All posts by maddwolf

New In Theaters

Don’t Expect Mints on the Pillow

1 Comment

The Motel Life

by Hope Madden

Emile Hirsch is a talented actor most effective when playing against that cherubic mug. As drifters, outsiders and struggling lowlifes (Into the Wild, Killer Joe, Prince Avalanche), he animates the hope inside the hopeless like few others. His open tenderness is half the reason The Motel Life is such a stingingly lovely portrait of American poverty.

Hirsch plays Frank, storyteller and brother’s keeper. That brother, forever getting the two into serious trouble, is played with heartbreaking frailty by Stephen Dorff – the second half of the film’s one-two punch.

Dorff’s Jerry Lee has gotten the rawer end of a pretty raw deal. His brother and his own ability with a pencil and drawing pad are all he has to show for his time on this planet. Missing part of his leg and drawn to trouble, Jerry Lee has given Frank a lifetime of clean-up work.

The film is at its most entertaining during story time. To keep his brother’s mind at east, Frank spins outlandish yarns where Jerry Lee can be a hero with two good legs and a voluptuous babe on his arm. Directors Alan and Gabe Polsky set these to great illustrations that bespeak the brothers’ arrested adolescence.

Based on Willy Vlautin’s acclaimed novel, the film offers an off-kilter, smoky image of hope, and the choices that kick triumph – sometimes even survival – in the teeth.

The Motel Life exists in the same basic universe as Killer Joe (but with far less insanity or humor). It’s a world belonging to the broken and haunted, where a would-be mentor has to remind you, “Don’t make decisions thinking you’re a lowlife. Make decisions thinking you’re a great man. Or at least a good man.”

Who offers such advice? Kris Kristofferson – duh. Oh, one more thing he says. “And don’t be a pussy.”

The pace the Polskys set is deliberate, sometimes frustratingly so, and Hirsch is far too pretty to have led this life. (It doesn’t help that the brother who appears to be maybe 2 years his senior in flashbacks is played as an adult by an actor 12 years older than Hirsch.) But there’s an offhanded authenticity to the story of underdogs who might break free in one beautiful instant, only to fall back to what holds them in chains, whether it’s gambling, strippers, or a brother with a head full of bad wiring.

Verdict-3-5-Stars

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmcIEoYsnww

New In Theaters

Growing Up Too Fast

Leave a comment

 

by George Wolf

 

In her new film, gifted young actress Saoirse Ronan plays a teenager forced to fend for herself, fighting for survival in the wilderness.

Wait, is this a sequel to Hanna?

No, it’s How I Live Now, adapted from the young adult novel and sporting a storyline that actually follows eerily close to a recent foreign film not many here at home ever saw.

Ronan plays Daisy, an American brat sent to stay with her Aunt and cousins in the English countryside. Daisy’s mother has died, she “hates” her father, and in a very typical teenage fashion, is mad at the world.

It isn’t long before the world is mad right back.

War breaks out and martial law is declared, separating Daisy and her young cousin Piper from their family. The males and females are transported to different camps, though not before Daisy makes a promise to reunite.

In an opportune moment, Daisy and Piper break away, taking off on foot for a long and dangerous trek back home.

Two years ago, Lore covered very similar terrain, though in a World War II setting and with a much heavier historical context.

How I Live Now is more cavalier with the teen girl’s awakening to the ways of the adult world (yes, sexual included). Though Ronan is characteristically captivating, Daisy’s journey, both physical and spiritual, seems rushed and not quite sure-footed.

Director Kevin Macdonald (The Last King of Scotland/State of Play) attempts to channel the popular book by getting inside Daisy’s head, voices and all. That, plus the arresting landscape shots, handheld camera angles, and Ronan’s performance, is enough to keep your attention.

Ultimately, though, How I Live Now feels like a like a well-executed shot that falls a bit short of the mark.

 

Verdict-3-0-Stars

 

 

New In Theaters

We Are Not Ideal Dinner Hosts

Leave a comment

We Are What We Are

by Hope Madden

The little seen but magnificent 2010 Mexican import We Are What We Are offered perhaps the most biting social commentary set to film that year. The fact that this revelatory work happened to fit into the horror genre – and no doubt about that! – made the film that much more provocative and fascinating.

Writer/director Jim Mickel and his writing partner Nick Damici tackle an American remake, but wisely use the source material as more of an inspiration than an actual blueprint.

As in Jorge Michel Grau’s original, one family’s religious custom is thrown into havoc when the family leader dies unexpectedly, leaving the ritual unfinished and the children left to determine who will take over. Both films look at a particularly religious family as a sort of tribe that evolved separately but within the larger population. Grau has better instincts for mining this paradigm to expose the flaws of the larger population, but Mickel takes an American Gothic tone to create an eerily familiar darkness that treads on common urbanite fears.

Mickel and Damici created 2010’s surprisingly fresh Stake Land, a post-apocalyptic vampire tale that packed a real punch. Their second effort is a more polished piece, aided by impressive performances from a mostly seasoned cast.

The always exceptional Michael Parks plays a gentle, rural doctor heartbroken over the years-old disappearance of his daughter and intrigued by some grisly bits unearthed by the recent flood. Meanwhile, the devout and desperate Parker family prepares for Lamb’s Day.

While the subtext, subtle authenticity and almost Shakespearean family drama of the original are missing, this version is comfortable in its setting, drawing from a very American style of horror.  Along with Parks, Kelly McGillis adds a nice turn in a supporting role, while Ambyr Childers and Julie Garner ably embody the horrifyingly put upon children of a deceased matriarch with a really tough job to do.

The film sets a tone that sneaks up and settles over you, like the damp from a flood. Mickel proves adept with traditional horror storytelling, casting aside any flash in favor of smothering atmosphere and a structure that slowly builds tension, and the impressive climax is worth the wait.

Needless flashback sequences seek to explain what’s better left unsaid, and many surprises will be obvious too soon, but the creepy atmosphere, solid performances and fine writing help to make this remake a worthwhile counterpart to the ingenious Mexican original.

Verdict-3-5-Stars

 

 

 

New In Theaters

More Adorably Smitten Brits

Leave a comment

About Time

by Hope Madden

Even if you’re not a romantic comedy fan, it’s hard to dislike Love Actually, right? Sure, pieces of writer/director/Brit Richard Curtis’s film drag. Still, the fact that so many story lines – big and small – fit together so nicely, telling tales of heartache as well as true love, helps to make it an entertaining gem. So, why not give About Time – the latest from its creator – a shot?

Well, actually, it helps if you are not a fan of romantic comedies because, regardless of the marketing campaign, that label fits this film loosely at best.

About Time is perhaps the most understated time travel movie ever. The Lake family has a secret. Their men can travel – briefly and with very mild manners –  through time. One New Year’s Day, this intel is passed from father (Bill Nighy – hooray!) to son (and unrepentant ginger), Tim (Domnhall Gleeson – son of the great character actor Brendan Gleeson, but best known as a Weasley boy from Harry Potter).

Tim mostly uses his power to improve his luck with girls, though he fails as often as succeeds because Richard Curtis loves adorably, politely, pitifully smitten Brits.

Tim’s big success is the love of his life, Mary (Rachel McAdams, aggressively adorable, as always).

The end.

Surprisingly enough, that is not true because bumbling awkwardly but endearingly toward true love is not the film’s real focus.

Rather, Curtis’s interest lies on the fringes of Tim’s life, with everyone and everything he fails to notice because of his dogged attention to his pursuit of true love. And in the end, that’s what Curtis wants of us: to slow down and notice everything. Live life fully and you won’t need time travel to go back and fix things.

If that sounds trite and patronizing, credit Curtis for developing it at a leisurely enough pace and with sound enough acting that it does not feel that way. The life lessons Tim learns are thoughtful, and Gleeson’s performance sells the tenderness and the hard-won wisdom.

What it doesn’t really settle is the almost creepy dishonesty of Tim’s wooing of Mary, and for all of the rest of the film’s Nice Guy Tim-isms, it’s hard to look past the SciFi trickery he utilizes to dupe this woman into loving him.

But I suppose you can look past that, since the romance is hardly the point. Unless you’re a fan of romantic comedies, in which case, may I recommend Love Actually?

Verdict-3-0-Stars

 

 

New In Theaters, Slider

Hammer Time!

Leave a comment

 

by George Wolf

 

The very superhero nature of Thor presents a catch-22 for his standalone film installments. The medieval themes which anchor the character don’t really lend themselves to the fun we expect from Avengers films, yet leaving these themes behind would render any Thor adventure rather pointless.

The first film found a way to balance things quite nicely, establishing the blueprint that Thor:  The Dark World revises in even more impressive fashion.

The filmmakers made two smart moves right off the bat:  1) making Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) more than a bystander, and 2) bringing Loki (Tom Hiddleston) back for another round.

Well-rounded villains can make or break these films, and, in Hiddleston’s capable hands, Loki is the most interesting character on the screen. Sentenced to life in an Asgard prison by King Odin (Anthony Hopkins, finding just the right regal tone), Loki suddenly finds himself in high demand.

On Earth, Jane has stumbled into one the portals between worlds, and she becomes the keeper of something an ancient Dark Lord wants very badly. To save Jane and, a bit more importantly, the universe, Thor and Loki have to put aside old grudges and work together.

Director Alan Taylor comes with some serious medieval bonafides, directing several episodes of …pause for a moment of suitably reverential fanboy silence…Game of Thrones. His instincts for the pacing and framework needed to keep the Asgard scenes vital is spot on. While this may not be surprising, Taylor also shows himself to be more than capable of keeping the fun meter jumping as well.

The lively script, while a bit complicated in the early stages, settles into a very enjoyable rhythm that Taylor exploits well. Expect some nice surprises, of both the dark and light variety, as the film builds to an impressive final battle. Screenwriters Christopher Yost,  Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely even manage to land a few subtle jabs about the folly of war and how easily one army’s hero can resemble another’s zealot. Well played.

As Thor himself, Chris Hemsworth again displays a mix of charisma, physique and temperament that makes the role his own.  His scenes with Hiddleston are a mischievous hoot, both actors seemingly locked in to both their characters and the expectations of one another.

Aside from one curiously low-tech moment of Thor taking flight, much of the film’s 3D presentation looks fantastic, with a broader, more heroic gloss. In particular, an Asgard ceremony set amid candle lights and waterfalls is downright stunning.

The only thing keeping Thor:  The Dark World from superhero elite status is a first act that drags a bit. Once that is vanquished, acts two and three bring richer storytelling than we have seen from Thor. Yes, this film is darker, but it’s also more fun.

And, keep in your seat for two extra scenes.

 

Verdict-3-5-Stars

 

 

Outtakes

This Week’s Countdown: Best Onscreen ‘Staches

Leave a comment

The Mo-vember episode of the Studio 35 Show got us thinking ‘staches. What are the best onscreen mustaches? We chose our 10 favorites. Which big, hairy faces did we miss?

 10. Charles Bronson

Hard saying which set of whiskers is more impressive, Charles Bronson’s:

Charles-BRONSON

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or Tom Hardy in the title role for the film Bronson, so we’ll call it a tie:

bronson-trailer

 

 

 

9. Yosemite Sam

Sure, Snidely Whiplash was impressive, but when it comes to mustachioed animated gentlemen, we like the bold statement made by Sam.

yosemite_sam

 

 

 

 

8. Wilford Brimley

Our favorite cantankerous man with a mustache, Brimley and his whiskers have been making the world safe for oatmeal and extra terrestrials for generations.

5792788b1850b4ecd8b6dfc409b60bb9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7. Robert Redford

You forget how handsome the Seventies could be until you gander at the young Redford, who can even make an unruly mo’ look good.

butch-cassidy-and-the-sundance-kid-robert-redford-1969_i-G-67-6716-DIKA100Z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. Mike Ditka

Best NFL ‘stache (and sweater and sunglasses). He’s our Ditka.

mike_ditka_1987_11_11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5. Tom  Selleck

Can’t list famous mustaches without this hirsute Eighties PI.

Tom-Selleck

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. Burt Reynolds

Let’s be honest, the entire Eighties boom in mustaches is due to Tom Selleck and this man. Thank you?

 

burtreynolds-smokeybandit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. The Cast of Tombstone

More facial hair per square screen inch, Tombstone makes other films seem positively unmanly.

tombstone1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Ron Burgundy

This mustache escalated quickly. With a mustache like this, you have to keep your head on a swivel. It stings the nostrils.

ron-burgundy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Sam Elliott

Yes, he made the countdown twice! He’s the  most impressive part of the Stache Pack that makes up the cast of Tombstone, but the manliness that is Sam Elliot’s facial hair cannot be adequately praised with only one slot on this countdown! It’d be very undude of us.

sam_elliott_the_big_lebowski

New In Theaters

The Weirdest Place on Earth!

Leave a comment

 

by George Wolf

 

And the award for “Best Gimmick of the Year” goes to..Escape from Tomorrow!

Seriously. In his first project, writer/director Randy Moore risked the wrath of Mickey and covertly filmed inside Walt Disney World, piecing together the story of a family vacation gone very, very weird.

There’s really no point in trying to describe it any other way.  Even if the plot could be summarized, it would spoil the perverse joy of watching the film go places you can’t possibly see coming.

The acting is pedestrian at best, some of the segments not filmed at the theme park have laughably low production values, and Moore’s overall point gets muddied in the madness.

Does he hate the Disney machine and all it stands for? Is he using the resort to make a larger point about consumer culture running rampant? Or, does he just want to produce something unique, and have a little Goofy fun at the expense of an American institution?

It often seems as if a point was secondary, an afterthought to the fun of getting away with filming under Disney’s nose.  Moore gives the movie alternating streaks of satire and outright contempt, but cannot cannot find the cohesive voice needed to make it all work.

It’s a shame, because Moore was onto something here. As the film begins, you’re excited at the possibilities of what he is doing, only to have your enthusiasm strain under the weight of weirdness.

Still, Escape from Tomorrow offers a few low-brow laughs and a film experience that is truly unlike any other. If that’s enough for you, well, hey, it is a small world after all!

Sorry.

 

Verdict-3-0-Stars

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nfU_5NWBoE

New In Theaters

“It’s Not D&D!”

Leave a comment

 

by George Wolf

 

Here’s how much of a gamer I am not:  it took years -check that- decades for me to realize the great “zero charisma!” taunt from Elliot to his brother in E.T. was a Dungeons & Dragons reference.

In the film Zero Charisma, “Game Master” Scott (Sam Eidson) isn’t interested in D&D either. Instead, his world revolves around the role-playing board game he himself invented and plays regularly with three other social outcasts. If you’ve already guessed that Scott is a full grown man who still lives at home, give yourself ten “I know a guy like this” points.

Suddenly, there is a disturbance in the force, as one of the regulars has to drop out of the ongoing contest. A chance meeting with Miles (Garret Graham) leads to Scott extending an invitation he soon regrets.

Miles is smart, funny and sociable. He brings beer over and has a sexy girlfriend who apparently has a healthy sexual appetite. “You know what that’s like!” Miles exclaims to the group.

If the resulting open-mouth stares of wonder are any indication, no, they do not know what that is like at all.

The harder Scott tries to control his world, the more it falls apart, as writer/co-director Andrew Matthews, in his debut feature, displays a nice feel for social satire and dark comedy.  The game of “Scott vs. Miles” overshadows the role-playing exercise, as Scott becomes even more unlikeable, preying on his friends’ insecurities in an attempt to convince them that Miles is not what he seems.

Zero Charisma is often able to shine an uncomfortable light into the dark corners of alienation and social responsibility. Though it pulls back a bit at the finish to ensure matters are properly tidied up, Game Master Sam’s world is worth looking into.

 

Verdict-3-5-Stars

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=768wJZoqB9Q

New In Theaters

5 Oscar Winners Wasted

Leave a comment

 

by George Wolf

 

By the end of Last Vegas, you get the feeling everyone involved had a darn good time filming it. Robert DeNiro, Michael Douglas, Morgan Freeman and Kevin Kline got to hang together in Vegas for a few weeks, give the script the half-hearted effort it deserves, and leave happy.

Nice work if you can get it, too bad their fun doesn’t rub off on the rest of us.

The four Oscar winners play Paddy, Billy, Archie and Sam, lifelong friends who agree to meet in sin city for a..what else-bachelor party-just before Billy (Douglas) marries a woman less than half his age. Paddy (DeNiro) is still mourning the loss of his wife, while Archie (Freeman) is running from his overprotective son and Sam (Kline) has been given a hall pass by Mrs. Sam.

The guys are in Vegas about thirty seconds when they meet a beguiling lounge singer (Mary Steenburgen, making it 5 Oscar winners wasted in this cast) who is of course more than willing to be the Shirley MacLaine in their Rat Pack.

All these vets together on screen should be more of a hoot, but Dan Fogelman‘s screenplay never gives them the chance.  Instead, we get lazy age gags, sit-com obviousness and force fed attempts at character development.

Fogelman is an odd bird. He’s capable of smart, nuanced efforts such as Crazy, Studio, Love., but is just as likely to churn out losers the likes of The Guilt Trip. Last Vegas is closer to the latter, with a dependency on telling you about the characters when showing you works so much better. Throwing us a funny bone or two would also have helped.

Director Jon Turtletaub (National Treasure/The Sorcerer’s Apprentice) is content to keep his eyes on the wrap party, as the slapped- together scenes shine with the polish of one, maybe even two full takes.

Look, this is a Vegas bachelor party movie, so I gotta say it:  The Hangover may not have invented the niche, but it damn sure perfected it.  Strangely, by lifting a couple scenes from that film, Last Vegas seems to invite the comparison.

Not a good idea.

Verdict-2-0-Stars

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKiLs1iBgmg

Uncategorized

Halloween Calendar, Day 31: The Exorcist

Leave a comment

 

The Exorcist (1973)

The Exorcist gets a bad rap for being too Catholic, too traditional, anti-feminist. I read an account from a self-proclaimed Satanist who disliked it because the devil would never be so easily foiled. But for evocative, nerve jangling, demonic horror, you will not find better.

Director William Friedkin’s career is spotted with tepid-to-awful films, but when he cranks out a good one, look out. Hot on the heels of the verite action of his Oscar-winning The French Connection – a film that subverted expectations by casting seriously flawed heroes who don’t manage to resolve the film’s conflict – he made an abrupt left with this one.

Slow-moving, richly textured, gorgeously and thoughtfully framed, The Exorcist follows a very black and white, good versus evil conflict: Father Merrin V Satan for the soul of an innocent child.

But thanks to an intricate and nuanced screenplay adapted by William Peter Blatty from his own novel, the film boasts any number of flawed characters struggling to find faith and to do what’s right in this situation. And thanks to Friedkin’s immaculate filming, we are entranced by early wide shots of a golden Middle East, then brought closer to watch people running here and there on the Georgetown campus or on the streets of NYC.

Then we pull in a bit more: interiors of Chris MacNeil’s (Ellen Burstyn) place on location, the hospital where Fr. Karras’s mother is surrounded by forgotten souls, the labs and conference rooms where an impotent medical community fails to cure poor Regan (Linda Blair).

Then even closer, in the bedroom, where you can see Regan’s breath in the chilly air, and examine the flesh rotting off her young face. Here, in the intimacy, there’s no escaping that voice, toying with everyone with such vulgarity.

The voice belongs to Mercedes McCambridge, and she may have been the casting director’s greatest triumph. Of course, Jason Miller as poor, wounded Fr. Damien Karras could not have been better. Indeed, he, Burstyn and young Linda Blair were all nominated for Oscars.

So was Friedkin, the director who balanced every scene to expose its divinity and warts, and to quietly build tension. When he was good and ready, he let that tension burst into explosions of terrifying mayhem that became a blueprint for dozens of films throughout the Seventies and marked a lasting icon for the genre.

Remember the stories of moviegoers fleeing the theatre, or fainting in the aisles midway through this film? It seemed like hype then, but watch it today, experience the power the film still has, and you can only imagine how little the poor folks of the early 1970s were prepared.

Even after all this time, The Exorcist is a flat-out masterpiece.