• Movie Preview •

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: Warner Bros.

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: Sony Pictures

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: Universal

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: Warner Bros.

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: New Line Cinema

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: Lionsgate

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: Rogue Pictures

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: Picturehouse