays plenty of homage to the overall tone of the state, especially in its flashbacks to the mid to late eighties as we're delivered the backstory of Vince Vaughn's character, Frog, as he belts out the Gatlin brothers and cruises past open fields and dilapidated barns in his Nissan Fairlady 300ZX Coupé. At one point, Vaughn's Frog asks a couple of his associates what they're up to in which they respond with a generic comment before summarizing the feeling as being, "asleep at the wheel of the American dream." There's almost no better phrasing one could have concocted to define the stagnant air of progress yet fierce commitment to maintaining aged ideals (some good, not all bad). It is in this kind of mentality that we find the best facets of Duke's film as he's not simply telling a story of the "Dixie mafia" and funneling said crime/drama through the lens of the south, but he's utilizing this contradictory air of the south where everything feels ironic without the slightest bit of intent to add specific tone to his crime caper. Arkansas, the film, although a story about drug dealers is mostly a story about two generations of men whose aspirations are only limited by the economic options of their environment and whose intelligence is only undermined by their (mostly) unassuming appearances dictated by that same environment.

WHEN THE BOUGH BREAKS Review

It is evident from the word go that When the Bough Breaks is campy trash, but the most critical question campy trash always has to answer is whether or not it's fun campy trash. Director Jon Cassar has worked on many a television series which makes sense because When the Bough Breaks is very much along the lines of what the Lifetime network routinely produces. Everything feels rather staged and mostly inauthentic save for a single character who seems to be the only one in this universe within which such movies as this take place who understands real struggle while everyone else walks around-money being no object-without a care in the world. One might think, given these circumstances, that When the Bough Breaks might be a bit of a relief to the onslaught of tentpoles and big-budget/high concept offerings the summer movie season has just delivered in that it is (technically) an original story that remains just familiar enough to attract the necessary audience to justify its existence-not to mention it's a movie mostly made to cater to adults. And yet, this familiar story of seduction offers nothing new by way of cheap thrills or even openly ridiculous tension. Rather, Cassar's film takes itself so seriously and genuinely yearns to be a somber drama that it turns into a plodding and rather boring affair instead of pure trashy fun. That the film doesn't bother to have any fun with its otherwise farcical tone is a shame as trying as hard as the film does to come up with credibility when all they have is camp only makes the final product that much worse. To those points, When the Bough Breaks is a movie that will take more heat for what it stands for and represents rather than the actual content in produces. This meaning that the pieces are in place-Morris Chestnut and Regina Hall are seasoned veterans of this type of melodrama (unfortunately) and audiences can go through the motions of the film knowing the story beats that will clearly be hit and yet despite all of this being somewhat blatant rip-offs of other movies we've seen over the years both Chestnut and Hall as well as newcomer Jaz Sinclair are each more than capable of pulling anxiety and tension out of the situations their characters find themselves in. Still, When the Bough Breaks is overall a lazy if not competent thriller that could have just as effectively been directed by a board room as it has been a man for hire like Cassar.

GHOSTBUSTERS Review

I'd like to think there's not as much ignorance in the world as the internet tells me there is, but the small corner of the World Wide Web known as IMDb and more specifically the user reviews for 2016's reboot of Ghostbusters would suggest everything I've hoped to be true about this world is in fact wrong. Given the film has been out in wide release for less than 24 hours at the time of this writing it's astonishing how many harsh and outlandish tirades have been hurled at this film. Of course, we're not here to discuss the inability of what are likely now forty year-old men to share in the wealth of their childhoods, childhoods that provided such pleasures at the original 1984 film, and extend those same feelings of excitement and pure joy to the kids of today and moreover the young girls and women of today who have undoubtedly always looked to the portrayal of their gender in Hollywood and wondered why they were always so restrained. As far as I'm concerned and as far as I can tell (I was born in 1987 so I don't exactly "get" the hoopla that surrounds the original) despite how much the original Ghostbusters was a huge success and universally praised at the time of its release I've never understood the level of infatuation with it. Sure, it's a perfectly enjoyable comedy with a charismatic cast and unique premise, but in the thirty plus years since its release I can't help but think the film has lost some of its charm otherwise I wouldn't feel as out of the loop. With this new, all-female version director Paul Feig has both paid homage to the original film while creating a world and characters all his own. Written by Feig with the help of The Heat screenwriter Kate Dippold this new Ghostbusters universe doesn't capitalize wholly on the gimmick of the gender swap, but more it uses this basis of an idea to explore a familiar world from a new perspective. While no matter how good the film might have turned out to be there would undoubtedly still be people decrying the fact it exists at all, but that it is a lot of fun if not necessarily an exceptional comedy will surely only anger them more. To remain focused on those who take away from the unadulterated fun that Ghostbusters can provide though is to be reminded of the disappointment this world can be whereas to simply take the new Ghostbusters on its own terms can make you believe good does in fact exist among us. In short, it's a delight.

First Trailer for GHOSTBUSTERS Starring Melissa McCarthy

Much has been made of director Paul Feig (Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy) taking on a new installment in the Ghostbusters series when, for a long time, it was thought there might be a chance of a third installment featuring the original cast. When Harold Ramis passed over two years ago now though, the script for the third film was said to be getting a re-write, but eventually director Ivan Reitman left the project and a slew of directors were offered the job afterward, but nothing came to fruition until Feig got involved with the idea of doing more of a reboot than a sequel, but this time with an all female cast. While not much is known or has been seen of the film sans a few images and the posters included below, I've been interested to see what direction the gifted comedic director would take this franchise given he'd stated prior to filming that he wanted to make this scarier than the originals, but in turn hired one of the dreamiest comedic casts imaginable. Melissa McCarthy was a natural choice given she's headlined each of Feig's films since their 2011 breakout, but it was also nice to see him reunite with Kristen Wiig and bring her back to the kind of big, mainstream comedies she seems to have been avoiding while the additions of current SNL highlights Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones only upped the anticipation even more. These always felt like both wise and rather bold choices and given what we see in this first trailer it seems those choices might pay off big time. At this point I have complete trust in Feig as a director of comedy and can't wait to see what he's done with this property moving forward. Also starring Chris Hemsworth, Andy Garcia, Michael Kenneth Williams, Matt Walsh, and Cecily Strong, Ghostbusters opens on July 15th, 2016.

TRIPLE 9 Review

There is as much a vibrancy to Triple 9 as there is a subdued sense of dread. It's not hard to tell something bad or suspicious is lurking around every corner in this Atlanta-set cop drama from director John Hillcoat (The Road, Lawless, The Proposition) and yet, at the same time, you can't help but to want to turn those corners in anticipation of seeing the story develop. First time feature writer Matt Cook gives us a rather complex plot to comprehend, but that his script dives into the key characters head first and we come to know them and their circumstances almost immediately gives us reason to invest and want to understand these present complexities. From moment one, where we see a four man team robbing a bank with The Walking Dead's Norman Reedus serving as the lookout in an inconspicuous vehicle, I was into the dirty, grimy narrative that Hillcoat and Cook would be weaving to presumably get at bigger themes and larger statements about race, justice, and the gray lines that divide honor and disdain. The film accomplishes as much by not just being about bank robbers and corrupt police officers, but rather Triple 9 utilizes the unaccounted for details of emotion and other human elements to disturb the strict proceedings some, if not most, of its characters attempt to operate within. There is no room for emotions or a softened mental state within the Atlanta police department, especially for detectives. We see this in the toll that has clearly been taken on Woody Harrelson's character, Jeffrey Allen, while there is certainly no room for as much under the rule of Irina Vlaslov (Kate Winslet) a Russian Jew looking to free her powerful husband with the help of a few hired hands. Through each of these characters Cook enlists some type of inherent emotional attachment though, making things never as clear cut as the puppet masters would like them to be. While this may not be to the characters advantage though, it makes things all the more savory for the audience member waiting to see what decisions will be made and how such decisions will reverberate through to other aspects of the story. That said, Triple 9 is not a perfect film (far from it, really), but more times than not I was on the edge of my seat anxious to see where the film and more importantly, its characters, would take me.

THE GAMBLER Review

The Gambler is one of those movies that is effortlessly cool. It doesn't ever feel like it's trying, but instead that it naturally comes by the virtues that make it appealing. Despite this fact, it is without a doubt the precise intention of director Rupert Wyatt (Rise of the Planet of the Apes) that his film, a remake of the 1974 James Toback film starring James Caan, resemble something of a nuanced edge of humanity describing a state of mind more than something of this physical world. It is easy to see why The Gambler is one of those movies you expect to be of little significance as it is a remake of a film that seems well respected and not necessarily in any need of retelling (I haven't seen the original, but the DVD is sitting on my shelf and I'll definitely be giving it a look soon) as well as starring Mark Wahlberg who, as of late, has become a certifiable movie star and so we expect a certain amount of mainstream mentality to seep into each of his projects. Since the dawn of the second decade of the new millennium though, Wahlberg has found and continues to improve upon the path he is taking. With The Gambler he has accepted a challenge in seemingly taking on a more complex role, a lead role where it is not just the actions of his character that drive the plot, but the whole psychology of the character that has to be divulged in order for the narrative to feel even slightly cohesive. The overall goal of our main character, the events that drive this narrative are simple enough (pay off those you owe money to in a weeks time or pay the price), but it is the psychology of getting to that resolution that is the real issue because if it were as simple as getting the money to pay back his debts this movie would be about twenty minutes long. No, this isn't a race against time where Wahlberg's Jim Bennett has to scrounge up enough cash to free himself of his loan sharks thumb, but rather this is about Bennett being able to get to a state of being that lets him be okay with continuing to live, with continuing to win rather than constantly riding the thrill of the loss and hoping for the seeming peace of death.

INHERENT VICE Review

They say the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. If you agree with that line of thinking than you will likely be disappointed in the latest from director Paul Thomas Anderson. At nearly two and a half hours, it is a mess of a masterpiece that begs for you to dissect every scene and every line of dialogue as well as how the actor speaking a said line conveys the meaning of their dialogue. Do we place this kind of importance on the film because it does indeed come from a filmmaker with the unique status of Anderson? If it came from a lesser known director would the awaiting audience be as accepting? It's hard to say and it hardly matters because no one else would ever make films like the ones Anderson crafts. Like his other six features, Inherent Vice is wholly a concoction of the directors singular voice and style. From Boogie Nights to There Will Be Blood and Magnolia to The Master Anderson has demonstrated an eclectic range that gives each new film a dynamic all its own. It has always been clear his sentiment is slightly off-kilter, but he has never made anything as loopy or goofy as what we have here and somehow it seems as if this is the truest representation of the person Anderson actually is. As much as Inherent Vice fits perfectly into Anderson's diverse filmography it is the way he has approached the project that stands out more than anything, maybe even more than the finished product itself. Set in Gordita Beach, California in the summer of 1970 as Vietnam rages on and the sixties come to a screeching halt the director infuses his film with this aesthetic by consistently relying on the style of limited camera movement and the framing of shots to capture specific angles that immediately conjure up references to films of the time period in which his film is set. From the attention to detail to the technicolor texture of the images and more forward to the seemingly blind, but no doubt highly calculated preciseness of not seeming to give two shits Anderson delivers a film that, on the surface, seems to make little sense at all. And yet, as one begins to dig deeper and break down the whole of the film into single scenes, individual moments and certain pieces of dialogue it somehow makes more sense even if that bigger picture is all but lost. While Inherent Vice isn't and won't be hailed as Anderson's greatest work, it is easy to see it becoming the one his loyal fans end up returning to most often.

Full-Length Trailer for THE GAMBLER

I've yet to see Karel Reisz's The Gambler from 1974 starring James Caan though I imagine I will get around to it before Rupert Wyatt's remake expands nationwide in early January. Mark Wahlberg takes over leading man duties as Jim Bennett, an English professor with a serious gambling addiction. Besides the fact this seems more low-key than it should be given the onslaught of "awards" films this season, it is also somewhat mind-blowing to see the different turns Wahlberg keeps making in his career to not only stay relevant, but broad in the biggest sense of the word. Going from original B-movie fare like 2 Guns to the stirringly solid Lone Survivor back to blockbuster bombast with Transformers and now onto this clear best actor bid before delivering his first sequel in Ted 2 next summer, the guy is on a streak that doesn't seem to be ending any time soon. As for the trailer itself, it is effortlessly cool with a look and style that oozes confidence and hints of performances that could be nothing short of revelatory given the way everyone, John Goodman especially, seems to be bringing something different to the table. Wyatt, who before this directed Rise of the Planet of the Apes, seems to have a very clear and precise vision here that has been executed to the Nth degree as even some of the single shots in this trailer conjure up a reaction without the aid of any dialogue or context. Having not seen the original I am probably more excited about the prospects of this film than if I held Caan's version close to the heart. Instead, I am genuinely looking forward to why Wyatt, Wahlberg and the rest of their team decided this was a story worth re-telling. The Gambler also stars Jessica Lange, Brie Larson, Michael K. Williams and opens in limited release on December 19th and expanding on January 2, 2015.

KILL THE MESSENGER Review

Kill the Messenger is a true tragedy. A discussion, a meditation on the human life and the countless directions it could go according to the mind that is guiding it. It is a story that takes on the model of what its main character goes through reinforcing the difficulty with which he experiences in trying to follow the guiding light he caught a glimpse of as a child. Despite what else might go on in his life Gary Webb (Jeremy Renner) is an idealistic journalist who believes in the power of his profession. He is a man held to the virtues of his responsibilities to the American public and, as he should, takes that responsibility seriously. He is as ambitious as he needs to be in wanting to crack the one big story that might break his career wide open and send him from the bowels of the San Jose Mercury News to the big leagues of the The Los Angeles Times or Washington Post though these ambitions never feel as important as his need to produce quality. What the film tells of more than it does necessarily follow the plot of the story Webb is investigating is the role of man in our society when he plays with the powers that be. What is wrong with our government if we are not allowed to question them without repercussion? In this case the repercussion is that of Webb becoming the story, his credibility called into question, rather than what he'd actually investigated and reported on being the story or point of focus. It is as much a commentary on the integrity of investigative journalism and how it has devolved into what we have today (the 24-hour news cycle on roids) as it is an interesting take on the state of our country which promises and promotes freedom, but will devour you if you take those liberties to a certain extent. Kill the Messenger is an engaging film, one reminiscent of those 1970's Robert Redford films (namely All the President's Men) taking the paranoid political thriller and transcending even that genre classification because of the real life weight the story holds. It is a film that I was thoroughly engrossed in from the way in which it developed Renner's character, giving us more of who this man was than simply a hungry reporter, without allowing the film to become bogged down in details. It is as thoroughly engrossing as it is heartbreaking and as it comes to its conclusion it reveals itself to be truly that.

First Trailer for Paul Thomas Anderson's INHERENT VICE

It seemed as if we would never get a trailer for the latest Paul Thomas Anderson contraption, Inherent Vice, but now that we have it seems its over two month away release date will take forever to get here. I had no idea what to expect from this adaptation of the Thomas Pynchon novel and knew little about it other than the summary of said book. Given that, I was beyond anxious to dive into the trailer and upon first glance this couldn't be a better mix of everything I hoped it would be considering the style in the stills we'd seen up to this point and an unexpected comic tone that seems in line with Anderson's natural instincts. I love the look of the trailer (Anderson re-teams with cinematographer Robert Elswit after The Master) and I assume he is again shooting on 65 mm film using the Panavision System 65 camera. It gave The Master such sweeping, epic scope and even on your computer screen you can see the depth of some of the shots here. Besides the excitement that comes along with a first glimpse at footage from a new PTA film there is also the brilliant cast he has in place here that is on full display. Joaquin Phoenix re-teams with the director for his second go- around, but this time as drug-fueled detective Larry "Doc" Sportello. The remainder of the cast features Josh Brolin (getting a nice bit in the trailer), Owen Wilson, Katherine Waterston, Reese Witherspoon, Benicio Del Toro, Martin Short, Jena Malone and Joanna Newsom. Inherent Vice opens in limited release on December 12th before going wide on January 9, 2015.

THE PURGE: ANARCHY Review

Having re-watched the first Purge before going to see this quickly developed sequel I was reminded of what a good premise had been so messily squandered in execution. The idea of focusing in on one situation or opening up the world and giving a more well-rounded view is a difficult dilemma. Had the writer/director of both films, James DeMonaco, done with his premise the first time what he's done here he might have been criticized for trying to do too much. After having seen the sequel though it is clear that with such a layered and complicated world the possibilities might have been overwhelming to DeMonaco who chose to keep things simple the first time around. With the first film becoming a financial success though the studio was quick to greenlight and push into development a follow-up less than a year later which can, presumably, only boost a guys confidence. With that confidence DeMonaco has opened up his slightly futuristic world into what his one lawless night a year might be like not only for different individuals, but different classes of people according to society's structure. Given expectations weren't high for The Purge: Anarchy I'll try not to get too excited about how much better it is than the original while hopefully re-enforcing the fact it's still not a great or exceptional piece of cinema. Instead, this is a film that knows its end goal and accomplishes those goals well and does in fact deliver more on the promise of its interesting premise than its predecessor. From the advertising to the blatant acts of violence described as patriotism these films have always had a commentary in the back of their minds on the class systems of society and where our current situation may lead us. In this vein of thinking these films are more science fiction than horror in the way they preach nonviolence with violence and describe how escalating violence and economic issues brought the country to a breaking point that resulted in this annual event. These are naturally the more interesting aspects of the film and in Anarchy DeMonaco plays each of them up as he highlights the experiences of different groups of people from different ethnic and economic backgrounds creating a more captivating story and strong jeopardy we can all relate to.

First Trailer for KILL THE MESSENGER

I don't mind seeing Jeremy Renner take on the blockbuster and franchise roles that he's kept busy with since breaking out six years ago, but after his underwhelming showing in last years much-hyped American Hustle it is good to see the actor getting back to basics and playing someone like Gary Webb in a tough, gritty procedural like Kill the Messenger. The film is based on the true story of Webb, a journalist who stumbles on leads that take him to the beginning of the crack epidemic in America and the theories of conspiracy that go along with it. The trailer plays to the beats of films we've seen before about noble acts, where the main character sacrifices what is important to him for the greater importance of those he can inform but it looks to be executed with keen precision and high-caliber acting here. Adapted from Webb's book by Peter Landesman (Parkland) and directed by Michael Cuesta (Six Feet Under, Dexter, Homeland) this serves the kind of unnerving performance Renner can deliver a la The Hurt Locker and The Town. There is much to like on display here, but more than anything I'm looking forward to how Cuesta captures the specific tone of this genre and if the globe-trotting investigation aspects feel like something fresh. I'm intrigued if not by the inherently engaging story and truths it uncovered, but for the caliber of the cast they have recruited here to support Renner in what he no doubt hopes to be a definitive role that cements his leading man status. Kill the Messenger also stars Rosemarie DeWitt, Ray Liotta, Barry Pepper, Michael Sheen, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Oliver Platt, Andy Garcia, Tim Blake Nelson, Robert Patrick, Michael Kenneth Williams, Paz Vega and opens October 10th.

ROBOCOP Review

Sometimes it seems critics are so intent on seeing themselves as more intelligent than popular entertainment, above it in many regards, that they cannot help but look for what might be implausible in those big action movies that, the majority of the time, do in fact place explosions over intelligence. At this point though, that is an age old argument and I think studios have come to realize that audiences know better than to accept big, expensive action flicks for what they are, but that we have come to expect a little more from our movies. It doesn't necessarily have to be biting satire, social commentary or even a story that breaks any new ground, but what we do expect is something that someone somewhere seems to have put a good amount of thought and effort into creating that, preferably, comes from a single point of vision as to why this feature should exist. Those last stipulations are especially true when we come to something like a re-make of a classic film that many people will brush off from the moment its greenlit or will immediately dismiss as never being able to live up to the original. With Robocop, one did have to wonder what more could there be to the idea of re-making the 1987 Paul Verhoeven classic other than to rip-off the well-known brand-name that would hopefully assure butts in the seats opening weekend? It would naturally be taken as nothing more than a cash grab initially, something that, like Robocop himself, was put together by a committee of studio execs looking through old properties that could turn a profit in todays market and hey, science fiction has been hot lately so why not go for it? While I never had much affection for the original film (it came out the year I was born) and because I couldn't really watch it given the R-rating and gratuitous violence until many years later I came to view it more as a fun, little 80's flick with a guy in a cool suit rather than appreciate it as many seem to that were old enough to enjoy it in its heyday. That being said, I didn't walk in with horribly low expectations, but I knew the story, knew the likelihood of why this was produced and therefore knew not to expect much, but after the great introduction to this new world we get from Pat Novak aka Samuel L. Jackson I began to slip comfortably into enjoyment and let those critical inhibitions go to where the implausibilities and plot hang-ups disappeared and I was simply having fun.

SNITCH Review

Who knew there was any downside to being The Rock? Excuse me, I mean Dwayne Johnson. If the guy didn't seem genuinely nice or completely charming all the time you'd be crazy to assume there was anything wrong with being this bulking, perfectly chiseled statue of a man. Turns out, even the smartest of actors, the nicest of guys can sometimes become confined to what they do best for those exact reasons. Thus is the issue we run into with Snitch and what takes us out of the film rather than complimenting it. While what we usually expect from Johnson is a good old fashioned taking the trash out type story with a different style to elicit diversity among films, what he is trying to do here is restrain those natural instincts, putting himself in an everyman role and it is simply hard to believe this large, bulking guy as someone who would be intimidated so easily. It is absolutely a case of the actors reputation dictating an their screen persona even if that actor is trying to break out (at least a little bit) from the standard roles he or she is constantly offered. It is admirable that Johnson would want to branch out and try to take on material more challenging for him, helping him develop his dramatic acting skills, but Snitch still wants to be an action movie and you can feel it. Sometimes it even seems Johnson is waiting on the action to start. With three more upcoming films in the next three months we will be seeing plenty of The Rock on the big screen and while the other forthcoming projects cater better to the physique of this monster of charisma, Snitch is not a bad way to start things off. It has its fair share of issues but more than anything it suffers from a bad case of miscasting. This isn't our leads fault though as he does the best he can and turns in a rather surprisingly satisfying February film.