BEASTS OF NO NATION – The Review

beastsofnonation

Cinema can often be a doorway to witness events going on far from your hometown theatre (or multiplex). I’m talking of real events, often things more horrific than anything screenwriters can type up. Just last year a Best Picture Oscar went to 12 YEARS A SLAVE, which was based on a memoir from over a hundred years ago. SCHINDLER’S LIST also took the big prize nearly twenty years ago for a true tale from, then, just fifty years in the past. The tale told in this new film is ongoing, even as we view the story from the comfort of our theatre seats. It’s the tragedy of the use of child soldiers, boys not yet ten years old, in the near constant civil wars that plague the African continent. Yes, it was a part of the recent films THE GOOD LIE and MACHINE GUN PREACHER, but this new release puts us side by side with a young boy as he is swept up into a sea of brutality. Much has been made in the movie industry press about the fact that this is the first theatrical release from Netflix, the company known for streaming film through the internet into your home. They could’ve gone with a frothy “rom-com” or a CGI-filled fantasy adventure, something fun and “safe”. Instead they went with one of the most powerful, important motion pictures of the year, BEASTS OF NO NATION.

This is the story of Agu (Abraham Attah), who also narrates his story, a young lad of eight or nine. He lives a poor, but idyllic life in his dusty (unnamed) African village. It’s in a “buffer zone” a protected area from the battles being waged between the governments forces and armed rebels. Agu attends school, plays with his buddies (they make “imagin-TV”), helps his parents and siblings. But then the “zone” is dissolved and word comes that the fighting will soon be at their doorsteps. Because of the lack of motor vehicles, only the women and babies can be sent away, to the nation’s capital. There’s no room for Agu on the last truck leaving, so he will stay with his father and big brother. When the tanks roll in, they try to hide along with the rest of the men of the town. But the soldiers find them and accuse them of being rebels. Agu escapes the execution and dashes into the jungle. The hungry and frightened boy is soon picked up by a gang of rebels hiding in the wilderness. The troop’s leader, Commandant (Idris Elba) tells his underlings that Agu could be of some use since “little fingers can pull triggers”. Agu has no choice but to be trained to kill. Alongside his new friend and mentor, the silent Strika (Emmanuel Nii Adorn Quaye), the ragtag rebels cut a bloody trail through the land. Soon, Agu gives up hope of being with his beloved mother and younger siblings and becomes a brutal single-minded soldier.

The best known actor in the cast is, of course, the talented Mr. Elba. Why he’s part of the “Marvel movie universe” as Thor’s pal Heimdall and his name is frequently bandied about as the next 007 via several online campaigns. So it may surprise many moviegoers that he’s portraying such a throughly despicable person in this new film. And bravo to him for lending his efforts and fame to this production. We can understand why the Commandant has mesmerized these young men and boys. He looms over nearly everyone, speaking in an almost gutteral growl that intimidates and inspires. He’s equal parts father, wizard, and perhaps the fiercest of beasts. As formidable a performance as Elba gives, it’s in service to the astounding, heart-breaking debut of Attah as Agu. We see this hostile world through his unblinking eyes, a witness to unremitting horror and brutality. In the film’s opening, carefree minutes, he could be any playful, sweet child of ours, that mischievous son, nephew, cousin. When evil visits his world, Attah shows us the confusion and panic as he is suddenly on his own. He gives us a look at how his childhood is ripped away, how a boy can be turned into an uncaring weapon. The promising light in his eyes becomes dulled until he’s merely a killing robot. What little humanity that’s left is seen when with his only friend Strika played by the mute Quaye, who conveys his lost innocence without words, so scarred that he has no use for speech. These phenomenal young men are the heart and soul of this sad saga.

Cary Joji Fukunaga earned much acclaim last year for his direction of the entire first season (eight hours) of HBO’s hit “True Detective” and now establishes himself as a major film making force with his triple threat work here in direction, screen adaptation (from the novel by Uzodinma Iweala) and cinematography. He expertly goes from the tranquil beauty of nature in the training scenes to the chaos and madness of the conflict. Cary pulls no punches as the boys are forced to take a life, we’re right next to them as they spill blood for the first, and far from last, time. Every bit of abuse of these boys, the physical, verbal, and sexual are captured with an unflinching eye. This is a passionate expose, a call to action that never overshadows the personal story of Agu, who may represent thousands still trapped in the same Hellish torment. Despite the subtitles you may strain to decipher the dialogue, but the unforgettable images will pull you along, until these “freedom fighters” give in to ego and petty jealousy. The intense matter and violence may be the reason why the film has no rating, although it stars children, it’s really not for their viewing (it’s probably because one of the rebels has an aversion to…pants). But for mature, serious audiences BEASTS OF NO NATION is one of the strongest, dramatic cinema experiences ever.

4.5 Out of 5

BEASTS OF NO NATION streams on Netflix starting on October 16. It  also opens in theatres everywhere and screens exclusively in St. Louis at Landmark’s Tivoli Theatre

beastsofnonationposter

 

 

FREEHELD – The Review

freeheld

It’s been said time and again that major changes in the law and society can actually begin with one person,… or two. You know how just a pebble can gather momentum and bring about an avalanche that can alter the landscape. This new feature film docudrama tells such a story. Its subject is one still discussed, especially with the presidential campaigns starting so very early. The story begins just ten years ago, not that long before the sweeping changes concerning marriage which lead to equality throughout these united states. But at this time there were only “civil unions” which we often denied same-sex couples the rights that straight couples took for granted. Yes, this film is based on a true story, one that has been brought to the screen before, as a documentary short subject back in 2007. And it won an Oscar, too! The new dramatic adaptation shares its title with that earlier film also: FREEHELD.

The story begins with the look at the dangerous profession of Ocean County New Jersey police officer Laurel Hester (Julianne Moore), as she helps take down a drug-selling gang. She has the respect of all at the precinct, especially her macho, womanizing police partner Dane Wells (Michael Shannon). But Laurel keeps her personal life a secret from them: she is a lesbian. This prompts her to socialize many miles away from her home and work. At a volleyball game she meets the several years younger Stacie Andree (Ellen Page), an auto mechanic. After an awkward first date, almost ended when a closeted co-worker spots them, a tentative romance begins, after Stacie accepts Laurel’s need for discretion. Soon they decide to start a home, and Laurel purchases a house the two will share. When he arrives unannounced with a housewarming present, Dane meets Stacie and learns, and accepts the truth, about his partner. All is idyllic until a routine check-up on a persistent bruise shatters their world. Laurel has cancer that’s rapidly spreading through her body. As she retires from the force, Laurel sets about denoting Stacie as the recipient of her policemen’s pension, insuring that she will be able to live in the house they share. But county law doesn’t recognize civil unions and refuses the request. After being ignored at the meetings of the county’s board of “chosen freeholders” (hence the title), a local newspaper reporter contacts gay rights activist Steven Goldstein (Steve Carell), who makes the case of Laurel and Stacie the celebrated cause of Garden State Equality with the hope that justice is served before the decorated policewoman passes away.

The always impressive, and most recent long-overdue Best Actress Oscar winner, Ms. Moore bring every facet of the complex Laurel to dazzling life, making the spokeswomen for sexual equality into a warm, endearing human being. With her feathered “Farrah” blonde hairstyle, she could’ve made this “Joizee” lady cop into a caricature, but we see Laurel’s longing, yearning, tempered by fear and trepidation. We can imagine how tough it must have been to get the law enforcement “boys club” to accept her which spurs her concern over what would happen if her life was exposed. Moore shows her joy and finally finding the love of her life, which makes her descent into disease even more heart-wrenching. Page ‘s Stacie doesn’t have such an extreme conflict, but can’t quite comprehend the need for such secrecy. This tough, garage whiz is quite a change from her more eloquent, cerebral staple of role (she’s no “grease monkey” spin on JUNO) and page gives us a peek on her intense determination coupled with Stacie love and concern for Laurel. It’s only near the end of their public battle that Stacie finally dwells on her fading love. Shannon follows up his superb villainous supporting turn in 99 HOLMES with take on a brusque, tough guy whose surly exterior shields a soft, supportive soul. Dane is a faithful partner, no matter the curveballs thrown his way. When Laurel comes out to him, he’s not angry over her orientation, but rather that she felt she couldn’t share it with him. During the legal battles, he’s truly in her corner, though not as vocal or voracious as Carell playing the loud and proud Goldstein. Although he seems too flamboyant at times (as if he just popped in straight from an episode of TV’s “Will & Grace”), Carrell brings a needed comic energy to the politics and pain of the film’s last act. Also of note is TV vet Josh Charles as the “freeholder” who just may be swayed, and who fights to change the mind and hearts of his fellow members.

The film’s direction by Peter Sollett (NICK AND NORAH’S INFINITE PLAYLIST) is fairly standard and straightforward, never resorting to flashy tricks or narrative techniques that will lose the story’s focus on Laurel and Stacie. Ron (PHILADELPHIA) Nyswaner’s screenplay wisely delves into the love story with a sweet, sensitive touch, until the eventual legal declaration and occasional “speech-ifyin”. The score from Hans Zimmer never hammers at the heart-strings. Ultimately the film’s structure and scope never seems breaks the bounds of a cable TV effort, it’s a “super-special Lifetime movie event. This feels especially true when the story becomes a medical “tear-jerker”. Kudos, however, for showing Laurel’s chain-smoking, so that it doesn’t seem that the lung cancer comes outta’ nowhere. As she begins her long fade-out, Laurel almost becomes a martyr figure, suffering stemming from the injustices from close-minded society. It’s then that the fil almost wallows in her pain as she must trudge to those all-too familiar council chambers once again. Her story is an important one, but despite the terrific cast FREEHELD remains shackled by its dramatic deficiencies, when it should take flight.

3 Out of 5

FREEHELD opens everywhere and screens exclusively in the St. Louis area at Landmark’s Tivoli Theatre

freeheldposter

DRUNK STONED BRILLIANT DEAD – The Review

drunkstoned1

Attention comedy geeks everywhere! To paraphrase a literary classic, this new documentary feature lets us all “look back in laughter” at one of the most influential humor magazines of the last fifty years. Actually its legacy reaches on past its newstand existence. Yes, it’s been absent from newsstands (there’s still a few of them left) for nearly twenty years. But, to paraphrase again, we’ve come “not to bury this magazine, but to praise it”. And to recall the chuckles and the mini-empire it spawned. Of course, this wasn’t the first humor publication. Puck paved the way decades before. Then Mad magazine shook up the staid 1950’s. But by 1970, that mag had somewhat settled into a (still entertaining) routine, poking fun at suburbia, and wasn’t connecting with the “counter-culture”. Younger “baby boomers” wanted their humor to have a sharper edge, to reflect the “hippie” spirit, and so they turned to the “underground comix”, the realm of artists like Robert Crumb, Jay Lynch, and Skip Williamson, which were sold at “head” shops and other alternative venues. Then in 1970, a magazine tried to bridge that gap between Mad and the comix. It was sharp, stinging satire and parody. And along with the wit, there were lots of jokes about corporate America, rock music, drugs, and, to the delight of its mostly teenage readership, sex. in the pix of many, many topless ladies. Time to peer behind the scenes of that seventies (and early eighties) institution with (here’s the complete title) DRUNK STONED BRILLIANT DEAD: THE STORY OF THE NATIONAL LAMPOON.

Of course the story of Nat Lamp really begins in the sixties, with the college institution, the Havard Lampoon. By then their magazine parodies became quite sophisticated. Now here’s one of the many interesting tidbits this doc unearths: Mademoiselle magazine approached the college editors to do a parody of them as a great publicity stunt. Inspired by idea, and the cash, the college staff plunged in. This generated the spark to go past the college and venture into the murky waters of the magazine world. The film zeros in on the original editors, Henry Beard, Doug Kenney, and Robert Hoffman. We see the mag’s shaky start with its trippy “graphix” and attempt to ape Mad with a weird cartoon duck mascot. There’s insight from the still lovable huckster former publisher Matty Simmons, who became the “godfather” to the young group, a fella’ who looked more like a used car salesman than the guiding force behind these subversives. And then we catch up with Michael Gross , the art director who gave NL a slick professional look (if you’re gonna’ do funny stamp make them look like the real thing). We’re treated to lots of terrific art from that golden era (didya’ know that Frank Frazetta and Neal Adams were contributors?). Soon, other writers made their mark, like Michael O’Donoghue, Tony Hendra (a Brit TV star!) Chris Miller, and PJ O”Rourke. Much of their work still has a real “bite” (that “Vietnamese Baby Book” still smarts!). There are even interviews with the men that sold advertising space (a tip of the cocktail glass to Jose Cuervo). Slowly the brand branches off and expands to the stage with “National Lampoon’s Lemmings” (great old video footage of Chevy Chase, John Belushi, and Gilda Radner) and the later “National Lampoon Show” (hey, there’s young Bill Murray). The doc gives lets us a listen to their first comedy record “Radio Dinner” and the syndicated weekly dose of mirth and mayhem “The National Lampoon Radio Hour”. With the jump into book publishing, the doc devotes a much deserved chunk of time to what many people consider to be the mag’s supreme comedy achievement, the still scathingly hilarious “National Lampoon 1964 High School Yearbook Parody”. Simmons says that NBC approached him about creating a weekend live comedy/variety late night show (he says they passed, sot wishing for their talent to be stretched too thin). Finally Hollywood makes them that “offer you can’t refuse” and we hear of the mega-smash ANIMAL HOUSE with lots of insight from director John Landis. This plus lots of behind the scenes footage and stories from cast members Tim Matheson and Kevin Bacon. Their next huge movie hit, NATIONAL LAMPOON’S VACATION, is also profiled with stories of its creator John Hughes, director Harold Ramis, and quips from Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo. Along the course of the film we also hear from NL admirers like Billy Bob Thorton and Judd Apatow. This is one wild, funny trip through a true comedy kingdom.

Director/co-writer Douglas Tirola (along with co-writer Mark Monroe) aren’t re-inventing the documentary form with what seems at times to be a really well-researched bonus feature on the next super deluxe home video edition of ANIMAL HOUSE (hey, it’s been over two years, so it’s probably due for yet another re-issue). It’s told in a fairly straight-ahead chronological order (“then they did this, which led to this…”) and the interview subjects are the same basic talking heads (although there are some neat background knickknacks in view). But happily, the pace is jazzed up with some great graphic images from the mag’s pages and nifty limited animation enhancing some of the best gag cartoons (be sure and wait for the rolling Sam Gross-drawn frog). What actually surprised me was the way that the doc began to focus in on the funny yet sad and tragic story of Doug Kenney, the founder perhaps best known as the bespectacled Delta House veteran (“What are we supposed ta’ do, ya’ MORON!!”). The subtitle of the doc could be “The Seduction of Doug K”. He was engulfed by the vices of tinsel town and almost becomes a poster child for all the excesses of the flashy, coke-fueled 70’s and 80’s. His end became a harsh “wake up call” for those “over-indulgers”. Actually it would make a great solo doc or a dramatic/comedic bio-pic (Will Forte? Clark Duke?). I just wish the doc could have touched on the great “funny pages” section (No Vaughn “Cheech Wizard” Bode?) and the superb “Sunday Newspaper Parody” which revisited the 64′ Yearbook world. That’s being a bit nitpicky, but if they can run a few seconds of “Disco Beaver from Outer Space”? But (semi-) seriously this is an entertaining and informative look at a time before political correctness, when comedy burst its shackles and seemed to cover the globe.Without this mag would we have “Saturday Night Live”, “The Onion”, “Funny or Die” or “Adult Swim”. Uh-uh. And if you listen closely you can still catch the echos of raucous laughter generated by the lunatics of the Lampoon. Thank you Mona Gorilla!

4 Out of 5

DRUNK STONED BRILLIANT DEAD opens everywhere and plays exclusively in the St. Louis area at Landmark’s Tivoli Theatre

drunkstonedpster

 

 

TIME OUT OF MIND – The Review

_CR_0913

By Cate Marquis

When you imagine Richard Gere playing a homeless man, you may scoff. Yet director Oren Moverman, who also directed THE MESSENGER, put the movie star on the streets of Manhattan dressed as a homeless man and sent him out in the crowds. No one recognized him, which says a lot about how invisible the homeless truly are.

Gere turns in an outstanding performance as George, a man who seems to have teetered on the edge of homelessness for sometime, in this quiet, subtle drama shot in a striking realist style. Moverman plunges right into this story, without giving us any kind of background for George – we do not even learn his name until later in the film. We first meet him as he is roused from sleep and evicted from an apartment by a building manager (Steve Buscemi), where George had been staying with a friend, although it seems neither he nor his friend were legal tenants. George’s wish to shave before he leaves, his nice clothes and suitcase, and dignified manner suggest he was once a more prosperous person. However, he seems to have difficulty grasping what he is happening to him and his general lack of mental sharpness hint he has problems. Although he does not look like our idea of a homeless person, George is now without a place to live and nowhere to go.

The film is more art house in style and may prove challenging for non-film festival audiences. We are told nothing about George at the start, and details are only gradually revealed, often indirectly, through his interactions with people, primarily his estranged daughter (Jena Malone), a garrulous fellow homeless man he meets in a shelter (Ben Vereen) and a homeless woman with a shopping cart he meets in a park (Kyra Sedgwick).

On the streets, George wanders around and quickly loses his few possessions, including his wallet with his ID. He spends the last of his money on a beer, which he downs with a kind of desperation that suggests he is an alcoholic. Some time later – we are not sure how much later – he approaches a young woman named Maggie (Jena Malone) in a laundry mat. Her wary reaction tells us both that she is his estranged daughter and there is a history between them that makes her keep her distance. After meeting a nurse in an emergency room, whom he tries to charm into taking him home, he ends up in a large homeless shelter called Bellevue, where we get a glimpse of the lives of the destitute, discouraged or disturbed homeless and the overworked people trying to help them in an overburdened system.

When Israeli-born, New York-based director Oren Moverman was approached about making a movie starring Richard Gere as a homeless man, he had the same  reaction most of us would: No way. Gere is too familiar a face to play a role like this one. Yet the more he thought about it, the more intrigued he was with the challenge. He and director of photography Bobby Bukowski hit on a clever solution, which overturns expectations on how a film about the homeless would look, and even used Gere’s recognizable face to aid the film’s points about the homeless.

Moverman and his photographer approach their subject almost as if they are making a nature documentary. The camera often catches George in a crowd, where Gere’s recognizable face helps us find him, or films him through screens, windows or leafy foliage. The streets that George wanders are ordinary – busy, brightly-lit and full of people, who mostly do not seem to see George. The director accomplished this feat by setting up hidden cameras and using long lens for distant shots, then sending out the actor, made up as his homeless character, to wander among unsuspecting ordinary New Yorkers, not movie extras. Despite his famous face, no one recognized Gere, a chilling illustration of the film’s point about the invisibility of the homeless among us.

Gere delivers a striking performance, perhaps one of his best ever, and is on screen almost the whole time. Gere, who is also a producer on the film and the creative force behind getting the project made, delivers a spare, honest performance that has the feeling of truth. He accurately captures many quirks found in the homeless, such as denial and evasion, a seeming inability to comprehend some instructions or focus beyond the immediate, and repeating himself. At the same time, Gere crafts a distinctive individual, one who was once like you and me until he lost control of his own life through a combination of bad luck and bad choices. The performance is free of false, cloying sentiment, instead a direct and natural portrait of a lost person.

Moverman’s direction takes us inside George’s world, with sometimes disorienting angles and camerawork that mirror his own confusion. The realism is boosted by the soundtrack, which skips the usual music in favor of  ambient street sounds – snatches of real conversations, traffic noises, music wafting from bars and restaurants. The streets are sunny and flower-filled, packed with busy New Yorkers working, enjoying the weather and going about their lives. A few people extend kindnesses, like free food, some people are cruel, like the kids who mock him, but mostly no one notices George as he moves among them.

Despite the familiar names in the cast, this will not be a film for everyone. George’s story is  told in a series of vignettes that reveal information about him but more often illustrate the struggles of being homeless. The film uses a realism style that is more common in European films than here, which is one reason the film may be challenging for some audiences. There is no narration and there is a series of scenes, day or night, with little indication of how much time has passed between them – it could be an hour, a day, a week or months – or even if they are in sequence. It may sound confusing but it really is not – events in George’s life unfold just as they do in real life.

The film also uses Gere’s familiar face as a way to make the audience think about a “faceless” population. But Moverman is not a longtime campaigner for homeless, toiling in the trenches, and now making a heavy-handed advocacy film. TIME OUT OF MIND is subtle and fluid, a gentle, human way for the socially-conscious director to get his point across, about the difficulty of being homeless and their invisibility, and how a few bad breaks might bring anyone to a crisis.

TIME OUT OF MIND is a bold choice for Moverman, a step back from more commercial films to a less commercial art house one. Nonetheless, TIME OUT OF MIND is worth the effort, a visually striking film with a finely drawn central performance on a socially meaningful subject.

TIME OUT OF MIND opens in St. Louis at the Plaza Frontenac Cinema
on Friday, Oct. 9

OVERALL RATING: 4 OUT OF 5 STARS

TOOM_poster

PAN – The Review

IMG_1441.dng

By Cate Marquis

Audiences might expect the Peter Pan prequel PAN to be a big screen adaptation of  humorist Dave Barry’s and writer Ridley Pearson’s bestselling “Peter and the Starcatchers,” a funny, clever, imaginative prequel to J.M. Barrie’s beloved classic “Peter Pan,” or perhaps an adaption of the smart, funny, creative Broadway musical they wrote, “Peter and the Starcatcher,” a Tony Award-winning production that delighted grown-ups as well as kids.

Sadly, PAN is neither.

PAN is a kind of prequel to Peter Pan, but the cleverness, charm and humor of “Peter and the Starcatcher” are entirely missing in this disappointing big-budget extravaganza. Instead, “Pan” features a line-up of Hollywood stars, lavish costumes and sets with dazzling visual effects but a script cobbled together from  tired, overly familiar kid’s adventure movie tropes, a movie that brings to mind 2013’s “The Lone Ranger.” It seems like the filmmakers spent so much on the cast and effects that there was nothing left for a scriptwriter. PAN has a plot that is a mash-up of “Oliver Twist” and “Star Wars,” with a fistful of kid-friendly adventure movie cliches thrown in. “Original, charming and smart” are not words associated with this turkey. “All style and no substance” are more apt.

Levi Miller plays the future Peter Pan, who was abandoned by his mother (Amanda Seyfried) on the steps of a London orphanage (in a wink to movie history, cinephiles might note it is in Lambeth, where Charlie Chaplin grew up, a star who spent part of his childhood in an orphanage). However, this story is set not in the Victorian era but during World War II. During a bombing raid, underfed Peter and his pal Nibs (Lewis MacDougall) discover that the sinister nun (Kathy Burke) who runs the orphanage is both hoarding supplies and selling orphans to a mysterious pirate. Peter is captured by the pirates, and whisked away on a flying sailing ship to a floating island. The pirate who rules the island, Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman), greets the new boys by telling they they are now “free” – but only free to work in his mines, digging for a magical fairy-dust mineral.

In the mines, Peter meets a wise-cracking Han Solo-type named Hook (Garrett Hedlund), and they hatch a plot to escape to the jungle beyond the compound wall. There they meet princess Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara), who is not impressed with Hook despite his attempts to charm, but who helps Peter in his search for his mother. While Hedlund and Mara do a kind of Han and Leia stick, young Miller and Jackman play out a fast-paced adventure version of “Oliver Twist” mixed with a little “Peter Pan.”

That is a lot of big name cast to put in a film where no one seemed to think they needed to hire a scriptwriter. Don’t get me wrong – younger kids are still likely to enjoy “Pan.” It has plenty of bells and whistles – big splashy effects, swashbuckling action, chases through color-drenched fantasy vistas. PAN has a breathless pace, evil villains, brave heroes and a quirky sidekick. For younger viewers to whom all this is new or who relish its familiar beats, PAN can be fun because it is simple, fast and flashy. But this highly-predictable creaky story will be a harder slog for their parents, and there is not much to draw in the little ones’ older siblings either.

The most puzzling part is that the film is directed by Joe Wright, who has brought to the screen such excellent films as “Atonement” and “Pride and Prejudice.” Wright certainly has the skill to make a high quality and entertaining kids’ movie – and probably would have done so if he had been working on an adaptation of “Peter and the Starcatcher.” Instead, the all-style, no-substance PAN is sunk by its lackluster, cookie-cutter script.

The film also uses a puzzling pop music soundtrack, with Jackman as the villainous Blackbeard strutting out for his debut in front of his new recruits, to the sounds of Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit.” Those rights must have cost some dough, and the song adds nothing to the film apart from a catchy tune for Jackman, dressed in red stockings and a black frock coat trimmed in feathers, like some preening rooster, to make a grand entrance.

This puzzling stinker of a film is a missed opportunity, and likely something director Wright, as well as the cast, will hurriedly bury on their resumes. Unfortunately, this misfire probably reduces the chances that the much better prequel, “Peter and the Starcatcher,” will make it to movie screens. Too bad.

PAN opens in theaters Friday, October 9th in 3D and 2D

OVERALL RATING: 2 OUT OF 5 STARS

320173id1_Pan_Final_Rated_27x40_1Sheet.indd

99 HOMES – The Review

99holmes

Hello class, welcome to cinema economics 101. Before you start rolling your eyes, I should tell you that this isn’t about how producers raise the cash in order to fund your favorite flicks. No, we’re going to take a look at the latest entry in Hollywood’s flicks about finance: the very high ups and the low, low downs. This film joins the ranks of the WALL STREET series, with more than a passing nod to ARBITRAGE, GLENNGARY GLEN ROSS, and BOILER ROOM (and the soon to premiere THE BIG SHORT). Don’t be too concerned with the poster’s “based on real events” boast because it’s not about one incident, but an overall economic disaster that’s still affecting a whole lotta’ people. We’re talking the very recent housing boom and inevitable bust. How recent? Let’s turn the clock back just five years as we examine one’s man’s greedy desire to acquire, at any cost to those already living there, 99 HOMES.

The story begins on a particularly muggy Orlando, Florida afternoon in 2010, as real estate broker Rick Carver (Michael Shannon) must deal with an unexpected “problem” while evicting a family from their home. He’s pals with the local PD who aid in the “removals”. Meanwhile construction worker Dennis Nash (Andrew Garfield) has lost another gig, a shutdown just as the  house’s frame was set up. Frustrated, he returns to the family home her shares with his mother Lynn (Laura Dern) and preteen son Connor (Noah Lomax), whose mom is out of the picture. Soon Dennis is in court trying to save said home from the bank. After he’s given 90 days to pay up his debt, he begins a futile effort to get work. To his shock, Rick along with his work crew, and the police are on his doorstep with an eviction notice. Despite his pleads (his lawyer has the proper forms), Dennis and his mother and son are given two minutes to collect their things. After going to an extended stay motel ( a new home for many other displaced families), Dennis realizes some of his tools are missing. He finds Carver’s crew and confronts them just as they are to begin work on a house. When problems arise, Carver offers Dennis a cash job. The desperate man takes it, which leads to more work, and eventually an apprentice position with the ruthless broker. While keeping the nature of his work a secret from his family, Dennis hopes to earn enough cash to buy back their old digs. But at what cost to his soul?

The story could be called “The Seduction of Dennis Nash” since we’re seeing this world of despair and temptation through the eyes of this struggling single father. Garfield conveys his moral conflict with a subtle strength and proves that he’s so much more than a “web-slinger”. During his initial court appearance he lets us see the confusion and denial in his eyes and hesitant body language. It’s as if he’s saying, “I’m an honest, hard-working guy. This is not supposed to happen in the good ole’ US of A!”. Then when he’s kicked out, we witness his frustration and panic soon followed by helpless resignation and a feeling of failure, that he’s let everyone down. This leads to his quick descent into Carver’s world. During a powerful montage, we see the job eating away at him. He can’t help but feel the pain of all those displaced. The same can’t be said of his boss, who has expunged all empathy from his being. It’s the “show-ier”, more flamboyant role and the always interesting Mr. Shannon hits it out of the park. Like a vulture he swoops in on the unfortunate and desperate, but he’s also a deadly shark who must always keep moving,while devouring more and more. With his intimidating steely glare (the guy always looks P.O.’d!), Shannon turns this low rent southern Gordon Gekko into a true Mephisto, who dangles the keys to the good life in front of Dennis’s face. He’s got no attachment to anything, particularly these homes (“Nothin’ but boxes…just boxes”). When he gives a pep talk referring to Noah’s Ark, he becomes a memorable, devious bad guy who could actually live in any town. Dern provides the moral anchor to the story, as she tries to hide her desperation and confusion over being booted out of her long-time home. Still it’s tough to accept her now in a grandmother roles (in the last couple of years she went from being the mom of Shailene Woodley and Reese Witherspoon).

Director/co-writer Ramin Bahrani (AT ANY PRICE) has gotten some great work from that cast, but the script (done with Amir Naderi and Bahareh Azimi) ultimately stumbles in the film’s final half hour with a “macguffin” like bogus legal form which could destroy all of Carver’s schemes (kind of like that convenient level that blows up the lab in BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN). This twist seems forced and plays like a plot device to bring along a big dramatic finale’. It’s a shame since the preceding hour or so plays like a true modern horror story. Once Dennis hops into bed (not literally) with Carver, despair and tragedy follows him at every turn. A scene where he ejects a confused, elderly man out of his home (“I got nobody”) will crush your heart like an eggshell. Despite the story flaws this is a must see for fans of Garfield and the enigmatic Shannon, so if you’re in the mood for a sobering tale (many times you may think “There for the grace of…”) then you should take a tour of 99 HOMES.

3.5 Out 5

99homesposter

 

HE NAMED ME MALALA – The Review

henamedmemalala

This new documentary feature centers around the life of one very influential person. Unlike AMY from earlier in the year, this is not a retrospective of an ended life. This young lady continues to work and inspire. It’s that “fly on the wall” profile of someone at the height of their influence, as acclaim and fame swirl about them. The doc MADONNA: TRUTH OR DARE immediately comes to mind. Well, yes this young lady is famous, but she is not from the entertainment world like those doc subjects. Oh, I did mention that she is young, just a couple of months past her eighteenth birthday. Well, almost a year ago to the day she became the youngest recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. And in her less than two decades, she’s done more than most people at three or four times her age. In this engaging new film, we go behind the magazine covers, the awards, and speeches. Oscar-winning documentarian Davis Guggenhiem gives us an intimate glimpse of the remarkable Ms. Yousafzai in HE NAMED ME MALALA.

The title’s he refers to her father Ziauddin. In the film’s animated prologue, we’re told the story behind that name:  that of the inspiring Afghan poetess/warrior, Malalai of Maiwand. The film shifts between the current hectic days as Malala tries to balance school in her new British home as she travels the globe to tell her inspiring story while pressing world leaders into ending warfare and devoting their efforts into education for all people, and the story of her beloved homeland and the brutal attack that forced them out. She’s definitely her father’s daughter, as we see them travel as a team to the UN, different TV talk shows, a young girls’ school in Nigeria, and to a refugee camp on the Syrian border. Malala’s two younger brothers seem to have adjusted well to the new surroundings, while mother Tor Pekai has a more difficult time,  preferring to be out of the spotlight. More animation tells of their life back in northwestern Pakistan’s Swat Valley and how father set up a school. Snapshots show Malala and her brothers cavorting around the village full of rolling hills (and a nice waterfall). The idyllic life seems to come to an end with the arrival of the Taliban. News footage shows us the heavily armed men taking over, burning books, and banning anything from the outside world. We hear the audio tapes that the Mullah blares out of loudspeakers. When the schools are bombed, Malala speaks out via some BBC reporters. And when she reveals her name, we get a hazy, sun-drenched reenactment of the gunman’s attempted assignation of her on a school bus. This is followed by her time at different hospitals, the arduous rehab sessions, and her return to her cause.

Davis Guggenheim (AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, WAITING FOR ‘SUPERMAN’) makes the most of the intimate access to the whole family. We get the one on one interviews along with many intimate moments such as Tor’s shopping trek and Malala’s time at school (she even shows us some of her graded papers). They’re fascinating folks, so the director really had to know when to just get out of the way, although occasionally we’ll hear Davis on the sidelines or, from behind the camera, quizzing his subjects. His main strength in the film is balancing the big moments with the small. We see Malala playfully teasing her brothers, even as she googles some crushes (she into cricket more for the players than the sport), which reminds us that she’s just like most teenagers. But then there’s the incredible speeches she delivers and we’re stunned at her ability to communicate. The sweet moments never take away from the power of her eloquence. This makes Davis’s decision to save the horrifying details of her injury an insightful choice. In a way, it’s as if our own daughter or kid sister were viciously struck down. The simple, subtle score by Thomas Newman never overpowers the images, the best of which may be the judicious of animation (a great choice over re-stagings). The flowing, pastel-like art helps give the Pakistan back stories a dream-like, almost fairy tale quality. Kudos to animation designer Jason Carpenter and his whole talented team. But the biggest praise must go the entire Yousafzai family for letting us into their world and giving everywhere a chance to see how one young girl’s bravery and determination is helping to change the planet.

4 Out of 5

henamedmemalalaposter

 

Fantastic Fest: BONE TOMAHAWK – The Review

bone_tomahawk__full

Some words just sound better on paper than on-screen. Such is the case with S. Craig Zahler’s horror western BONE TOMAHAWK. What works in literary form does not work when spoken through the mouth of actors Patrick Wilson, Matthew Fox, and other members of this fine cast. Zahler has had a bright career as a published writer dabbling in genres but mainly sticking to the western front. Although I’m not as familiar with his style as some, his timely but overly snappy dialogue doesn’t quite roll off the tongue, and certainly isn’t as quick and sharp as the weapon of the film’s title.

A lone thief (David Arquette) shuffles into town late one night. He just lost his partner (played by genre veteran Sid Haig) and is still shaken by a sudden attack he barely escaped. But just as quickly as he downs his drink at the local watering hole, the town’s sheriff (Kurt Russell) throws him in jail – of course not before shooting him in the foot. The town’s nurse (Lili Simmons) is called upon to fix the new hole in the man. However, this late night call quickly turns into a nightmare when her husband Arthur O’Dwyer (Patrick Wilson) wakes to find that his wife is still missing in the morning. All signs point to a cannibalistic tribe that live deep in the mountains. It is now up to the sheriff, his assistant deputy Chicory (Richard Jenkins), an indian-killing gunslinger (Matthew Fox), and the injured O’Dwyer to hunt down the tribe and rescue the missing woman.

Russell and Jenkins are in top form as the two aging lawmen. Russell is straight no nonsense and all grit while Jenkins delivers much levity to the ultra serious affair. Their scenes opposite one another work the best. A charming rapport is ignited by two actors that can do this stuff in their sleep. Even still, some of their lines feel so forced and unnatural that you can’t help but roll your eyes.

Thankfully the dialogue starts to come together once the group sets out on the dusty trail. Male-bonding takes center-stage as the four men venture out into the unknown. Their support for the injured O’Dwyer is admirable and adds heart to their journey. But just as slowly as Wilson limps along, the film moves at a snail’s pace. At 133 minutes, Zahler spends far too long forcing the audience to empathize with O’Dwyer’s redemptive struggle against all odds to find his wife – he’s shown as some form of Rocky mixed with Jesus.

BONE TOMAHAWK showcases an impressive cast playing a cheap looking game of cowboys and indians. Aside from what the actors’ salaries, the only moments where you feel like the budget is being put to good use is in the gory effects. Blood splurts, limbs are removed, and bodies are bisected like meat in a butcher’s shop. The final act is a real showstopper! Gore hounds will be satisfied as well as those looking for a western with some bite. It’s just a damn shame that the journey leading up to the bloody bits is littered with stale male bonding, cheap looking costumes, and absolutely zero tension. Instead of building atmosphere as the cowboys close-in on the cannibal cave, Zahler seems more keen on creating sympathy for Wilson as he is shown time and time again hobbling around the desert.

BONE TOMAHAWK seems to want to be both a male bonding classic western while also incorporating a healthy amount of exploitation shocks. Zahler’s persistance on unnatural cowboy banter combined with an unnecessary sex scene (complete with female nudity, of course) and over the top bloodshed make this feel as if Lucio Fulci directed THE SEARCHERS. Given the talent involved, BONE TOMAHAWK feels more tawdry than the exciting genre mashup that it was shooting to be.

 

Overall rating: 3 out of 5

bone-tomahawk

Fantastic Fest 2015: CAMINO – The Review

4guide_camino_2__large

Zoe Bell has proven that she’s up to the challenge of getting her hands dirty in films like RAZE, BITCH SLAP, and her career igniting role in DEATH PROOF. Her physicality is without question. She more than holds her own in CAMINO as she rumbles in the jungle with a bunch of Columbian thugs. There’s a stark realism to her maneuvers, punches, and kicks, but the stunt woman turned actress from New Zealand doesn’t quite have the strength to carry this 70’s and 80’s throwback action film. CAMINO suffers from a case of being both monotonous and feeling like a film you’ve seen done better before.

Avery Taggert (Zoe Bell) is an award-winning photojournalist. Her new assignment is to venture into the jungles of Colombia and document a group of religious freedom fighters led by Fantastic Fest mainstay and all-around wild man Nacho Vigalondo – an inspired bit of casting.  After accidentally photographing something on her journey with the group that she was not supposed to witness, Avery is now forced to survive the hellish jungle while battling the internal ghosts of her past.

CAMINO is a standard action film and nothing more. Once the chase begins through the jungle, the film tries to spice things up with periodic fights with a different baddie. Each knife fight or skirmish includes the requisite drawn-out speech or commentary from the attacker. One scene in particular is quite ridiculous. The meanest tattooed baddie of the bunch spends a ridiculous time talking and toying with Zoe Bell to the point that he practically lets her setup her counter-attack without fail.

Part of what makes the film not work as well as it should is because it feels like one extended set-piece. Each action sequence seems like an extension of the next. The only thing that separates one from the next is the amount of dirt and sweat caked on Zoe Bell, and whether each bloody battle is lit by natural light or barely visible in the dark of night. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if they lit the entire film with only natural light since the night sequences are so distractingly dark. What makes it worse is when the camera zooms in close for the hand-to-hand knife fights. Half the battle will be trying to decipher who’s limb is whose.

Avery’s journey to capture the truth on camera lends the film a slight morality tale angle. Director Josh Waller balances the drama with the action fairly well, but neither feel entirely satisfying. Bones break alongside a soul-searching and truth seeking adventure film, but CAMINO doesn’t quite have the endurance to stand apart from the pack.

 

Overall rating: 2.5 out of 5

 

CAMINO_ONESHEET_A_LG-thumb-630xauto-57603

FINDERS KEEPERS (2015) – The Review

Finders Keepers 1

How can anyone argue with the rules of our childhood? Finder’s keepers is as sacred an adolescent law of survival as calling shotgun of implementing the infamous triple dog dare. But, what happens when we employ these tactics in adult life? One possible eventuality plays out in real life as the subject matter of a new documentary from Bryan Carberry and J. Clay Tweel.

FINDER’S KEEPERS follows the antics of two men, John Wood and Shannon Whisnant. John Wood lost his leg in a small plane crash that killed his father. Shannon Whisnant is an entrepreneurial picker who purchases the contents of a storage unit at an auction and discovers John Wood’s amputated leg inside a smoker grill within the storage unit he purchased.

You may be asking “how does something like this transpire?” Believe it or not, it all makes sense once the film explains the circumstances, but none of that changes the fact that truth is so often stranger than fiction and some real people are far better characters than can be written. John and Shannon are similar in ways, but are essentially polar opposites when it comes to how they view the world.

The filmmakers who brought us this film may have seen a quirky diamond in the rough, but FINDER’S KEEPERS does manage to tell an interesting story of human desires, delving into what makes these two curious characters tick. On the surface, the film feels like something hosted by Maury Povich or Jerry Springer, with absurdly eccentric characters quarreling over the silliest or strangest of squabbles. However, as the film progresses, the underlying human drama emerges, peeking its head out from behind the cantankerous curtains that separate these two men, revealing some raw emotion of illustrates the true fragility of human dreams and passion.

FINDER’S KEEPERS is not perfect. Few, if any films truly are, but in this case, it’s misleading. In all fairness and full disclosure, I’ll freely admit it took me two viewing to appreciate this film. Upon my first experience, I found the film to be funny and enjoyable, if not even interesting on a tabloid level. The laughter continued, and then a bit less, then a bit less, and I found the level of interest I had in the film was waning and I was growing bored. This was not a good sign.

Then, as any decent critic should at least consider doing, I gave the film a second chance. Still not perfect, but with this second viewing is when all the undercurrents of humanity poked through the surface sludge of silly sensationalistic slander. FINDERS KEEPERS was actually addressing the inner dreamer in all of us, even if we don’t look or talk or behave like these two men, it’s still essentially our story. There is something desired, but it’s just out of reach, despite of perseverance.

As Shrek would say, “people are like onions.” This is true, and not just in that some people stink. People have layers, many layers and these layers are not all the same. There’s not always a pearl within, but the process of peeling away the outer, decaying layers serves to reveal the true self. FINDERS KEEPERS does this for John and Shannon, but in two distinctly different directions.

John Wood is a man whose had a long, hard run of bad luck and poor choices he now lives with while trying to reconcile. He may have began his life in the luxury of a wealthy household, but for better or worse, it’s the choices we make that define us… FINDERS KEEPERS is a film about those choices.

While the film does become somewhat repetitive in its content, it’s a short feature film, running a pleasantly well-paced 82 minutes. While the intent, I believe, is to stay impartial, the truth of the matter is that we rarely ever feel sympathy for Shannon. We find ourselves empathetic for both characters, but ultimately Shannon is the heel, the villain, the antagonist. John, on the other hand, is clearly the protagonist, made out as the victim and showcased as the more likable character, despite his flaws.

The problem with Shannon is that he’s not an easy guy to like, even if we find a bit of ourselves in his persona, a bit of that dreamer or and rebel combined. FINDERS KEEPERS fails to compel its audience into caring much about its central characters, but it does raise some interesting philosophical questions, such as… if I buy a grill at an auction and find a human body part inside, do I retain the rights to that body part as goods purchased, or does the body parts’ owner retain the right to claim it back?

Something to think about.

Overall Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

FIKETH-001_OneSheet_FM (1)