FILM SYNOPSIS: Robert Neville (Will Smith) is a brilliant scientist, but even he could not contain the terrible virus that was unstoppable, incurable…and manmade. Somehow immune, Neville is now the last human survivor in what is left of New York City…and maybe the world. But he is not alone. He is surrounded by “the Infected" - victims of the plague who have mutated into carnivorous beings who can only exist in the dark and who will devour or infect anyone or anything in their path. For three years, Neville has spent his days scavenging for food and supplies and faithfully sending out radio messages, desperate to find any other survivors who might be out there. All the while, the Infected lurk in the shadows, watching Neville’s every move, waiting for him to make a fatal mistake. Perhaps mankind’s last, best hope, Neville is driven by only one remaining mission: to find a way to reverse the effects of the virus using his own immune blood. But his blood is also what The Infected hunt, and Neville knows he is outnumbered and quickly running out of time. PREVIEW REVIEW: “It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.” So learn the scientists who attempt to eliminate all illness from the earth. The vaccine used to inoculate everyone against cancer goes so wrong that everyone except Will Smith (maybe others) becomes a flesh-eating member of Night of the Living Dead. It contains moments of cacophonous thrills, others of philosophical profundity, with a continuous intensity. Computer trickery is so impressive these days that Manhattan can be turned into a Mad Max wasteland and monsters can become the things that nightmares are made of. Though the story has its roots in such films as On the Beach, The World, the Flesh and the Devil, and every zombie movie ever conceived, it is so well done by its technical crew and injected with such a bravura performance by its star that it becomes a satisfying seat-grabber of a movie. There are several moments that show regard for the Creator. When Neville’s wife and child board a helicopter, there is a family prayer. At another point, the lead character is quick to let someone understand that this catastrophe was not the fault of a Supreme Being: he unequivocally states, “God didn’t do this, we did.” And though at one point at his most desolate, the character in anger yells out there is no God, the ending reveals that not only is God still among us, but the character was being used by the Almighty to aid mankind.
Distributor:
FILM SYNOPSIS: Taken from Philip Pullman’s bestselling trilogy, His Dark Materials, The Golden Compass is set in an alternative world where people’s souls manifest themselves as animals, talking bears fight wars, and Gyptians and witches co-exist. At the center of the story is Lyra, a 12-year-old girl who sets out to rescue a friend who’s been kidnapped by a mysterious Big Brother-like organization known as the Magisterium. PREVIEW REVIEW: Throughout this film I felt a depression, something discouraging my spirit. Was that because nearly all the adults portrayed seemed sinister? Was it because I was suspicious of the direction the story was going, only to be right when in the final scenes of the film it is declared by the child that freedom of will is everything? Was it due to the fact that according to everything I’ve read, the author of the series is an avowed atheist? Was it because I was concerned that the author’s anti-religious agenda might truly become apparent? Is it because the author wants to kill off God later in the series? Is it because secular critics and moviegoers think we Christians are a bit silly at being alarmed at a sci-fi fantasy? Was it because all the characters of the film call the manifestation of their soul a daemon (demon)? Or was my depression due to the fact that while the film never mentions God, I suspected that the film was simply a part of a larger picture that threatens the relevance of the Almighty in our culture? Or is it because one of my fellow reviewers was so excited that there would be the antithesis of The Chronicles of Narnia, a film whose characters and storylines symbolize all the themes important to C. S. Lewis, including the clear-cut retelling of Christ’s love and our need to be His ambassadors. Was it because The Golden Compass is so well made that it will no doubt be alluring to audiences even though it was filled with deception and violence? Was it because of all of the above? Director Chris Weltz and his camera crew have given the film a golden, mesmerizing look. The CG whiz department has filled it with Oz-like magic, the effects staggering the imagination. And the story, though confusing as most of these sci-fi trilogies tend to be if you haven’t read them five or six times, makes for fascinating viewing. But there’s just something unsettling about this film, which points to sequels that will further Mr. Pullman’s book series. Here’s how the series is perceived by most in the church community: The themes of these books concern reason, truth, self-awareness, and free will. Those are important, but only until they become idols replacing God’s authority. (I suspect that’s where the debate begins.) In the series, the Authority is the enemy, a mythological and false God. And in the second and third books, with the aid of demons and witches, Lyra is determined to defeat the Magisterium, and God is killed in the last book. Many in the secular community and some in the church, those who rallied around Harry Potter because of the hypnotic hold that series had on adolescent readers, may find themselves defending Mr. Pullman’s trilogy for the same reason – they like the idea that kids are reading, even if the characters the kids relate to are defiant of authority. Those who seldom frequent church services or even know which room hides their family Bible may not be able to grasp our hesitance to be supportive of an atheist with an agenda. Because I’ve been asked about this production more than any other release this year, allow me to offer these humble thoughts concerning the overall frustration Christians have with the film’s themes. As I grow closer to God through Christ I find myself awed by His love for us. This love became profound to me as I read about the night Christ served the last supper to his disciples. Jesus knew what lay before Him. It wasn’t just physical torment, or even the sins of the world that overwhelmed Jesus as He later prayed in the garden. It was the realization that for the first and only time in eternity, the Son would be separated from the Father. The pain God felt is symbolized in Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. As the audience is looking down on Golgotha, the three crosses prominent, hangers-on still in attendance, the camera’s bird’s-eye view takes in the tableau, briefly becoming distorted, as if looking through water. Suddenly that optical illusion converts into a single teardrop falling to earth, signifying God’s anguish. Because our Savior was willing and able to overcome this humanly unfathomable emotion and make that crucial sacrifice, we never have to go through such anguish. We never have to be separated from the Father. This is a love I’m not sure we will completely comprehend until the day we stand before Him. As I seek to draw closer to God, I sense His compassion. Along my spiritual walk I become more aware that God deserves our passion and demands our reverence. So to knowingly support one who wants to diminish God and religious authority seems counterproductive to that destiny. And it saddens Believers who truly care about the souls of those around us when artistry is defended at the expense of spiritless content. To me, the saddest thing is that there will be those who smirk while reading this or those who pat me on the back but fail to connect with the message. If I’m wrong, what do I lose? Isn’t living a life based on the teachings of Christ worthwhile? But if they are wrong, won’t they regret their rebellion? Unbelievers think we Christians just want to be right. The truth is, we’re just afraid they’ll discover too late that they’re wrong.
Distributor:
Ellen Page, Michael Cera, Jennifer Garner, Jason Bateman, Allison Janney, J. K. Simmons. Comedy/drama. Written by Diablo Cody. Directed by Jason Reitman. Opens in limited release 12/5/07
FILM SYNOPSIS: A smart teen becomes pregnant after her first sexual encounter and decides to have the baby, giving it up to an adoptive “perfect” couple. PREVIEW REVIEW: Starting out with the same cynical attitude we’ve seen in a jillion teen angst movies, intermingled with lots of biting humor, the film soon reveals a perceptive look at today’s high school crowd, with the lead rather blasé about her world until grownup situations take charge of her emotions. As soon as Juno discovers she’s pregnant, her first notion is to have an abortion (tells you where the society is at, doesn’t it?), but without the filmmakers attempting a flagrant pro-life statement, the sanctity of unborn life quickly becomes apparent. Ellen Page comes across as a young Janeane Garofalo, sharp tongued and quick witted, but the actress, who last year starred in Hard Candy, as a Lolita type who traps a pedophile in his own home and ruins his life, here allows a vulnerability to shine through her New Millennium toughness. Ms. Page gives a three-dimensional performance as a teenager smarter than her peers in many ways, yet still unaware of the complexities of adulthood. Juno is funny, moving, and completely engaging. That said, it does contain some objectionable material now common in theatrical releases. Please read the content (the reason for the rating). If you do not wish to support a film with this content, try my suggested DVD Alternative: March of the Penguins. In the Antarctic, every March, the quest begins for penguins to find the perfect mate and start a family. This courtship begins with a long journey – a trek that will take hundreds of the tuxedo-suited birds across seventy miles of frozen tundra to a location where the courtship will begin. It’s rated G and though it depicts harsh life and death struggles, it does so in a family-friendly way. It’s full of impressive, almost unworldly locations and amazing cinematography, and most importantly, it sends a powerful message concerning the importance of life. Nature is telling us about the sanctity of life. In a time when audiences are subjected to pro messages concerning euthanasia (Million Dollar Baby, The Sea Inside), the need for abortion (Vera Drake), and desensitizing images of violence toward our fellow man (most films), here is a film that reveals creatures in the wild sacrificing all in order to preserve life. This may sound like a strange alternative, but it is a film that shows the sanctity of life.
Distributor:
Freddie Highmore, Keri Russell, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Terrence Howard, Robin Williams. Music-driven Drama. Written by Nick Castle and James V. Hart. Directed by Kirsten Sheridan.
FILM SYNOPSIS: A charismatic young Irish guitarist (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) and a sheltered young cellist (Keri Russell) have a chance encounter one magical night above New York’s Washington Square, but are soon torn apart, leaving in their wake an infant, orphaned by circumstance. Years later, performing on the streets of New York and cared for by a mysterious stranger (Robin Williams) who gives him the name August Rush, the child (Freddie Highmore) uses his remarkable musical talent to seek the parents from whom he was separated at birth.
PREVIEW REVIEW: Ever see An Affair To Remember with Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr? Or Sleepless in Seattle with Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks? This new release has much in common with those two classics. Mainly, you have to set aside how life and love reality work. But if you are able to suspend reality, you are a romantic, one who believes that justice and love will triumph. If you are one of those folks, and despite the fact that I’m a film critic and therefore must be a cynic, I am one of you, because I found August Rush to be one of the best films of the year. Interestingly, Keri Russell, who plays the female lead, also starred in Waitress, my other frontrunner for best film of this year. Not only are these two films pro-life themed, but they ultimately celebrate life. Ms. Russell does a lot to make them believable and interesting. A fine actress, she’s equally famous for her curly golden locks. She also possesses soul-revealing eyes, which just so happen to be lovely. (Yeah, I got a little crush.) The elements of technology and artistry come together, as if magically, in this production. Even Robin Williams, who has disappointed with most of his recent film choices, gives the film’s main bad guy dimension as a Fagin-like hustler who uses kids to score a living. And certainly music is a main component of the film’s success. We are reminded by both the male lead and the film’s villain that we are all connected by music. The dialogue also manages to amuse and stimulate thought. When the journeying boy is asked what he’d like to be most, he answers with a profound, “Found.” Most importantly, the one responsible for the casting of Freddie Highmore as August deserves pats on the back, awards, whatever. We are indebted to that person, for young Highmore lights up the screen with a role that could have been limited by blandness, as has happened in many a film concerning Oliver Twist-like protagonists. This kid is a fine actor, able to portray emotion of every kind, and possesses perhaps the most engaging smile I’ve seen in a long time. When this kid smiles, you feel joyous. To top it off, the film contains spiritual themes, including the need for faith, scenes taking place in a church, church folk singing a song about not giving up, and someone saying that music is God’s reminder that we are all connected. The boy, who interprets the sounds of life as music, asks, “Only some of us can hear it?” The response: “Only some of us are listening.” The delivery of those two lines gives them a profundity. The lad is rescued at one point by members of a church. The minister asks a concerned little girl if she’s prayed for August, to which she responds positively. The minister himself is portrayed as a good guy, not poisonously pious or fundamentally hypocritical, but real, a man involved in doing God’s work. And the final shot (no, I’m not giving anything away other than the film has a happy ending), the boy looks up to Heaven as if saying thank you. I get teary just thinking about it. It’s a wonderful film, because like most of the great films, from It’s A Wonderful Life to Casablanca, August Rush makes you feel hopeful and good. I’ve seen so many Oscar contenders this year, but most of them deal with the dark nature of man. This one looks to those things that unite us – the music around us, the hope of love, and the adventure of life. I don’t know about you, but I’m going to see August Rush again.
Distributor:
Amy Adams, Patrick Dempsey, James Marsden, Timothy Spall, Susan Sarandon. Comedy/musical. Original songs from Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz (Pocahontas, Hunchback of Notre Dame). Written by Bill Kelly (Blast from the Past). Directed by Kevin Lima (Tarzan, Eloise At Christmastime).
FILM SYNOPSIS: The film follows Princess Giselle (Amy Adams) as she is banished by the evil queen (Susan Sarandon) from her magical, musical, animated land and finds herself in the gritty reality of the streets of modern-day Manhattan. Shocked by this strange new environment that doesn’t operate on a “happily ever after” basis, Giselle is now adrift in a chaotic world badly in need of enchantment. But when Giselle begins to fall in love with a charmingly flawed divorce lawyer who has come to her aid, she begins to wonder if a storybook view of romance can survive in the real world. PREVIEW REVIEW: There’s nothing really wrong with this production other than sometimes it struggles to be charming. Everyone does his or her job with a robust effort to bring family-friendly storytelling to the holiday season. Somehow, though, the Disney magic is missing. I’ll see The Little Mermaid again. And Beauty and the Beast. Maybe even The Hunchback of Notre Dame. But I have no desire to re-see this one. Mermaid had me with the witty and memorable Under the Sea, as did Hunchback with the spiritually enlightening God Help the Outcasts and the whimsical Be Our Guest in Beauty and the Beast. With the exception of the theme-revealing, mood-setting number True Love’s Kiss, the music here is like cotton candy: bright and fluffy, but with no lasting substance. My personal disenchantment shouldn’t be misconstrued as a denouncement of the picture, and despite my picayune letdown, I grant that it is one where both kids and their older companions can find engaging themes or laugh-out-loud antics. And if you consider yourself a Disney trivia buff, you’ll find yourself amid a treasure trove, as the film is loaded with Where’s Waldo-isms (pardon, Hidden Mickey-iconics), including a glass slipper and poisoned apples and recognizable names that pop up with amusing frequency. Disney’s past glories are constantly being saluted with cameos and tips-of-the-hat, such as the appearances of Jodi Benson, the voice of The Little Mermaid, appearing as Robert’s assistant, Sam, Paige O’Hara – Belle of Beauty and the Beast – portraying an actress on a soap opera, and clever moments such as the scene where Giselle encounters a very short, very angry business man, whom she mistakenly calls Grumpy. It just made me long for the days of Mary Poppins, 101 Dalmations (the original) and Beauty and the Beast. In fact, I may borrow my nieces and nephews just so I can watch those Disney treasures again!
FILM SYNOPSIS: The film follows Princess Giselle (Amy Adams) as she is banished by the evil queen (Susan Sarandon) from her magical, musical, animated land and finds herself in the gritty reality of the streets of modern-day Manhattan. Shocked by this strange new environment that doesn’t operate on a “happily ever after” basis, Giselle is now adrift in a chaotic world badly in need of enchantment. But when Giselle begins to fall in love with a charmingly flawed divorce lawyer who has come to her aid, she begins to wonder if a storybook view of romance can survive in the real world. PREVIEW REVIEW: There’s nothing really wrong with this production other than sometimes it struggles to be charming. Everyone does his or her job with a robust effort to bring family-friendly storytelling to the holiday season. Somehow, though, the Disney magic is missing. I’ll see The Little Mermaid again. And Beauty and the Beast. Maybe even The Hunchback of Notre Dame. But I have no desire to re-see this one. Mermaid had me with the witty and memorable Under the Sea, as did Hunchback with the spiritually enlightening God Help the Outcasts and the whimsical Be Our Guest in Beauty and the Beast. With the exception of the theme-revealing, mood-setting number True Love’s Kiss, the music here is like cotton candy: bright and fluffy, but with no lasting substance. My personal disenchantment shouldn’t be misconstrued as a denouncement of the picture, and despite my picayune letdown, I grant that it is one where both kids and their older companions can find engaging themes or laugh-out-loud antics. And if you consider yourself a Disney trivia buff, you’ll find yourself amid a treasure trove, as the film is loaded with Where’s Waldo-isms (pardon, Hidden Mickey-iconics), including a glass slipper and poisoned apples and recognizable names that pop up with amusing frequency. Disney’s past glories are constantly being saluted with cameos and tips-of-the-hat, such as the appearances of Jodi Benson, the voice of The Little Mermaid, appearing as Robert’s assistant, Sam, Paige O’Hara – Belle of Beauty and the Beast – portraying an actress on a soap opera, and clever moments such as the scene where Giselle encounters a very short, very angry business man, whom she mistakenly calls Grumpy. It just made me long for the days of Mary Poppins, 101 Dalmations (the original) and Beauty and the Beast. In fact, I may borrow my nieces and nephews just so I can watch those Disney treasures again!
Distributor:
Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, John Malkovich, Robin Wright Penn, Brendan Gleeson, Crispin Glover, Alison Lohman, Angelina Jolie. Written by Neil Gaiman & Roger Avary. Directed by Robert Zemeckis.
FILM SYNOPSIS: Robert Zemeckis offers a 14-year-old-boy’s alluring vision of the legendary saga of the mighty warrior Beowulf, who battles the demon Grendel and incurs the hellish wrath of the beast’s ruthlessly seductive mother. PREVIEW REVIEW: To look at, this rendition is awesome, if you’ll allow me the use that now corrupted word. Much of this awesomeness is due to the 3D trickery (do not see this film without the 3D effect). As with The Polar Express, a process known as “performance capture” has been used to excite our senses. It’s not live action, it’s not animation, it’s a hybrid visual technique done because, well, because they can. Like a camera in a cell phone or an ipod capable of recording every song known to ASCAP – there’s really no legitimate reason for performance capture, but they can do it. It’s like, cool. The look is the cinema’s equivalent to the comic book. The film has been sexed up, what with a seemingly nude Angelina Jolie prancing around as a fetching demon, complete with stiletto heels. And the special effects-driven dragon will entertain those who live for CG magic. But will this updated fable satisfy those who actually read the tome while in high school? Well, literary appreciators are not the intended audience. The story is condensed and refocused, but it does deal with the sins of pride and giving in to temptation. Somewhat. The legendary poem has as much to do with man’s destiny and his foibles as with his conquests. But here man’s nature takes a backseat to the action and special effects. What will no doubt draw repeat business is the hypnotic visual conception. It is a production where backgrounds become potent characters, the look of the film doing as much to propel the story as the dialogue or performances. Actually, more.
Distributor:
Steve Carell, Juliette Binoche, Dane Cook, Emily Blunt. Comedy/romance. Written by Pierce Gardner, Peter Hedges. Directed by Peter Hedges.
FILM SYNOPSIS: An advice columnist/widower takes his three daughters to Rhode Island for a family reunion. There, at a bookstore, he meets and falls for a lady. She also likes him, but there’s a problem. When he gets back to the family, she shows up – with his brother. Soon, Dan realizes he isn’t taking his own advice. PREVIEW REVIEW: Remember when comedies were charming, funny and clean? Wow, you must be old! Well, this is one of those kickbacks to the good old days. Dan In Real Life is sublimely charming, lightheartedly funny and explicitly clean. I don’t want to overbuild this thing, but I left the theater feeling good. When’s the last time moviegoers got to do that? Too often this year, I’ve left a screening feeling depressed, guilty, horrified or grungy. The comedies of this year, for the most part, have relied on the I-can’t-believe-I-just-saw-that factor. You know, gross-out humor. I suspect a generation has come to believe that’s where all humor stems from. Satire and wit, for many moviegoers, are unexplored regions. Not that this is the next His Girl Friday (a comedy classic), but it’s a sweet, relaxing, entertaining movie. There’s depth, not a cavern of depth, but just enough profundity to give the humor dimension. There’s grownup romance, just enough to give us singles hope. And despite the teen angst of the lead’s two girls, they emerge as fully dimensional, real people. I got a kick out of the 13-year-old daughter – she’s so dramatic. Full of passion, she thinks she’s discovered the greatest love since Romeo pursued Juliet. This, as you can imagine, unnerves her father. Her Romeo has hitchhiked all the way to the family reunion in order to see his Juliet. But the lead will have none of that. The boy is soon on his way home. As the anguished daughter runs after the car with all the unbridled drama only a adolescent experiencing first love can muster, she hysterically cries out to her dad, “You murderer of love!” I nearly fell out of my chair. There are several positive messages in the film and father and daughters grow closer by film’s end. Dan’s parents and siblings are both supportive and loving, and there’s an underlining morality to the film. When the brother brings his new love home to meet the folks, for instance, the parents make sure they have separate rooms, indicating there will be no hanky panky going on under this roof. It’s a thoughtful message in an era when sex between unweds is the norm in movies. As good as the writing and the supporting cast are, the film belongs to Mr. Carell. The star of The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Evan Almighty is developing into a strong screen presence. He proved in Bruce Almighty
Distributor:
Josh Hartnett, Melissa George, Danny Huston, Ben Foster. Thriller. Written by Steve Niles and Stuart Beattie and Brian Nelson. Directed by David Slade.
FILM SYNOPSIS: For 30 days every winter, the isolated town of Barrow, Alaska is plunged into a state of complete darkness. It's a bitter time when most of the inhabitants head south. This winter, a mysterious group of strangers appear: bloodthirsty vampires, ready to take advantage of the uninterrupted darkness to feed on the remaining town residents. Barrow's Sheriff Eben (Josh Hartnett), his wife Stella (Melissa George), and an ever-shrinking group of survivors must do anything they can to last until daylight. PREVIEW REVIEW: A cross between vampire and an evolved zombie, these creatures are a nasty bunch, but dumber than a bagful of hammers. For example, there’s the snow; if you’ve ever lived around snow, you understand that footprints are easily detected in the snow. Yet, the blood-drinkers can’t seem to follow their prey despite the fact that there’s a foot of snow wherever you walk! Inconsistencies bug me. Stupid writing bugs me. A filmmaker’s contempt for his audience bugs me. Graphic torture and brutality in place of eeriness in horror movies bugs me. This film bugs me. When Bela Lugosi’s Dracula was made in 1931, it was scary to filmgoers because they hadn’t seen such imagery. It’s no longer as frightening, though still atmospheric and eerie, a testament to the fact that we’ve become somewhat desensitized to things that spook us in the movies and, like junkies, we need more gruesomeness to satisfy our spine-tingler factor. The 1930s horror movies were in actuality morality plays, good vs. evil tales. In them evil was eventually defeated by good. What’s more, the makers of these movies were prevented from showing contempt for God. Oh, how Hollywood’s ghouls changed. In Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 Bram Stoker’s Dracula, his monster was an omnipresent creature who contemptuously burned a crucifix with a stare, rather than turning away from the significance of the cross – something the vampire had done ever since Bela Lugosi first put on a set of fangs. This new spin changed the entire theme of the Dracula legend. No longer was God the conqueror of the devil; now man alone was in control of his fate. Before you remind me that the Count was only a work of fiction, I want to point out that it’s not the movies that disturb me so much as the messages contained in those movies. Coppola’s Dracula is humanism in its most monstrous form. It denies the supremacy of God and perhaps His existence all together. So does this recent vampire flick. Over the decades horror masters have continued to find a spin for their scary creations. The 1950s were mostly goofy with prehistoric lizards breathing fire and trampling over Tokyo; the ‘60s gave us Britain’s candy apple blood fests from Hammer Films; and the ‘70s showed promise with Jaws, Night of the Living Dead and… All the President’s Men. (Hey, if that guy wasn’t a vampire, I’ll eat wolfbane.) But audiences were beginning to find graphic depictions of the destruction of the human body to be more acceptable and somehow more satisfying. In the ‘70s and ‘80s, horror films became little more than gruesome showcases for studio special effects departments. Good vs. evil themes were replaced with personifications of evil. Malevolent and apparently indestructible ghouls such as Nightmare on Elm Street’s Freddie Kruger, Halloween’s Michael Myers and Friday the 13th’s Jason returned sequel after sequel to kill as many randied teenagers as possible in 96 minutes. But now the murderers have taken on a decidedly more torturous zeal. Certainly, there have been exceptions to that rule. With 1999’s Sixth Sense, director M. Night Shyamalan returned to suspenseful Hitchcockian elements in order to unnerve the audience. Psychological tension was used in that film rather than pelting viewers with sadistic brutality. The strength of Shyamalan’s chiller lay in what is suggested rather than seen. Besides being an arm-grabbing suspenseful thriller, Shyamalan’s other great fright flick Signs, contained a subtext about a man losing, then regaining his faith. That film also had an intriguing take concerning coincidence in our daily lives. It asked questions such as, “Are the details of life governed merely by happenstance, or are they a part of a great plan? Do things happen by chance or do they purposely serve to develop our nature?” Signs was the thinking man’s horror film. Thinking man’s films are limited in any genre. And that term could in no way be applied to 30 Days of Night. It’s spooky and action-filled, but it’s also gruesome, dumb and dreary. Gory and full of blood and f-words, it also shows disdain for God. In one scene, the head demon says there is no God. And that is the one and only mention of the Creator in the entire film. No one even wears a cross. You’d think somebody would be praying, considering their entire town’s populace is being eaten alive by children of the night. It’s as if the filmmaker goes out of his way to exorcise God from our consciousness. And that is the scariest element for me concerning today’s horror genre. It’s horrifying what many filmmakers want to believe in and what they don’t. Like all living things, the spirit of man needs to be nourished. I couldn’t say it any better than the following quote from the film I’ve Heard the Mermaids Singing. You might keep it in mind when attending any new release, let alone horror films. “Your head is like a gas tank. You have to be really careful about what you put in it, because it might just affect the whole system.”
Distributor:
Alexander Ludwig, Ian McShane, Gregory Smith. Sci/Fi action adventure. Written by John Hodge. Directed by David L. Cunningham.
FILM SYNOPSIS: This parable concerns a teenage boy who discovers he is the last of a group of immortals who must battle the forces of darkness. Going back and forth in time, our hero discovers clues, some dating back to biblical times that will lead to a climatic confrontation. PREVIEW REVIEW: My first reaction was that this good vs. evil action adventure was a nightmarish muddled mess: too scary and complex for little ones, too simplistic and boring for adults. But on further reflection, the allegorical aspects, along with having a teenager as its main protagonist, may appeal to adolescent males. The folks at Walden Media (The Chronicles of Narnia, Because of Winn Dixie, I Am David) have a track record that attests to the fact that story and a significant message should still be the essential special effects when making a fantasy. I suspect that the producers here are betting on the intended audience having read the book series, much like the Potter people did before they went to see those movies. The extra information the books would no doubt supply may give a deeper meaning to the goings-on in the movie. Without that info, however, many of us find it difficult figuring out the film’s symbolism. The Seeker gains special abilities as he finds each of the six hidden magical mysterious buttons needed to save the world from dark forces. The Rider is a combo of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse bent on destroying the Seeker, then our world. So why doesn’t he destroy the kid before he gets all the powers? Both our hero and the villain have their helpers. While the rest of us fill our lives with the business of living, these devils and angels look diligently for these prizes that will conquer evil and bring peace on earth. The young hero has just turned fourteen, a difficult age, which the film points out –several times. As I recall, though it’s been 100 years, a 14-year-old boy is going through many changes. He discovers that he has some powers, but also discovers that 14-year-old girls have more powers. This may be the real revelation in this boy-bent actioneer. Warner Bros. gave 14-year-old females Nancy Drew a few months ago, a movie that promoted a self-thinking young lady as a positive role model for preteens and up. Walden Media has now given boys of the same age the equivalent male counterpart. The film contains lessons, family is lifted up, as is church-going and self-sacrifice, and it is a clean movie, devoid of crudity and objectionable language. The pacing is stilted and slow in the beginning, but as the action gears up, it becomes more involving. It’s far from the quality of the Narnia film, but the intended audience may find it somewhat satisfying.
Distributor:
George Clooney, Tom Wilkinson, Tilda Swinton, Sydney Pollack. Drama/thriller. Written & directed by Tony Gilroy.
FILM SYNOPSIS: Michael Clayton (George Clooney) is an in-house “fixer” at one of the largest corporate law firms in New York. A former criminal prosecutor, Clayton takes care of Kenner, Bach & Ledeen’s dirtiest work at the behest of the firm’s co-founder Marty Bach (Sydney Pollack). Though burned out and hardly content with his job as a fixer, his divorce, a failed business venture and mounting debt have left Clayton inextricably tied to the firm. At U/North, meanwhile, the career of litigator Karen Crowder (Tilda Swinton) rests on the multi-billion dollar settlement of a class action suit that Clayton’s firm is leading to a seemingly successful conclusion. But when Kenner Bach’s brilliant and guilt-ridden attorney Arthur Edens (Tom Wilkinson) sabotages the U/North case, Clayton faces the biggest challenge of his career and his life. PREVIEW REVIEW: With its insightful, nonlinear script coupled with trenchant dialogue, engaging directing and masterful performing, Michael Clayton is a masterpiece. That is said from an appreciation of the film’s artistic and technical merits. Alas, my appreciation is dampened by the film’s often abusive language. Don’t worry, for once I won’t take up your time with my frustration with the profane use of God’s name, Christ’s name and the ever present F-word, which dominates the palate of nearly every Hollywood artiste. Suffice it to say, the script is peppered with obscenity and profanity. What a shame, because I thoroughly enjoyed the other elements of this film. The lead is drifting, finding no solace in his work or life, then suddenly finds himself head on with a dilemma whereby he can find a sort of redemption. Mr. Clooney has never been better. Though I’m often frustrated with his political bent and the fact that he manages to follow God’s name with a curse in nearly all of his films, he is truly a movie star. A throwback to old Hollywood, George Clooney reminds me of Burt Lancaster in that he has rugged good looks, a strong persona, a moving talent and a regard for social issues. What’s more, I hear he’s a nice guy. And he is in fine form here. But doggone it, it’s hard to get past that constant misuse of God’s name. I know that saying, “Pray for George Clooney” sounds pious to some and corny to others, but to me he represents all of those in Tinseltown who have been blessed with looks, talent and success, yet seem to disregard a need for Christ’s salvation. I don’t want to think of him or Britney Spears or Barbra Streisand or anyone else who has entered our consciousness via the entertainment mediums having to face eternity without our Lord’s redemption. Again, may this not sound sanctimonious, but perhaps when we see their flagrant disregard for spiritual matters, we should be reminded of those in our daily life who also need spiritual discovery. And then offer up a prayer of gratitude that we have been forgiven for our own misdeeds.
Distributor:
Morgan Freeman, Greg Kinnear, Selma Blair, Radha Mitchell, Alexa Davalos. Drama. Written by Allison Burnett, Charles Baxter. Directed by Robert Benton.
FILM SYNOPSIS: From venerable, multiple Academy Award winning director Robert Benton (Kramer Vs. Kramer, Places in the Heart), comes a kaleidoscopic ode to life and love. In a coffee shop in a tight-knit Oregon community, local professor Harry Stevenson (Academy Award winner Morgan Freeman) witnesses love and attraction whipping up mischief among the town’s residents. From the unlucky-in-love, die-hard romantic coffee shop owner, Bradley (Academy Award nominee Greg Kinnear), who has a serial habit of looking for love in all the wrong places, including with his current wife Kathryn (Selma Blair) who leaves him for a lesbian lover; to the edgy real estate agent Diana (Radha Mitchell), who is caught up in an affair with a married man (Billy Burke) with whom she shares an ineffable connection; to the beautiful young newcomer, Chloe (Alexa Davalos), who defies fate in romancing the troubled Oscar (Toby Hemmingway); to Harry himself, whose adoring wife (Jane Alexander) is looking to break through his walls of grief after the wrenching loss of a beloved son, they all intertwine into one story in which no one can escape being bent, broken, befuddled and ultimately redeemed by love’s inescapable spell. PREVIEW REVIEW: With its erudite script, masterful directorial detail, and outstanding cast headed by the superb Morgan Freeman, Feast of Love is a potent, hard-hitting tale of love, betrayal and the resilience of the heart. Alas, the “grownup” themes of lesbianism and adultery are handled with even less shyness than the many actors who depict various sexual activities as if they were making an adult video. Indeed, most everybody is seen without clothes and enacting sex in explicit detail. I was moved by characters dealing with betrayal and the loss of love, as people discover the need for forgiveness, but the abundant sexual activity and the profane language drenched the lessons with a flood of decadent hedonism. Simply put, it is excessive. And once again the new morality is reinforced with depictions of people going to bed with each other on the first date, marriage vows broken with all the guilt of one who constantly runs red lights, and spiritual “insights” often falling outside biblical teaching.
Distributor:
Documentary from ThinkFilm. Opened 9/7/07 with a wider release scheduled.
FILM SYNOPSIS: The incisive documentary features the accounts of the surviving members of the Apollo teams who walked on the moon. PREVIEW REVIEW: I was teenager, working a summer job as a performer at an amusement park, on July 20th, 1969, the day the first man walked on the moon. The management allowed me to make the announcement to the folks at the park’s Opera House that the Apollo team had landed. What a roar of applause. This was really something. I mention this personal experience because it demonstrates how we were all united by NASA’s endeavor. It was one of those defining moments when all of America stood together and was proud of being American. This documentary gives a fresh perspective of those achievements, allowing for the spiritual implications that affected the men on those explorations. At one point, we even hear Charles Duke from the Apollo 9 mission give his testimony. I couldn’t believe my ears; a man was declaring his faith in Jesus Christ and there were no snickers from audience members. Indeed, my fellow moviegoers were moved, realizing that there is something far bigger than man, or even space itself. One of the best film-going experiences of the year, In the Shadow of the Moon engages, uplifts and unites.
Distributor:
The Rock, Kyra Sedgwick. Comedy.
FILM SYNOPSIS: The Game Plan tells the story of rugged superstar quarterback Joe Kingman (the Rock), whose Boston-based team is chasing a championship. A ‘serial bachelor,’ Kingman is living the ultimate fantasy: he’s rich, famous and the life of the party. But this dream is suddenly sacked for a loss when he discovers the 7-year-old daughter (newcomer Madison Pettis) he never knew he had – the product of a last fling before parting years ago with his young wife. Now, during the most important time in his career, he must figure out how to juggle his parties, practices and dates with the newfound ballet classes, bedtime stories and dolls that come with his daughter. PREVIEW REVIEW: Okay, when it comes to acting, Dwayne “the Rock” Johnson is no Van Johnson. Or Don Johnson. Or Arte Johnson. Still, he has a screen presence. And following Vin (
Distributor:
Kevin Kline, Cesar Ramos, Paulina Gaitan, Alicja Bachleda. Crime drama. Written by Jose Rivera. Directed by Marco Kreupaintner.
FILM SYNOPSIS: Adriana (Paulina Gaitan) is a 13-year-old girl from Mexico City whose kidnapping by sex traffickers sets in motion a desperate mission by her 17-year-old brother, Jorge (Cesar Ramos), to save her. Trapped and terrified by an underground network of international thugs who earn millions exploiting their human cargo, Adriana’s only friend and protector throughout her ordeal is Veronica (Alicja Bachleda), a young Polish woman tricked into the trade by the same criminal gang. As Jorge dodges immigration officers to track the girls’ abductors, he meets Ray (Kevin Kline), a Texas cop whose own family loss to sex trafficking leads him to become an ally in the boy’s quest. PREVIEW REVIEW: Recently we have learned that a famous football player who made millions of dollars at his chosen profession, who wanted for nothing, still wanted to make more – at the expense of animals. The monstrous training and the torture of dogs for the purpose of a gambling sport meant nothing to the associates of Michael Vick. Or, evidently, Michael Vick himself. There are people bent on harming other living things to satisfy something deep inside them. Even worse are the men and women who traffic in human beings in order to satisfy a deviance that has corrupted their souls. Is it just the acquisition of money that motivates them? Can you really destroy another person’s life merely to gain wealth? Or is there some other deep-seated objective behind controlling another person’s destiny? Though both Cesar Ramos and Kevin Kline are compelling in their roles, as are Paulina Gaitan and Alicja Bachleda, and while I congratulate the filmmakers for addressing this subject without the inclusion of titillation or exploitation, still the production might have been more effective without the typical Hollywood treatment, with the good guys eventually besting the bad guys. In real life, that’s not happening. The bad guys are still profiting from this illicit activity and the good guys seem to be looking the other way. What would have haunted our dreams would have been the image of 13-year-old Adriana seen led away, never to return. For, except for a few lucky ones, that is the fate of many sucked up by this “industry.” Perhaps that horrifying image would have galvanized us into action. Instead, everyone gets to go home as if the evil had been defeated. Of course, in this film it’s George Bush, his administration and the rest of us gringos who are doing all the looking in the other direction. Once again, America is censured by a filmmaker for not policing the entire world, while other nations go unscathed. The resentment for the United States by other countries is beginning to bug me. It’s always portrayed that those nations have just a bit more soul than we do. Yet, most of the human trafficking – even that which exists in our country – is being organized by foreigners, illegals who go undetected. Are Americans uncaring about human slavery in the world? Some are. Some are too busy trying to care for their own. And some don’t know what to do. But I suspect that the majority of America’s citizens despise the concept of human trafficking. We also detest dog fighting, bull fighting and the clubbing to death of baby seals. But until the governors of foreigners do their job, there’s not much ours can do. There are those who don’t want us to remove Hitler-like dictators who govern the way things are run in plighted countries, but these same folks want us to feed the hungry of the world and police bad doers such as slavers and drug pushers who reside in other nations. Though this desire to end such indignities is well meant, it has become clear that such attempts are merely treating the symptoms, not the actual ailment. We’ve been feeding the world for years, yet it remains hungry. And every so often, the importers of narcotics are seized with record loads. Yet, corruption in other countries assures that industry a luxurious survival. The truth is, until the leaders of other nations see the evil in their indifference and our legal system returns to protecting victims more so than criminals, no amount of American enforcement will be effective. Well, that’s about as controversial as anything I’ve written in a review. I expect to get clobbered for it. But I just can’t believe that our nation alone is guilty for all the adversity around the world. And I find the detractors of the U.S. more concerned with the downfall of America than the building up of other lands. They seem to justify the ignorance of others, as if conscience was regulated by culture or finances. The film has many powerful moments, ones that hit you in the gut. When you see one of these slavers punch a woman in the face, or an escaping girl hit by a car, or a young woman raped, or a 13-year-old girl crying, wanting to go home to her mom, or a young boy held down while a man injects him with heroine in order to control him, you’ll wish you were anywhere but at that theater. That said, if these enactments cause a motivating concern, then perhaps we should see this film. The visuals of these brutalizations drive home the fact that such an institution still exists. It thrives. In the film we see people bidding to buy a young girl on the Internet. From what I understand, this is actually possible, that such transactions actually occur via the information superhighway. My God.
Distributor:
Brad Pitt, Mary-Louise Parker, Brooklynn Proulx, Dustin Bollinger, Casey Affleck, Sam Rockwell, Jeremy Renner, Sam Shepard. Western. Written & directed by Andrew Dominik.
FILM SYNOPSIS: A take on the life of outlaw Jesse James and…well, I guess the title pretty much says it all. PREVIEW REVIEW: This slow-paced and poignant character study gives viewers a three-dimensional look at what it must be like to ride with death, which is what outlaws did when they followed the likes of Jesse James. The desperate desperado had caught the imagination of many in his day due to the penny dreadfulls (booklets surrounding his escapades – usually made up) who thought of him as a sort of Robin Hood, a man going up against corruption. Indeed, there are writings that maintain the James brothers turned to a life of crime because of injustice done to their family. In this adaptation, that view is mainly ignored. Here he is portrayed (incisively by Brad Pitt in one of his best roles) as a manic depressive who could laugh along with his men one minute, then turn violent toward them the next. Jesse is presented as mentally unstable, and his men either got killed due to his leadership or betrayed him for money and fame. The look is authentic; the script, though too long due to unnecessary subplots, is nonetheless revealing, and the performances are riveting. And director Andrew Dominik makes use of an actor’s greatest tools – his eyes. Instinctively, the performers expose volumes of inner emotions with a few mere expressions. In one scene, Jesse, who was the son of a minister, is seen reading the Bible. But Jesse chose a road of rebellion and revolt, which led to a spiritual and physical death. Church, prayer and the Bible are displayed, showing us a time when men were brought up on such reverential tools. Sadly, these men didn’t adhere to scriptural teaching. While I appreciate the grandeur of the production and the artistry displayed, still I left depressed. I had just spent 2 hours and 40 minutes with a story that, while insightful and even metaphorical, did nothing to feed my soul. After sitting through its graphic depiction of the true nature of criminals, I now needed something to raise my spiritual spirits. Interesting fact: Neither Jesse nor any of his gang is heard profaning God’s name in this production. Alas, a supporting player is heard in the final act using God’s name followed by a curse three times. I can handle rough language or brutal violence when it is done to expose the inner character or promote the film’s theme, but when a “GD” is uttered in a movie, for me it says the actor has little regard for the Third Commandment. He is forthrightly stating, “I don’t believe in God and I don’t care if you do.” I feel sad for him, because one day he will care. DVD alternative: Jesse James. Though it is steeped more in Hollywood glamour than historical fact, the 1939 version (it’s in color) with Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda and John Carradine, is genuine western fun. That said, this newer version doesn’t try to exempt the James boys from their outlaw ways, where the older film furthers the myth that they were just put-upon and misguided. The earlier version doesn’t have the excessive violence or offensive language, but it also prefers legend over fact.
Distributor:
Evan Rachel Wood, Jim Sturgess, Joe Anderson. Musical. Written by Dick Clement & Ian La Frenais. Directed by Julie Taymor.
FILM SYNOPSIS: A whimsical musical/love story set against the backdrop of the turbulent anti-war protests of the 1960s, the film moves from the dockyards of Liverpool to the creative psychedelia of Greenwich Village, from the riot-torn streets of Detroit to the killing fields of Vietnam. The star-crossed lovers, Jude (Jim Sturgess) and Lucy (Evan Rachel Wood), along with a small group of friends and musicians, are swept up into the emerging anti-war and counterculture movements, with “Dr. Robert” (Bono) and “Mr. Kite” (Eddie Izzard) as their guides. Tumultuous forces outside their control ultimately tear the young lovers apart, forcing Jude and Lucy – against all odds – to find their own way back to each other. PREVIEW REVIEW: It’s a psychedelic salute to the hippy-dippy, turn-on, tune-out ‘60s generation whose Mecca was Haight-Ashbury and mantra was “Hell no, we won’t go.” Driven by the Beatles songbook (it seems like the actors sing every song the Fab Four ever conceived), the film has a stylish look and sincere performances, but director Julie Taymor (Frida, Titus, and the Broadway smash hit musical The Lion King) and writers Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais (The Commitments) glorify the cartoonish behavior of that time with little regard for its disastrous naiveté. But I won’t write-off the filmmakers’ ability. They have a point of view and express it with earnestness. In the press notes, director Taymor says, “You constantly have to revisit these stories in order to reflect upon your present and really think, ‘What is it that’s different now?’ That era is explicitly important to our time now.” True. If we ignore the past, we are doomed to relive it. But comparing the battling in Viet Nam with our situation in Iraq may be misguided. As usual filmmakers only present one perspective, a dangerous prerogative when dealing with world issues. Sometimes evil must be faced and fought, not placated. And having lived through that time, I’m just not sure all the radical discourse of that era was truthfully done with pure motives. The revolution wasn’t just against man’s authority, but God’s, as well. It was a troubling age as the youth of America found little satisfaction in the complicity of its elders and sought profundity anywhere but at the feet of their folks. Added to a dawning awareness of unequal rights and the disillusionment with political authority, the 1960s were dominated by an unpopular war. Alas, whatever righteousness the youth movement found in fighting injustice became sickened by a cancerous rebellion for rebellion’s sake. Ultimately, the peace/love generation proved to be no more enlightened than any other. All the revolt against the system and all the self-exploration imaginable are eventually found to be disillusioning when Christ-awareness is denied. And the comparison these filmmakers attempt with today’s social dissatisfaction is colored by rose-tinted granny glasses, like those once worn by the Honky Tonk Women of whom many a young man said, “She blew my nose and then she blew my mind.” Oh, sorry, that’s the Stones, not the Beatles. Long (2 hrs 14 min.), excessive (too many musical numbers that bemoan the status quo), dreary (lots of distress due to the war-is-hell theme and countless unsettled relationships), and I suspect it’s only metaphorical if you’re stoned. And I don’t recommend that.
Distributor:
Amanda Bynes, Matt Long, Sara Paxton. Comedy. Written by Chad Creasey. Directed by Joe Nussbaum.
FILM SYNOPSIS: In this college comedy that puts a modern-day twist on an age-old storybook tale, Sydney White tells a tale of a tomboy freshman (Bynes) who ditches her conniving sorority sisters and finds a new home with a group of dorky outcasts. Fed up with the way they’ve all been treated, she’s off to war against the reigning campus queen (Paxton). PREVIEW REVIEW: Innocuous and overly familiar, yet enjoyable due to Amanda Bynes. A veteran of TV and film, the young actress knows how to apply timing and toning to a comic line much the way a good singer shades a note. She looks like a cute chipmunk and radiates a quality that could only be perceived as – and I mean this in the nicest way – nice. Trashed by the evil sorority sister, Rachel Witchburn, our plucky Ms. White moves into the dilapidated cottage just down the street, where seven male outcasts from the school – geeks all – live in harmony. They’re her pals, but she has a crush on the handsome Tyler Prince. You see where this is going, right? It’s Sydney White and the Seven Dorks. Now, the more cynical among us might call the concept and its subsequent handling insipid and shallow, but I think girls between the ages of pubescence and high school entrance will enjoy the themes – fitting in, being yourself, and witches never win. It’s interesting, however, that while the filmmakers seem to be aiming this production at preteen girls with its non-threatening presentation of college life, today’s take concerning what’s acceptable language and behavior is far more lax than when Gidget frolicked on the beach with Moondoggie. Today, the term “pissed off” is no longer considered objectionable parlance for the good-girl lead, beer-chugging is depicted without consequence, and to be truly open-minded means to not only embrace the gay lifestyle, but the transdressers subculture, as well. The film is rated PG-13, the studio evidently believing that Ms. Bynes’ fans are now of an age capable of handling the leering presence of the camera (this cameraman never met a short skirt he didn’t like) and open-minded enough to consider transdressers as everyday folks. Suggested DVD Alternatives: Joan of Arc. The 1999 TV presentation about the French martyr starring Leelee Sobieski, Neil Patrick Harris, Jacqueline Bisset, Peter O’Toole, and Peter Strauss is entertaining, educational, and uplifting. Or: For those looking for a bit more substance, Beauty and the Beast (1946 French version with Jean Cocteau). In order to save her father, a beautiful girl agrees to live with a feared wolf-like beast. But after time passes, they learn to love one another. This moody, atmospheric B&W rendition of the classic tale is a masterpiece. In French, with subtitles, it is both beguiling and fanciful.
Distributor:
Jodie Foster, Terrence Howard, Naveen Andrews, Mary Steenburgen. Psychological thriller. Written by Cynthia Mort and Neil Jordan. Directed by Neil Jordan.
FILM SYNOPSIS. New York radio host Erica Bain (Jodie Foster) has a life that she loves and a fiancé she adores. All of it is taken from her when a brutal attack leaves Erica badly wounded and her fiancé dead. Unable to move past the tragedy, Erica begins prowling the city streets at night to track down the men she holds responsible. Her dark pursuit of justice catches the public’s attention, and the city is riveted by her anonymous exploits. But with the NYPD desperate to find the culprit and a dogged police detective (Terrence Howard) hot on her trail, she must decide whether her quest for revenge is truly the right path, or if she is becoming the very thing she is trying to stop. PREVIEW REVIEW: A more conflicted Death Wish, with Jodie Foster filling in for Charlie Bronson, The Brave One is superb filmmaking. With intense performances from Ms. Foster and Terrence Howard, plus a well-structured script that points out the frustrations of victims of crime and the judicial system, The Brave One holds our attention throughout. Alas, as with most films that will be vying for the Motion Picture Academy’s attention this year, it punctuates its story with R-rated content. Everybody gets to use the f-bomb – many times – in order to express their frustration and fear. And why imply when you can depict? So we see many graphic close-up shootings, one dastardly dude getting it in the eye, another in the mouth, one chick three times in the chest by her peeved boyfriend. It’s a well-made film, but a rough one; not just because of the violence or the language, but because of its reminder that brutality lurks around the corner and touches lives otherwise involved in everyday living. The movie haunts us as it suggests tragedy may suddenly disrupt our lives. By film’s end, the main victim has found no solace, no peace of mind. Ironically, she wears a cross throughout the film, but never do we see her praying for God to intercede. For me that was the most disturbing aspect, this physically and mentally wounded woman trying to find resolve from within, yet never seeking a spiritual assist. The ending is just as morally repugnant as the one in the original Death Wish where Charles Bronson was seen in a new town aiming a finger like a gun at delinquents, implying his reign as vigilante had not ended. While I won’t give away this picture’s climax, suffice it to say, though it appears our heroine has been reprieved, in reality, she has not truly been helped.
Distributor:
Billy Bob Thornton, Seann William Scott, Susan Sarandon. Comedy. Written by Michael Carnes, Josh Gilbert. Directed by Craig Gillespie.
FILM SYNOPSIS: John Farley is a self-help author who returns to his hometown only to discover that his mother has fallen in love with his old high school nemesis, Mr. Woodcock – the gruff, no-nonsense gym teacher who had put him through years of mental and physical humiliation. Determined to prevent history from repeating itself, the frustrated author sets out to stop his mother from marrying the man who had made life miserable for him and his classmates. PREVIEW REVIEW: Nobody plays barbaric bullies better than Billy Bob and he manages to hold our attention throughout this lame comedy with that same satanic gusto. But his character is not amusing fodder for humor as there are such people who dominate and make the lives of others miserable. I can understand why the Seann William Scott character would not want this man to marry his beloved mother. These types can become violent and usually are – both in demeanor and physicality toward the women they marry. Of course, Mr. Scott’s John Farley isn’t much more likeable. He’s written a self-help book, which he ignores, and manages to make every dumb move possible when attempting to expose Woodcock for the monster he is. The humor has about the same consistency as most of the comic efforts from this past summer, the writer’s quiver being equipped mainly with arrows of vulgarity or crudity or obscenity. To be fair, these are talented people and the script does contain some chuckles, even a guffaw or two, but overall, I found it mean-spirited and tedious.
Distributor:
Russell Crowe, Christian Bale, Ben Foster, Gretchen Mol, Peter Fonda. Western. Written & directed by Cathy Konrad and James Mangold.
FILM SYNOPSIS: In this modern take on the classic western by Elmore Leonard, the setting is 1800’s Arizona, where infamous outlaw Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) and his vicious gang of thieves and murderers have plagued the Southern Railroad. When Wade is captured, Civil War veteran Dan Evans (Christian Bale), struggling to survive on his drought-plagued ranch, volunteers to deliver him alive to the 3:10 train to Yuma where the killer will face trial. On the trail, Evans and Wade, each from very different worlds, begin to earn each other’s respect. But with Wade’s outfit on their trail the mission soon becomes a violent journey. PREVIEW REVIEW: Here’s something I’d like to convey to Hollywood concerning the western: the main supporters of that genre are mostly traditionalists. While today’s filmmakers are looking for the “spin,” lovers of westerns are looking for John Ford. Over the past few decades, the makers of movies have attempted to either put a new take on Ford’s values or, worse yet, attempt to update them with more graphic realism. But even the few that have met with critical and box office success (Open Range, Unforgiven) did little to inspire a rebirth of the legend of the West. Too much profanity and too much profundity have replaced the simplicity of structure and character. Now, listen Tinseltown, we are living in a time when it is obvious that moviegoers are looking for the familiar (most films this year are sequels or salutes to the familiar). Think: A return to the once traditional view of the Old West might generate a return of popcorn buyers now shy of that genre thanks to Brokeback Mountain. I’ll back this theory up with an example. John Wayne is still voted in poll after poll as one of the most popular movie stars, ever. His films constantly run on most cable movie stations and the DVDs of nearly all his 200 films continue to be money makers. True, there will never be another John Wayne, but besides his persona, people supported his films because of the principles he honored with his roles. I won’t go further, because even if they should read it, the Hollywood Elite wouldn’t pay attention. But rather than delete my rant, I’ll pass it on to you in order to further explain my disappointment with the latest rendering of the Old West. Before I go into the negatives, however, I’ll state my enjoyment with several elements of 3:10 to Yuma. First, good performances by all. A good actor takes your mind off a film’s deficiencies. Both Russell Crowe and Christian Bale are able to direct your attention off this film’s faults with their fleshed-out characterizations. Second, there’s lots of action, lots of well-choreographed shootouts that highlight the drama. And besides all the well- choreographed gunplay, the film attempts to add suspense and psychological drama. Alas, it doesn’t come close to the original in its effectiveness. Oh, you didn’t know it was made before? Come on, other than Waitress, Hollywood hasn’t made anything new all summer; just familiar. In the 1957 version, directed by Delmer Daves (Broken Arrow, Dark Passage), Van Heflin played the struggling farmer and Glenn Ford the murderous outlaw. It was a bit more wordy than the remake, but it was also more captivating with its High Noon-like western clichés and Mr. Daves’ intense and tautly structured direction. Both films reveal complexity of character, with men tested to the limit and both discovering their true character, but in this newer one, directors Cathy Konrad and James Mangold seem more in tune with the spaghetti western than the works of American filmmakers such as Hathaway, Hawks or Ford. The opening scene is off-putting with its copycatting of Ennio Morricone’s use of music and Sergio Leoni-like overbearing visual style, punctuated by today’s jittery close-ups and excessively violent structure. The westerns of long ago were films the entire family could attend. Though injustice reared its ugly head, the valiant sought and brought about retribution. While that quality is in this updated version, so is the gruff and gritty R-rated content that has become commonplace. Exploitive sexuality, the profane use of God’s name and the superfluous use of violence that includes a man being burned alive while trapped in a cage and another being stabbed to death in the throat with a dinner fork (a gruesome use of sound effects) make it undesirable for those who weren’t assaulted by Hathaway, Hawks or Ford. Do the filmmakers think this brutal realism is necessary to satisfy today’s audiences? Is it? DVD Alternative: Ride The High Country. This nearly flawless film depicts the ending of a way of life for two westerners, one a lawman, the other his outlaw friend. Joel McCrea, Randolph Scott. Directed by Sam Peckinpah before his films became filled with extremely violent images. Special Note: If you’d like to compare the original 3:10 To Yuma with the latest version, the 1957 western has just been released on DVD.
Distributor:
Dan Fogler, Christopher Walken, George Lopez, Maggie Q, Thomas Lennon, Robert Patrick. Action/comedy. Written by Thomas Lennon & Robert Ben Garant. Directed by Robert Ben Garant.
FILM SYNOPSIS: An outrageous new comedy. In this secret society, the competition is brutal and the stakes are high. It is the unsanctioned, underground, and utterly unhinged world of clandestine ping-pong tournaments. Down-and-out former professional Ping-Pong phenom Randy Daytona (Dan Fogler) is sucked into this maelstrom when FBI Agent Rodriguez (George Lopez) recruits him for a secret mission. Randy is determined to bounce back and win, and to smoke out his father’s killer – arch-fiend Feng (Christopher Walken). PREVIEW REVIEW: I want to take it easy on these filmmakers. This type of comic spoofing is so difficult to pull off. Woody Allen did it brilliantly in What’s Up Tiger Lilly, as did Christopher Guest with his Best In Show and Waiting For Guffman, while others have often disappointed. It’s magic when it happens, but such magic is illusive. You can have a great concept, great visuals such as Christopher Walken dressed as Fu Manchu, and you can have a bouncy fat guy in the lead, just like John Belushi, John Candy, Chris Farley and assorted other zaftig practitioners of outrageous physicality, and still the film won’t work. Here, many jokes fall flat, while others just never seem to arouse more than titters. The fat guy sweats a lot but never really makes us feel or laugh. And Christopher Walken never generates that other-worldly humor that he so often makes look effortless. Now, nobody sets out to make a bad movie. But since this film is so inconsequential, with little on its mind, you’d think the gags would be funnier. But the plot does a cameo, the lighthearted absurdity is toothless, and there’s nothing new in the way of puns or wisecracks. There’s the old guy making with prickly observations and the little girl who kicks the lead in the groin and the occasional passing-wind bit. But just how many times are audiences expected to laugh at a man grabbing his crotch in pain? It’s not really satire or parody or madcap. It’s just lame. Oh, rats, I was going to take it easy on these guys.
Distributor:
Documentary from Picturehouse. Written by Ed Cunningham, II, and Seth Gordon. Directed by Seth Gordon.
FILM SYNOPSIS: In 2003, 35-year-old family man Steve Wiebe, after losing his job at Boeing, found solace in Donkey Kong. He began perfecting his game every night after his wife and kids went to bed, and not only surpassed Billy Mitchell (“Gamer of the Century” and Donkey Kong Champion), but ended up with a thought-to-be-impossible 1,000,000 points. In the months that followed, Steve and Billy engaged in a cross-country duel to see who could set the high score that would be included in the 2007 Guinness World Records’ book and become “The King of Kong.” Along the way, both men learned valuable lessons about what it means to be a father, a husband, and a true champion…discovering that you don’t always need to win to be a winner. PREVIEW REVIEW: So well conceived, I thought for a while, “Are we being punked?” But no, even though it has a mockumentary feel, it’s the real deal. Despite the title, which, as a colleague pointed out, is the best film title this year, this is not a Christopher Guest (Waiting For Guffman, Best In Show) comic satire, but an honest appraisal of a cult of obsessed people who take video game playing very seriously. Searching for an outlet to nurture their energies or artistic nature or just a venue where they can succeed above all others, these geeky gamesman are tunnel visioned and a picture of obsessive-compulsives. While many people apply such efforts and time to activities that aid others, the people who spend their time in front of arcade machines tend to be less social, more in tune with their own desires. They appear to be selfish and self-centered. Even the “good” guy here, the man we root for, is so possessed by being the highest scorer that when his four-year-old boy calls from the top of the stairs, “Daddy, come wipe my butt,” daddy dearest refuses to budge. Now, there will be those who defend this “sport,” and I’ll admit that -- like anything done well -- it demands discipline and expertise. But what does it say when the most astute person in the room is a preteen girl who suggests to her father, who wants to enter the Guinness World Records, “Some people ruin their lives to be in that book.” She’s wise in her generation. King of Kong is not mean spirited or belittling. It is, however, a taunting exposé that masterfully reveals the makeup of these two advocates of the arcade. The biggest surprise of the summer; I thoroughly enjoyed this delightful concept.
Distributor:
Carly Schroeder, Adrian Dunbar, Katharine Ross, George Harris, Jane Lynch, Christine Adams. Drama/adventure. Written by Michael Sellers, Wendell Morris. Directed by Michael Sellers.
FILM SYNOPSIS: Alyssa is a troubled fourteen-year-old who has been living with her grandmother Lucy since the sudden death of her mother. Unable to control her granddaughter, Lucy decides it’s time for Alyssa to go to the Bahamas to live with Hawk, a dedicated dolphin researcher and the father she never knew she had. Alyssa’s arrival comes just as Hawk is battling the greedy developers determined to turn his research center into a tacky tourist attraction. A prickly relationship between Hawk and Alyssa begins to develop as they come together to save the center. PREVIEW REVIEW: Young Carly Schroeder (Gracie, Firewall) is developing from cute screen presence into a talented actress. Through much of the film she brandishes the sulky stare that has come to represent screen teenage-hood, but suddenly she allows a captivating smile to beam across her face and you realize that there is depth to this young actress. Also athletic, Ms. Schroeder trained for several months with former Los Angeles Galaxy player Dan Calichman to prepare for her role in Gracie and has performed her own underwater stunts, including swimming with the dolphins. We do see Alyssa in a rebellious stage, smoking, drinking and making herself up to look like a wild child, but it doesn’t take long for her true self to emerge. She is a caring person, one full of character. The film subtly points out the need to nurture children. They need to feel loved and understand that they have importance. Along with this development, the film gives us an entertaining look at underwater life. Indeed, there’s nothing cynical about the production. It’s a straightforward story that takes us into a world most of us don’t get to explore – the undersea of the Bahamas. Along with the involving performances and storyline, the film contains a pretty musical score and lovely cinematography. The themes concern bringing family together, learning to listen to others, keeping our hearts open. I must, however, warn parents that some content may confuse little ones. The film has a friendly Hallmark feel, so the inclusion of PG-13 content seems unnecessary and out of place. Along with showing Alyssa’s rebellious stage by including drinking smoking, even marijuana use, we also learn that her father lives with a woman outside marriage. Though this has become an accepted lifestyle, is it the example you want your young children constantly confronted with in movies? There are no graphic sexual situations and the main characters grow into giving, self-sacrificing people. So, if you can enjoy a film despite a few lifestyle choices you may not agree with, then I think you’ll find the film an entertaining outdoor adventure.
Distributor:
Colin Firth, Thomas Sanger, Ben Kingsley, Aishwarya Rai. Action/adventure. Written by Jez and Tom Butterworth. Directed by Doug Lefler.
FILM SYNOPSIS: Barbarians overtake Rome and kidnap the newest Caesar, a 12-year-old boy. The surviving captain of the guard sees Rome completely destroyed and goes after the abducted emperor with the aid of a handful of assorted warriors, including a beautiful martial arts expert from India. Once they have the boy back, and this really big sword, they find themselves in battle after battle as they search for a new kingdom. PREVIEW REVIEW: Twelve-year-old Romulus Augustus, the newest Caesar, learns quickly that the barbarians truly are at the gate. His legions are off somewhere and soon he’s without an empire, left with only a handful of warriors who look like they’re out of a Conan movie rather than members of the Roman army. Together they search for sanctuary as they cross rough terrain and battle everybody but Conan. I mean there’s a lot of sword play. Trouble is, the battle sequences are so ineptly staged and filmed that it feels more like a TV-made movie. And that’s about all there is to this movie. Some masked villain is determined to kill off the boy king and take his place, ruling the known world. He’s got a lot of henchmen willing to do his bidding and, though fierce warriors themselves, they’re no match for our small band of killer elites. With probably the most absurd take on the Excalibur legend yet brought to the screen, aided by functional performances that do little to inspire (listening to Colin Firth’s speech to the troops before the final battle, one wonders why they didn’t all go back to their farms) and listless direction and blah cinematography, it’s easy to understand why critics weren’t invited to an early screening. The studio knew the job was blown, and so they hoped to get a little back on their investment from those hearty first weekenders who must see attractions that first Friday and Saturday night come hell or high water. Well, nobody got hurt. Moviegoers have survived many a poor theatrical offering and filmmakers have botched other action pictures even worse (audiences should have sued over last year’s Stealth). But there are a lot better films on DVD concerning Rome, or sword battles or dangerous journeys. Heck, there’s many a home movie that would be more inspiring.
Distributor: