Getafilm Gallimaufry: Robin Hood, L'Enfant, Cruise's Curse, Toy Story 3, and The Two Escobars

Robin Hood (B+)

After too many months away from the movies I jumped in with both feet last week, starting with a big spring blockbuster that I didn't want to let get away from me on the big screen. In the last installment of Gallimaufry I declared my love for Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, as well as the Robin Hood brand as a whole. Out of the loop as I've been from the movies scene in 2010, I completely forgot that Ridley Scott's version was meant to be an introduction to the title character.

You could understand, then, why I was growing restless as the movie went on and on with only minor teases of the charm, wit, humor, and romance that I associated with Robin and his merry men. Ridley's crew was comprised of weathered patriots fighting a ruthless (and inexplicably baldheaded?) villain for the honor of King Richard's crown. Embarrassingly, I was left scratching my head all the way until the finale, after which a title card reminded us that "now the legend begins". Ahhh, that's right! I'm thickheaded like that sometimes.

Getafilm Gallimaufry: A Prophet, Fish Tank, Robin Hood and More

[Note: This series includes scattered thoughts on various movie-related topics. I was looking for a word that started with the letter "g" that means collection or assortment, but lest you think I'm some elitist wordsmith, know that I'd never heard of "gallimaufry" and I don't even know how to say it, but it was the only other option the thesaurus provided aside from "goulash" (too foody) and "garbage" (no).]

_______________________________________________________________

A Prophet (A) 

A Prophet is the first must-see film of 2010. Maybe that's not saying much considering the caliber of movies that have been released in this first quarter. How about this instead: A Prophet is one of the best crime sagas in recent memory, and, along with last year's Lion's Den and Hunger, it has helped usher in a new era of harrowing prison dramas (the last truly memorable one being what, The Shawshank Redemption?).

Written and directed by Jacques Audiard, whose last film (The Beat My Heart Skipped) was highly acclaimed but unseen by me, A Prophet boasts impressive verisimilitude for a completely fictional story. Maybe it's not surprising considering former convicts were hired as extras and advisers, but Audiard himself has admitted that prison life is rarely depicted in French film and television. French citizens are apparently clueless about what goes on behind prison walls in their country, so it doesn't take much convincing to accept this story as reality.

Indeed, life on the inside is reflective of life on the outside: the old French/European power structure is fading as new immigrant groups - particularly Arab Muslims (that term should not sound nearly as redundant as it does) - are arriving and establishing their identities as the "new French". Symbolically speaking, this film is urgently relevant (it won nine of the record 13 César Awards for which it was nominated); cinematically speaking it is a masterful showcase of acting, cinematography, pacing (even at 150 minutes), suspense, music, action and, most importantly, global insight.

_______________________________________________________________

300 Words About: State of Play

I've been itching a little bit to write more words about several new releases, but in writing 100-word reviews for MSPIFF films for the Strib a couple weeks ago, I'm still "thinking small" about crafting reviews (plus I'm perpetually short on time this spring). This will probably remain true for a while since I'm going to see about 10 movies a week for the next two weeks, but as with the films I highlighted from the Beyond Borders Film Festival two weeks ago, I hope to expand some of the MSPIFF write-ups/festival reports to full reviews before select films have their wide releases later this year.

In the meantime...

Why do we trust star investigative reporters to organize details when they can't even find a stapler on their desk?

Like a paper clip that's twisted one too many times, State of Play eventually snaps apart, unable to regain its form and sending you into your desk drawer, or rather film library, for a new conspiracy thriller. It's certainly taut and tense, but almost to its own detriment. From the jarring opening scene to the roaring climax, we're hardly given a moment to stop and consider what these characters are doing and, more importantly, why. Directed by Kevin Macdonald (The Last King of Scotland) but heavily influenced by the typically overambitious writing of Tony Gilroy (Michael Clayton, Duplicity), it's full of memorably witty "gotcha" lines, but empty, for the most part, on thought-provoking insights.

Attempting and mostly succeeding in masking the blubbering writing (the characters are mostly relegated to shouting in newsrooms or mumbling into cell phones) is a high-caliber cast highlighted by Helen Mirren, Jason Bateman, Jeff Daniels, and, incredibly, Ben Affleck's mid-Atlantic/Philly accent. Less excellent but still decent are Russell Crowe (who evidently is embracing his newfound role as Hollywood's favorite "misunderstood yet resolutely righteous" schlub), Rachel McAdams, Viola Davis, and Robin Wright Penn, the last three of whom all deserved more screen time.

Moving on, I must declare that I'm becoming increasingly intolerant of manipulative, Michael Clayton-ish percussive sound effects and musical scores. Chases through dark alleys and parking garages are - or should be - harrowing enough without ominous musical blasts (evidence: 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days). If the characters are well developed and the urgency of their plight is properly illustrated, crutches like shaky cameras and menacing music can actually end up detracting from the suspense, in my opinion.

I haven't seen the BBC miniseries on which State of Play is based, but I can see why it received critical and popular acclaim, as it touches on controversial and relevant issues involving everything from the death of newspapers to the birth of mercenary private defense contractors. But therein lies the problem - State of Play ends up only "touching" on these topics, compromising in-depth examinations of them for the sake of cheap suspense and a happy ending. It should say something that instead of discussing these controversial issues, my friends and I ended up talking about the overreaching coincidences and gaps in logic.

Call it a decent little thriller hiding a missed opportunity.

REVIEW: Body of Lies (C+)

"Trust no one. Deceive everyone.," declares the official tagline for Ridley Scott's Body of Lies. The phrasing is an appropriate metaphor for the movie in two ways: 1.) the wording is as unoriginal and bland as the story itself, and 2.) it describes the internal marketing strategy for this movie at Warner Bros., since they're clearly trying to deceive us into thinking we're getting something richer than the action-packed trailer suggests.

It was only last April that Washington Post columnist David Ignatius's bestselling novel of the same name was released. Filming on Body of Lies began in September. How did they do that, and what was the rush anyway? We're guaranteed years more of these movies about Iraq and the "War on Terror" (a veritable genre is developing), so what was accomplished by fast-tracking this one for an October surprise?

As it happens, the biggest surprise in Body of Lies is the fact that it's not a better movie. Sir Ridley Scott's track record has been shaky in the last few years (though I don't think either American Gangster nor A Good Year were as outright terrible as some people think), but this is still a director who helmed a Best Picture winner within the last decade (not to mention Blade Runner decades ago), so the name automatically carries a fairly high level of expectation. Body of Lies marks the third time in as many years Scott has directed Russell Crowe, and the first time he's worked with the reliably great Leonardo DiCaprio (Blood Diamond, The Departed).

Unfortunately, this truly A-list trio has produced a truly C-grade movie. Body of Lies is admittedly better than several of its cousins (The Kingdom, Rendition), but despite an experienced director and committed cast, it still ends up achieving only mediocrity. It's almost as if Ridley Scott knew that substance was lacking but just decided to produce his way out of it and hope nobody noticed. Significantly slicker and more visually realistic than its predecessors, Body of Lies commands your attention only to tell you something annoyingly trivial. What was the point of this again?

Oh yeah, to celebrate jingoism and reinforce toxic stereotypes about the Middle East. Look, I'm not saying terrorism isn't a real threat and that these movies don't have some educational potential, but at this point the "rogue American hero infiltrating terror cells and romancing the beautiful local woman" is a pretty stale set-up, and we never learn any lesson at the end anyway, do we? The number of clichés on display here is almost breathtaking; it's disconcerting and frankly insulting, for example, to see CIA agents continue to disguise themselves in foreign countries by wearing track jackets, sunglasses, and floppy hats, successfully establishing themselves as the only people in the country ever dressed like that.

But I'm asking for too much if I'm asking for a new story. It's just that I would enjoy something fresh, a crazy conspiracy theory or a shocking twist at the end - anything new. If I'm not going to get anything meaningful out of these movies, at least entertain me. Russell Crowe knows this, otherwise why would he ham up his performance as a hilarious hybrid of Donald Rumsfeld and George W. Bush? Leonardo DiCaprio (whose "costume" here is almost comical: brown contact lenses and a lumberjack goatee?) knows this, otherwise why would he leave me near tears laughing at the scene with the children at lunch, one of the funniest I've seen all year? In fact if it wasn't for Crowe, Russell, and what should finally be a star-making turn for Mark Strong (Sunshine; Stardust), the movie would be almost unbearable to sit through, even if it is kind of pretty to look at.

Hollywood surrenders to contrivances and clichés yet again...

If any of this sounded familiar as you were reading it, imagine how I felt writing it. I already reviewed this movie here, here, here, here, here, and, most importantly, here. Turn a synopsis from any of those reviews into a Mad Lib and you'll likely end up summarizing Body of Lies in the process.

Grade:
Writing - 7
Acting - 10
Production - 8
Emotional Impact - 7
Music - 4
Social Significance - 5

Total: 39/50= 78% = C+

Short Cuts: "In This Life or the Next"

Gladiator (2000). Directed by Ridley Scott; written by David Franzoni, John Logan, and William Nicholson; starring Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Connie Nielsen, Oliver Reed, Richard Harris, and Djimon Hounsou.

REVIEW: American Gangster (B)

Background: Ridley Scott’s (Blade Runner, Gladiator) new film, American Gangster, is based on Mark Jacobson’s New York Magazine article “The Return of Superfly,” which is in turn based on the true story of Frank Lucas, notorious drug kingpin (and king) of 1970’s Harlem. Both Lucas (played by Denzel Washington - Deja Vu) and his former NJ police rival Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe - 3:10 to Yuma) were consultants during production, helping with accuracy and accents. The messy pre-production of the film took several years and scripts, and at different points involved director Antoine Fuqua (Training Day), screenwriter Terry George (Reservation Road), and actors Don Cheadle, Joaquin Phoenix, Ray Liotta, John C. Reilly, and Benicio Del Toro. Of course none of these people ended up working on American Gangster, but Del Toro actually collected a $5 million paycheck before production was shut down the first time. One other interesting piece of trivia - a number of the Thai extras were actually involved in Frank Lucas's real drug-running operation. Must be a statute of limitations for drug-related crimes in Thailand.

Synopsis: Harlem, late 60's. Frank Lucas (Washington) is the successor to local druglord/crimeboss Bumby Johnson. Richie Roberts (Crowe) is a divorced New Jersey cop who is too honest for his line of work. Lucas is committed to monopolizing the booming heroin market in Harlem, and he actually visits the source in Thailand before moving his entire family (including 5 brothers) to Harlem for assistance in the new venture. Before long, junkies all over New York are hooked on his "Blue Magic," and the corrupt NYPD, led by Detective Trupo (Brolin), look the other way while stuffing their pockets. After losing the trust of his fellow officers, Roberts is picked to head a federal taskforce whose only goal is to stop the drug trade at its source. By this time, Lucas has wealth, power, influence, and the reputation as the baddest dude in Harlem. Despite his low profile (quiet suits, simple routines, weekly church-going, etc.), Lucas (and Det. Trupo) eventually attract the attention of Robert and his team. Their surveillance pays off when they learn of one final, massive heroin shipment coming in from Thailand, and a major raid ensues. Lucas is dramatically arrested on his way out of church and forced to either take life in prison or rat out all of his NYPD bedfellows.
I Loved:
+ The production design - great sets, on-location filming, and a believable 70's look to it all.
I Liked:
+ Denzel Washington's ice-cold performance - better and more believable than his silly turn in Training Day.
+ T.I. - he was good in a limited role and shows as much potential as he did in ATL.
+ The RZA - outacting professionals and showing off a Wu-Tang tattoo.
I Disliked:
- Josh Brolin's exaggerated bullying, Russell Crowe's dull indifference, Cuba Gooding, Jr.'s typical spasticity, and Common's boring coolness.
- Chiwetel Ejiofor being miscast as an African-American again (as in Talk to Me and Inside Man) - he's British and excels in roles where he doesn't have to fake an accent or an attitude, like in Dirty Pretty Things and Children of Men.
- Not seeing images/interviews with the real Frank Lucas and Richie Roberts - I know, I know, wait for the DVD. Well I never see DVD's so I'll miss it.
I Hated:
- Nothing, really.
Grade:
Writing - 9
Acting - 7
Production - 8
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5
Significance - 4

Total: 42/50= 84% = B

Last Word: With all of the mess in getting this made, where was Spike Lee? I have to believe he would have made a better movie, though he may not have extracted better performances from the cast. American Gangster is not a bad movie, it's just not a very likable one. Basically, it's another shoulder-shrugger. Aside from showing that Denzel Washington can legitimately play a ruthless criminal, not much is accomplished. I didn't know anything about Frank Lucas, and still I have to read the original article and look for more information about him and Roberts. The corruption in the story, from the military to the police, is incredible and should have played a larger role. Although it kept my interest, some scenes could have been trimmed, mostly those involving Roberts' family matters. Speaking of Roberts, I have to stick up for Crowe here regarding his accent. I'm not from North Jersey, but I think Crowe probably got closer than the others (Del Toro, Phoenix) who would have played Roberts. He did fine with the accent, but just didn't seem very passionate about what he was doing. Maybe that's the real Roberts, though. American Gangster was the right idea for an old-school gangster movie, but the final product isn't as dark or as revealing as you'd hope for. Or am I just that desensitized by this point?

REVIEW: 3:10 to Yuma (A-)

Background: As a genre, Westerns have been relatively nonexistent the last 10 years. Unforgiven , after winning Best Picture in 1993, "spurred" the production of Tombstone, Wyatt Earp, Open Range, (sadly) Wild, Wild West, and a handful of others, none of which were blockbusters. I can't even think of the last one I saw (Brokeback Mountain doesn't fit my criteria and I missed The Premonition). So here comes James Mangold (Walk the Line) hoping to revive the modern day Western by remaking the 1957 classic 3:10 to Yuma, which I also have not seen. Christian Bale and Russell Crowe star, with bit parts by Gretchen Mol and Peter Fonda. Incredibly, IMDB reports Eric Bana and Tom Cruise were originally sought after for the main parts, which would have made for a completely different, really bad movie.

Synopsis: In late-1800's Arizona, down-on-his luck rancher Dan Evans (Bale) and his two sons witness the hold-up of an armored wagon (yes, an armored wagon) on its way to a bank delivery. The gang responsible is led by Ben Wade (Crowe), a legendary outlaw. Evans assists in the capture of Wade and negotiates a contract to join the escort team that will deliver Wade to the train depot in Bisby, to catch the "3:10 to Yuma" where he will be tried and hanged. The two day journey provides moments of humor and horror as the escorts (soon joined by Evans' teenage son) evade Wade's gang, Apache Indians, and each other as they reach their destination. Wade, for his part, does as much as he can to get into Evans' head and convince him he has made all the wrong decisions in his life. The finale finds Evans torn between his choices as both the train and Wade's gang approach Bisby.

I Loved:
+ The performances of Bale and Crowe.
+ The production design - seen on the big screen, almost all of your senses are stimulated by the feeling of being in 19th-century Arizona.

I Liked:
+ The excellent musical score, especially at the end.

I Disliked:
- The number of bullets fired at Evans that conveniently miss their mark.
- Luke Wilson's performance - what was he doing in this?

I Hated:
- The number of people shot at point-blank range - these don't need to be so graphically shown for me to get the idea.
- The creepy guy on the escort team singing the "hanging" song - was anyone sad to see him go?

Grade:
Writing = 10/10
Acting = 10/10
Production = 10/10
Emotional Impact = 8/10
Music = 4/5
Significance = 3/5

Total: 45/50 = 90% = A-

Last Word: In addition to his performances in two other movies in just the last year (Rescue Dawn, The Prestige), Christian Bale is firmly establishing himself as one of my favorite actors. Truly an acting talent, he has especially impressed me with his different accents. Russell Crowe, in the meantime, has also shown the amazing range he has in continually unique roles (The Insider, Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind). Both of them are excellent in 3:10 to Yuma (as is Ben Foster). I would recommend it for fans of dramatic Westerns and action movies in general. The gunplay is brutally violent, probably more so than it needs to be, and there are some cliches that may be holdovers from the original writing in 1957. Nevertheless, you should leave the theater affected by Bale's character, as the decisions he is forced to make will stay with you. I think James Mangold has succeeded with this - watch for big-budget Westerns to reemerge in the next few years. By the way, isn't the Old West a romantic idea, if you ignore all the inconveniences? Talk about the simple life - tend your cattle, make campfires, and enjoy unpolluted air and technological silence.