Chiwetel Ejiofor, Alice Braga, Max Martini, Tim Allen. Written & directed by David Mamet.
FILM SYNOPSIS: Set in the west-side of the Los Angeles fight world, a world inhabited by bouncers, cage-fighters, cops and special forces-types, Redbelt is the story of Mike Terry (Chiwetel Ejiofor), a Jiu-jitsu teacher who has avoided the prize fighting circuit, choosing instead to pursue an honorable life by operating a self-defense studio with a samurai’s code.
Terry and his wife Sondra (Alice Braga), struggle to keep the business running to make ends meet. An accident on a dark, rainy night at the Academy, between an off duty officer (Max Martini) and a distraught lawyer (Emily Mortimer), puts in to motion a series of events that will change Terry’s life dramatically-introducing him to a world of promoters (Ricky Jay, Joe Mantegna) and movie star Chet Frank (Tim Allen). Faced with these challenges, and in order to pay off his debts and regain his honor, Terry must step into the ring for the first time of his life.
PREVIEW REVIEW: The substantial nature of this martial arts film, a true morality tale, one of the most absorbing I’ve seen in quite some time, is due both to the writing/direction of David Mamet and his formidable cast. Mamet doing a martial arts film? That’s right. He uses the genre to tell a tale of an honorable man surrounded by corrupted people who see little reason for life other than the accruing of money – no matter the destructive nature of their agendas. It may not be a masterpiece, but wisely and interestingly addresses principles that govern the human condition.
Of course, along with his well-structured dialogue, Mamet peppers his story with the f-word, a tradition of this filmmaker. But here, the writer seems to use objectionable language to relay the corruption of those whose pursuit of wealth has indeed become evil. Still, be warned, Mamet never met an obscenity he couldn’t use.
DVD alternative: The Winslow Boy. (1999) Nigel Hawthorne, Rebecca Pidgeon. Writer/director David Mamet (best known for his salty dialogue in most productions) has sensitively adapted Terence Rattigan's play about a barrister defending a youth accused of school theft. Genteel look at a father's determination to see justice done. A superb screenplay by Mr. Mamet, proving a story can be told without bombarding the viewer with profane and offensive material. G (I found nothing objectionable).
Or:
Requiem for a Heavyweight. A solid drama from Rod Serling about a fighter (Anthony Quinn) whose career in the ring is nearing its end as he faces corruption in the sport. Good performances from Jackie Gleason, Mickey Rooney and Julie Harris.
Distributor: Sony Pictures Classics
Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, Greg Kinnear, Dax Shepard, Romany Malco, Maura Tierney, Holland Taylor and Sigourney Weaver. Written and Directed by Michael McCullers.
FILM SYNOPSIS: Successful and single businesswoman Kate Holbrook (Tina Fey) has long put her career ahead of a personal life. Now 37, she’s finally determined to have a kid on her own. But her plan is thrown a curve ball after she discovers she has only a million-to-one chance of getting pregnant. Undaunted, the driven Kate allows South Philly working girl Angie Ostrowiski (Amy Poehler) to become her unlikely surrogate. Simple enough…
After learning from the steely head (Sigourney Weaver) of their surrogacy center that Angie is pregnant, Kate goes into precision nesting mode: reading childcare books, baby-proofing the apartment and researching top pre-schools. But the executive’s well-organized strategy is turned upside down when her Baby Mama shows up at her doorstep with no place to live.
An unstoppable force meets an immovable object as structured Kate tries to turn vibrant Angie into the perfect expectant mom. In a comic battle of wills, they will struggle their way through preparation for the baby’s arrival. And in the middle of this tug-of-war, they’ll discover two kinds of family: the one you’re born to and the one you make.
PREVIEW REVIEW: When attending a screening, the professional film reviewer must remain open, an exponent for the “promise of movies” theory. He must leave all prejudice at the boxoffice. The trailers for upcoming releases are a different matter. That’s when we can go all Addison DeWitt (the cynical critic in All About Eve). And that’s just what I and my colleagues in criticism did when we saw the commercial for Baby Mama. We could see every joke coming and cringed at the bevy of crude visuals, such as Amy Poehler crouched upon the bathroom sink, declaring that the toilet doesn’t work. But I couldn’t take my hastily formed opinion into the screening. Of course, by now, I’d have to be an idiot to think that former members of Saturday Night Live would do a movie comedy sans crude humor.
Tiny Fey is as sharp as a comic writer can come and Amy Poehler astounds with her sketch characterizations. These are two funny women (cynical, coarse and irreverent, but funny). The movie is not. Funny, that is. Cynical, coarse and irreverent, yes, but funny, no. Both Fey and Poehler are overworked, doing everything from credit card commercials to hit TV series to supporting cameos in all their buddies’ movies. They grab every project, knowing their days in the glow of Hollywood’s spotlight are limited. But their choices are not always wise.
Oh, sure, there are some laughs, but the humor never strays far from the bathroom. And when it does, it seems nearly as tired as the expressions on the leads’ faces. But worse yet, Tiny Fey is just not a very good actress. I understand that this time of the year is not yet reserved for Oscar attention. But this one couldn’t even get MTV’s attention.
DVD Alternatives: The Odd Couple. A very funny Neil Simon comedy about two very different men (Jack Lemmon, Walter Matthau) sticking together out of necessity.
or
Enchanted April. A delightful fable about four women in 1920s London escaping inattentive husbands and repressed lifestyles by renting a castle in Portofino. They soon discover the estate has a magical effect on all those who stay there. Witty dialogue, dreamy cinematography, and savory performances from Joan Plowright, Polly Walker and the rest of the cast.
Distributor: Universal
Neil Dudgeon, Jessica Stevenson, Jules Sitruk. Comedy. Written & directed by Garth Jennings.
FILM SYNOPSIS: The story takes place in 1980s Britain, where young Will Proudfoot is raised in isolation among The Brethren, a puritanical religious sect in which music and TV are forbidden. Accidentally, he sees a bootlegged copy of Rambo: First Blood and it blows his imagination wide open. Now, Will sets out to join forces with the seemingly diabolical school bully, Lee Carter, to make their own action epic, devising wildly creative, on-the-fly stunts, all the while hiding out from The Brethren.
PREVIEW REVIEW: Both sensitive and amusing, the film is about friendship and the willingness to put others first. Though it takes a shot at the piousness of some religious folk who put the law before Christ’s love, the film is not antagonistic toward biblical matters. It just states that spiritual devotion is most effective when practiced by caring for others. At least that was my interpretation. I may be honoring the filmmaker more than he deserves.
Alas, the film is peppered with objectionable language, including a disrespectful use of Christ’s name, and mostly by a kid.
Though it is a tenderhearted movie, the misuse of our Savior’s name is just too abundant to be overlooked.
You may wish to try the following DVD alternatives to get the same message:
To Kill a Mockingbird. Horton Foote's winning screenplay of the Harper Lee novel about rural life, justice, honor and bigotry as seen through the eyes of a nine-year-old girl.
Or:
The Sandlot. The new boy in town struggles to become a member of the neighborhood baseball team. PG (a few mild expletives, one graphic scene where the kids get sick after chewing tobacco).
Or:
One Foot In Heaven. A devout minister (Fredric March) and family deal with the community and church life during changing early 1900s America. Fun scene has the good Reverend attending his first movie.
I would like to suggest Millions from 2005 since it is fairly new and that seems to be a prerequisite for some movie viewers. Alas, I can’t. Starting anew after the death of their mother, 9-year-old Anthony is ever practical, while his 7-year-old brother Damian uses imagination, fantasy, and faith to make sense of his confusing world. When a suitcase full of money falls out of the sky at Damian’s feet as he plays near the railroad tracks, it sets the boys on the adventure of a lifetime that leads them to realize that true wealth has nothing to do with money. The little boy believes so strongly in saints that he envisions them and has conversations concerning the directions he should take in life. I see this engaging PG film as morality play but for one scene. In it, Damian visualizes Saint Peter. During their discussion, the ever earthy Peter blasts out with an irreverent use of Christ’s name. So unexpected, it demanded a reaction from the startled audience, one that expressed itself through laughter. The actor portraying Peter continues by applying a humanistic explanation for the feeding of the 5,000. Turns out the miracle was not done by Jesus, but by the giving spirit of the people. It’s a subtle deflection from the godliness of Jesus. The filmmaker got his laugh, but he lost me.
Distributor: Paramount Vantage
Robert Downey Jr., Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges, Shaun Toub and Gwyneth Paltrow. Written by Mark Fergus, Hawk Ostby, Art Marcum, Matt Holloway. Directed by Jon Favreau.
ILM SYNOPSIS: Paramount Pictures and Marvel Entertainment's big screen adaptation of Marvel's legendary Super Hero Iron Man will launch into theaters on May 2, 2008. Oscar(R) nominee Robert Downey Jr. stars as Tony Stark/Iron Man in the story of a billionaire industrialist and genius inventor who is kidnapped and forced to build a devastating weapon. Instead, using his intelligence and ingenuity, Tony builds a high-tech suit of armor and escapes captivity. When he uncovers a nefarious plot with global implications, he dons his powerful armor and vows to protect the world as Iron Man.
PREVIEW REVIEW: Smart and witty writing (considering the genre), involving direction, perhaps the best special effects I’ve seen, and actors doing what good actors do best, make this one of the best of the Marvel comics screen adaptations. True, the last third becomes top heavy with the standard combativeness we’ve already seen with the Fantastic foursome, the mutating Transformers and the go-go Power Rangers, but by then Mr. Downey and his supporting players have cast their spell, drawing us into a mesmerizing action adventure that’s also a morality tale.
I do have a concern. While it has a comic book feel, the amount of visceral violence gained the film a PG-13 rating. Because of the amount of violent imagery already aimed at kids by the world’s entertainment community, I question this film’s suitability for younger moviegoers. Indeed, when our protagonist found himself in a bad way, a traumatized child (way too young for such a movie) started screaming.
I was also disappointed, but not surprised, by the inclusion of several obscenities and even a couple of profane uses of God’s name. Is that language now appearing in the action comic books?
Distributor: Paramount Pictures and Marvel Entertainment
Richard Jenkins, Hiam Abbass, Haaz Sleiman , Danai Gurira. Comedy/drama. Written and Directed by Tom McCarthy.
FILM SYNOPSIS: A college professor becomes embroiled in the lives of a young immigrant couple living in New York City and stumbles into an unexpected romance as a result. As these strangers struggle to deal with their individual lives in a changed world, their shared humanity is revealed in awkward, humorous and dramatic ways.
PREVIEW REVIEW: Here’s what I loved about this film. It was a gentle character study about a man shut off from the world suddenly opening up to those around him. And the film points out that different nationalities can actually complement one another. That’s not a conservative or liberal consensus. Or shouldn’t be. We are like pieces of a puzzle designed to work together in order to make a living, breathing picture. I know, it sounds like I’m going to start handing out daises. But when we get past the barriers of politics we start coming together, appreciating the gifts God has given all of us.
The film is well cast down to the smallest roles, the direction seamless and though the pacing will be slow to those more accustomed to action thrillers than dramatic character studies, still there is a rhythm and a rhyme to the story that maintains an interest.
Alas, though I understand the filmmaker’s agenda – to tell a personal story that will aid in changing our immigration system - still it’s a pretty one-sided argument. We see a good man deported, separated from his family and his dreams of a better life here in the U.S. The filmmaker may be asking us to examine alternatives, or perhaps he’s just condemning us. But it must not be forgotten that while this is a good man, he is here illegally.
I’m always amazed at which laws people will uphold and which they will ignore. I don’t consider myself an authority on immigration, but shouldn’t laws be changed rather than just ignored. That said, at least this filmmaker is opening the question to debate. Debate is good. True art makes you think and feel. This film does both.
Distributor: Overture Films
John Cho, Kal Penn. Comedy. Written & directed by Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg – and maybe Jack Daniels.
FILM SYNOPSIS: The same morning that Harold and Kumar eat at White Castle, Harold learns that Maria, the girl he lusts after, has set off for Amsterdam. The pair decide to pursue her so Harold can proclaim his love. However, an overzealous airline passenger mistakes Kumar for a terrorist, and the plane is diverted as the duo get stuck in a case of mistaken identity.
PREVIEW REVIEW: I’m trying to find something new to say about this recent adolescent comedy. Let’s see, I’ve already used the following words and phrases to describe today’s direction in film comedy: crude, vulgar, exploitive, cheap, easy, irreverent, offensive, profane, stupid, inane and frat-mindedly base. Now, I could open my Roget’s Thesaurus, but I feel nearly as lazy as the filmmakers, so let’s just use the same words to describe this attempt at cashing in on slacker/stoner humor.
Though I hadn’t seen the first film, I was aware that it was about stoners. And knowing the sensibilities of today’s comic filmmakers, I knew this sequel wouldn’t be filled with the wit and wisdom of Noel Coward. But I had noooooo idea what I was getting myself into.
It’s not that there aren’t some laughs, or that the two stars don’t have comic chops. It’s just that since the main moments that brought laughter from the audience weren’t generated from scatological and anatomical activities, why base the entire film around them? Those visuals and vocals seemed to just bring moans or startled reactions (“I can’t believe I just saw that”). Again, I ask, why rely so heavily upon gross-out gags? Because there is an audience for such amusement. While most “stoner” movies don’t do all that well at the box office, they often generate big revenue once put on DVD. Could this possibly be because real-life stoners enjoy these movies best when they themselves are home alone, partaking of forbidden substances? Nah, no one would do that. That would be illegal.
Please read the attached reasons for the rating. Though I normally attempt to be discreet with my content descriptions, I’ll be rather graphic here in order to let you understand just how far these filmmakers are willing to push the envelope of bad taste.
Though my description of the film’s nudity may be enticing to adolescents (of all ages) I would hope they would keep this in mind. The media is bombarding you with sexual images. Indeed, it’s difficult to avoid all the sexual imagery in our culture. Aren’t you feeling manipulated by moviemakers? You should be. These films aim at our baser instincts. They are ultimately unfulfilling and merely aid in setting back social behavior. Keep in mind, whenever we try to avoid temptations and self-gratification at the expense of others, it honors God, the opposite sex and ultimately that one special person destined for your life. I know, that sounds corny. What’s right often does.
Distributor: Warner Bros
FILM SYNOPSIS: This investigative documentary probes the snubbing of scientists and teachers who teach the theory of intelligent design. Ben Stein, who’s had an eclectic career ranging from presidential speech writer to droning actor (he played the blaze teacher in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off), hosts this outing of those determined to prevent the creationist hypothesis. Mr. Stein interviews respected scientists and teachers who have lost their jobs and/or careers because of their desire just to be open to ideas other than evolution.
PREVIEW REVIEW: With touches of cynical humor and moments of thoughtful reasoning, the filmmakers take on a system that has long since said that there is no place for the concept of intelligent design outside Sunday morning worship. Indeed, in the halls of prejudicial academia, spiritual matters have become archaic. And when someone has the nerve to test the theory that man came from fish in the sea or apes in the trees or a big cosmic bang, not only are they ridiculed by many in the field of science, they are also ridiculed by the media (hence the overwhelming negative reviews from the secular press).
What an eye opener this has been. Movie critics, so proud of their liberal and objective stances, are clearly dominated by personal views and agendas. After reading some of the poisoned-pen smears of this film by many of my colleagues in criticism, I have come to the conclusion that they demand not only separation of church from state, but of church from anything. Their so-called open-mindedness only extends so far as to the boundaries of their own beliefs.
I must point out that there are exceptions to that previous statement. I know people in the press who are positive role models for the term “liberal,” in that they debate, but also listen to the views of others. They are, however, few and far between.
Admittedly, the film has an agenda. It mocks the narrowness of man’s all-knowing, all-seeing intellect conceit. Stein and his team use any means to make cartoons of evolutionists, including the actual use of cartoons to do it. Stein attacks them much the way Michael Moore does everyone else. Of course, Moore’s tactics are generally accepted as filmmaking tools to make an entertaining point. Stein’s, however, are mocked as amusement and denounced as disingenuous and deceitful.
The makers of Expelled are using the very stratagem documentarians have used to puncture Detroit, McDonald’s and church hierarchies. Ah, the evolutionary worm turns. The film is thought-provoking, amusing and scary because it points out that our nation’s schools, which once embraced a reverence for God and spiritual concepts, are now manned by those who don’t.
Distributor: Premise
Jackie Chan, Jet Li, Michael Angarano. Action/adventure/sci-fi. Written by John Fusco. Directed by Rob Minkoff.
FILM SYNOPSIS: An American teen is transported back in time to ancient China, where he joins a crew of warriors to help free the king, who has been placed under a spell and turned into stone.
PREVIEW REVIEW: Jackie Chan and Jet Li, both in the same kick-action thriller! If only Bruce Lee was still with us and in this one, that would make it the trifecta of what’s respectfully referred to as “kick-suey” action fantasies.
You don’t have to worry about any faux-literate verbiage or deep social messages. This film is just pure escapism, filled to the brim with martial arts kicks and flips and lighthearted absurdity. I suppose you could find some symbolism and perhaps the characters are representative of good and evil, but I think it’s stretching it a bit to find our young hero to be a messianic figure. This is just a fine example of the genre, with Mr. Li and Mr. Chan doing what they do best. Both actors display a good sense of humor and both choreograph the martial arts battles with all the aplomb of a Fred Astaire dance sequence. (That’s a compliment, for those who don’t know Fred Astaire.) It lacks the artistry and substance of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, and though the plot does little more than a cameo, still it generates whimsy and the leads are likeable.
The fly in the dim sum, however, is the incessant violence. While it is supposed to be whimsical, and though we come to expect one martial arts battle after another in these films, there are also some jolting acts of brutality that detract from the playful tone. An old man is shot by a gang of modern day teens, while others are killed by sword, knives and slings and arrows. I suppose your level of acceptance will rely upon your appreciation for the genre. If you like martial arts movies, I’d say this is a pretty good one. If you see very few of them, you may object to the amount of physical pummeling.
Distributor: Lionsgate
Skewering comic documentary from Morgan Spurlock (Super Size Me).
FILM SYNOPSIS: Witty documentarian Morgan Spurlock has recovered from the overeating he did at McDonald’s for his Super Size Me. Now he’s taking on the political world. He trains like a secret agent and travels to the Middle East to do what the FBI, the CIA and all of America’s military might can’t do: find the world’s leading terrorist. Throughout his mission he talks to political and military leaders as well as ordinary citizens of Egypt, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, seeking their views of America and Osama. It’s flippant at times, poignant at others, as Spurlock himself questions America’s political strategy.
PREVIEW REVIEW: I suppose there are two ways of perceiving this film. It could be seen as a biting satire of the ineptness and corruption of our government, not just in its handling of Iraq, but with almost every other American intervention. Or, perhaps the film can be seen as an indictment of all nations in general. Either way, such films – and there have been a bunch of them in the past two years – wallow in America’s faults and foibles without suggesting its strengths. Overall, they give the impression that our enemies have more soul, while we are the devils.
Here the filmmaker says he loves his country, yet I see no indication of that affection. Perhaps he does. So, why not relay some positives to the world concerning our agendas and our makeup. Both our people and our government have been there countless times to feed and inoculate those in need of food and medicine. We’ve sacrificed countless lives in order to stabilize the world and defeat tyranny. And once we defeated those who attempted to destroy us, we turned around and helped rebuild their land and generate their economy. I can’t remember when a filmmaker attempted to remind the world of those facts.
After WWII, when Russia was exacting revenge upon Germany by closing off Berlin from the rest of the world, literally starving that city to death, America and England revealed their Anglo compassion. We came to Berlin’s aid by having our flyers drop supplies at their own peril, including candy for kids. In order to not be confrontational with Russian military, our planes were unarmed. Hmmm, never saw a film about that.
A couple of years after Iran held Americans hostage, that country underwent a devastating earthquake. Who was the first to send aid? Oh, yeah, America. Hmmm. Never saw that movie, either.
Mr. Spurlock’s comedy is amusing, but his perspective is limited and naïve. Though he takes a few swipes at the ignorance and hostility of some in Muslim nations, he seems accepting of anyone’s on-camera quotes concerning America or Osama. Right now when U. S. citizens are most confused about our presence in Iraq, Spurlock’s position seems justified. But does this perspective include all the facts – or has he chosen just those that give strength to his agenda?
Distributor: The Weinstein Company
Jason Segel, Paul Rudd, Kristen Bell, Mila Kunis. Comedy. Written by Jason Segel. Directed by Nicholas Stoller.
FILM SYNOPSIS: From the producers of The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up comes a comic look at a sloppy slacker’s arduous quest to get over the heartbreak of being dumped by his fiancée. After an unsuccessful bout of womanizing and an on-the-job nervous breakdown, he sets out to clear his head by vacationing in Hawaii. But the nightmare continues when he discovers his ex and her hip new British-rocker boyfriend have checked into the same hotel.
PREVIEW REVIEW: One step at a time, one film at a time, a young generation has become consumed by the crassness, vulgarity and bad taste that masquerades as comic entertainment. Teens and twenty-somethings must assume by now that all humor comes from jolting shock value, because, with few exceptions, that’s all they’re presented at the local cineplex. In Roget’s Thesaurus, behind the word comedy, nineteen synonyms are listed, including comedy of manners, farce, satire, slapstick, play of wit and burlesque. None of these terms honestly describes the efforts of many of today’s comic filmmakers. Most funnymen of today mine their gags from below the surfaces of bawdy and burlesque.
The easiest way to make someone laugh is by surprising them with a visual that counters public decency. We are told from childhood that we shouldn’t pass gas in front of someone or discuss the functions of the male penis in front of the opposite sex. So, when someone does these things on screen, it evokes a stunned reaction, which is then released through involuntary laughter, much like a sneeze. This sort of visual is not generated from clever wit, but rather, from sophomoric startlement. Frankly, it bugs me. Writers of whimsy are either told by studio honchos to write down (which should insult moviegoers) or they just don’t have the imagination to come up with a humorous view of the human condition without the aid of scatological coarseness. And that’s my problem with this film. Its humor never strays far from the bathroom.
Jason Segel, who displays a gentle side on How I Met Your Mother and a buffoonish Neanderthal in Knocked Up, has written the screenplay, giving himself the lead. Not that he should be proud of that achievement. We’ve seen this same boorish man-child dozens of times in the past few years. He’s a slob, like most of Will Ferrell’s man-childs. Indeed, ever since The Odd Couple’s Oscar Madison declared “I got brown sandwiches and green sandwiches,” the screen perception of the male bachelor has been that of an unkempt, uncouth slob. Well, not in my house. Felix Unger is my hero. But I digress.
Austin Power’s Mike Myers has confessed that there are no limits to where screen humor should be mined – high or low brow chuckles are all the same. So, along with his clever concept of Dr. Evil guesting on a Jerry Springer show, musing over the difficulties of being a super villain, he has also created Fat Bastard, an obese antagonist who spends much of his screen time describing his need to defecate. Will Ferrell adheres to this anything-for-a-laugh philosophy by running around in what seems nearly every film covered only by dingy underwear. And now Jason Segel follows in this mindset, by shedding his boxers to display his hind quarters, and on several occasions also revealing the man-child’s favorite organ. (That visual resulted in lots of giggles from an astonished screening audience – the first time. By the third exposure, we began to wonder if Mr. Segel supplemented his income by doing porno.)
Now, don’t misunderstand, I’m not saying that viewing a bared private part will lead us all back to cave-dwelling. I am suggesting – with the evidence of each proceeding envelope-pushing comic movie to back up my theory – that film humor is getting more prurient and less smart. You’re being insulted and cheated by filmmakers who get rich by aiming down.
This may seem more a critique of our culture than of this movie. But how else do you review this film? Universal Studios has enough money to hire a competent cameraman and enough loot to take cast and crew to pretty locations. And because they’ve been making comedies for a hundred years, they know how to tickle the funny bone. Today’s producers just give ticket buyers what they want. Or at least what they are willing to accept.
DVD alternatives: The Awful Truth. This classic screwball comedy has Cary Grant and Irene Dunne as a divorced couple sabotaging each other’s new relationships. Grant reveals his expert touch with physical and verbal comic timing. Forget its age, it’s a perfect comedy.
Or:
I.Q. (1994) Walter Matthau, Meg Ryan, Tim Robbins. Albert Einstein has fun putting aside his physics to play Cupid for his pedantic niece and the local good guy/car mechanic. Romantic, literate and downright funny. PG (one scene features sexual double entendre and there are two mild expletives, but I caught no sexual situations, violence, or obscene language).
Distributor: Universal