giancarlorocks

Political commentary is to be expected in the creative medium of filmmaking. Yet, there is a time and a place for it. One would not expect to witness political undertones in a Robert Rodriguez film. Ergo, ‘Once Upon A Time in Mexico' is a brash, violent and massively disappointing debacle, which holds Rodriguez's follow up to the gaudy 1995 film ‘ Desperado' as a quasi-western wrapped in a Mexican political sentiment. Rodriguez first burst onto the Hollywood mainstream with his impressive $7,000 film ‘El Mariachi' which was later remade into his 1995 signature film ‘Desperado'. Sadly, since then, Rodriguez's best achievement has been the highly lucrative ‘Spy Kids' trilogy for Miramax banking in more than 275$ Million in total. Yet, just when we thought Rodriguez would display his true affinity for filmmaking, he drapes himself with the love a country (Mexico) and engineers despondent political commentary masquerading as an action film. Filled with extemporaneous characters, blurred action sequences displaying the lack of choreography and plenty of comedic misfires, the film that could have been – was not. ‘Once Upon A Time in Mexico' is a calamity since it was the spawn of one of the most gifted Directors out there today. Rodriguez so eloquently states in his opening Western sequence filled with guitar solos through his credits that he shot, chopped and scored the film. And while it was indeed a labor of love, he does his best at parlaying his love for cinema. Yet his convoluted script and lack of action sequences leaves the filmgoer bitter and once again in revolution against the lack of worthy Hollywood cinema. Antonio Banderas reprises his role as the guitar wielding, gun-toting El Mariachi who actually dwells in the background of this multi-layered, ambitious misfortune of a storyline which spirals into eternal script damnation. Willem Dafoe wins this year's ‘Miscast Actor of the Year' Award as he thickens a horrendous Mexican accent to portray Armando Barillo, a Mexican Drug Lord who intends to overthrow the Mexican President. Johnny Depp (whose gracious acting styles, wicked one-liners and bloodied missing eyeballs cannot even save this film) is a corrupt CIA agent who demands payback for the uprising and employs El Mariachi to ensure the uprising does not go according to plans. Inside this thick, abrupt, coarse and difficult-when-it-does-have-to-difficult storyline lays a story (somewhere) about lost love, vendettas and retribution. Therein lies the problem. The vengeance and retribution should have been at the forefront of this film instead of casting a treatise on Mexico's political state.

Banderas does his best to speak as little as possible while Rodriguez displays his editing skills in excess of as he uses transitions and dissolves at every waking moment, which further saddens the film and proves to be disappointing for an Artist of his once thought of inherent brilliance. What keeps this film going through its many gaps is the constant appearance of a blistering cast. Just as the film begins to dip, there is Mickey Rourke appearing as a washed out fugitive. Then as his underdeveloped character begins to become tiring, there is the sexy Eva Mendes (2 Fast 2 Furious, Training Day) portraying an equally underdeveloped Mexican Officer. Wait; just as the script becomes obscenely over-the- top, we have Ruben Blades (Devil's Own, Color of Night) appearing as a retired FBI Agent adamant about putting a stop to Barillo's tyrannical feats. And just when you think you can't possibly see any space for another dumb-witted character, Rodriguez lays it thick with the biggest of them all - there is Enrique Iglesias; mole and all, prostituting himself for a dollar (much like he does in real life). Rodriguez stuns the audience with the lack of action, the missing depth in storytelling and the absence of Salma Hayek for a ridiculous reasons which to this point I still do not know how bettered the script. Without releasing any information, her absence is supposed to make the audience see how it fuels the rage behind ‘El Mariachi'. Yet Rodriguez is too busy trying to display his lack of proficient storytelling that he completely misdirects his stressing of the main points of the film. In a disappointing direction for the film, the main character is the country of Mexico and masked behind this glamororized B-Movie Western is a strong political sentiment that is completely misplaced.

Giancarlo's Rating: *1/2

The most exasperating aspect of Ben Affleck's newest catastrophe is how

ineffective ‘Daredevil' is as a so-called Blockbuster. Set in current day New York, the film traces the origins of an enigmatic superhero similar to the

beginnings of the greatest superhero of all – Batman. As in the former film, the press also languishes Daredevil's existence and brings forth artists' renderings of a half vampire, half man prowling the streets at night. Perhaps if the

superhero actually was a half man -half vampire, the film would have been

much more stirring Directed by Mark Steven Johnson, Fox had apparently hired him for his die- hard vision of the film, yet, I see absolutely no vision in this film. A film can work only if a story is present, in ‘Daredevil' there is the reoccurring theme of

retribution, yet absolutely no story which is serving as a trajectory for the actions on screen. It seems like Johnson elected to play it safe and as a result, there is no dichotomy within the character of Matt Murdock-unsighted Lawyer by day,

buffed crime fighter by night. Furthermore, it does not help when he is played by Ben Affleck. Not taking anything away from Ben Affleck, but there is absolutely no delivery in his

performance. It seems as if Ben was just along for the ride knowing his career will not be stunned if the movie fails. Yet, in five years time, we all know Ben will be looking back and saying, ‘What was I thinking?'. Seeing as Tim Burton is the pioneer of the dark and gothic film, there is such a thing as too dark and gothic. ‘Daredevil' suffers from this infectious flaw as we see the hero only in dark alleys and choreographed sequences with barely any

light on screen. Taking into account the mastery of such films as ‘Batman' and ‘The Crow', that image worked for those creations, yet in this film, when we

actually see Daredevil in a lighted room, we cannot help but laugh at the

stupidity of this character. He is simply not believable, many times I found myself as well as others rooting for the villain in order to end Daredevil's miserable display of self-righteousness. His origins are retold in a formulaic fashion, and his appeal for justice comes out of the loss for someone – as it always is. Yet, Director Mark Steven Johnson suffers from the curse ‘Batman Returns' suffered from – an inundation of

characters. Colin Farrell is maliciously cast as the venerable villain ‘Bullseye'. He is probably the best part of the film. Despite his limited dialogue, he

relinquishes this role and creates a veritable good time as his homicidal angst works well. Then there is another villain played by Michael Clarke Duncan,

many have lamented that his ‘Kingpin' comic book character is of a white male Caucasian, but Duncan plays it well as best as he can as a huge Black Man

with arms of steel as will be seen in the studio-set filmed fabricated climax. Wait - enemies do not stop there. Within the city of New York, there is another unbalanced mind by the name of Elektra Natchios who after seeing her father

murdered by Daredevil, decides to also put on a suit and wreak havoc all in

hopes of defeating Daredevil. Now, I was expecting a good time at the movies, but this film can be equated with pure mindless dribble. I did enjoy the dark tone of the film and the nihilistic beliefs of the murderous Daredevil character, but the rest of the film was wasted celluloid. The only great part is at the very end within the showdown of

Daredevil and Kingpin. If someone can think of a lazier way of keeping a sequel open – please let me know. Furthermore, this film has the most ineffective use of camera angles. Usually the ‘Dutch Tilt' is supposed to evoke some kind of anticipation within a scene, yet, Johnson implements the angles during a standard courtroom sequence.

There are some great shots, but none of them innovative. Furthermore, as

aforementioned it is too dark of a film and the overabundance of darkness

probably is used as a cosmetic to mask the most horrible screenplay for a comic book character besides the Dolph Lundgren fiasco ‘The Punisher'. Johnson

also wrote the film and I admire him for trying to cram in as much as he could for the movie buck. But that is where the problem is – he crammed in too much.

Furthermore, there were so many fade-outs to end scenes in the film it gave me a headache. It seemed as if the rushed postproduction schedule rushed the

editing of the film, which is also tepid at best. In conclusion, when it comes to film I am both selective and cynical. I am very harsh when it comes to film because they cost a lot to see and many times we

waste our time on them and cannot get that valuable time back – this is a solid example. The magic of cinema is slowly escaping us as studios are bringing

forth plenty of bad cinema all in the name of a dollar. While it will have a strong opening weekend, it will succumb to a horrible second weekend, as the word

will be out on the horridness of this film. By the way, if you really like the Bullseye character, stick around during the end credits, there is a little

surprise…

Giancarlo's Rating: *

Director Alexander Payne first caught my eye with his 1999 eye opener

‘Election'. Matthew Broderick and an undiscovered Reese Witherspoon starred

in that fine film dealing with conflict and pride. In his newest outing, Payne directs the sublime Jack Nicholson in one of his richest roles and conflict and pride are also brought to the forefront in a delightful little film entitled ‘About Schmidt'. Payne engineers a rich screenplay which stems from a novel by Louis

Begley. Payne's screenplay allows Nicholson to show a wide array of range

and depth as his Warren Schmidt is a character befuddled by inner angst and a lack of true satisfaction with life. Payne sets the story in his hometown of

Omaha,Nebraska ( One of the Theatre Marquis in Omaha showed the title for

‘Sideways', Payne's yet to be released Project). and uses the simplistic setting to retell the complicated story of a retired Assistant Vice President of an

Insurance carrier who must deal with his abrupt end to normality.

Or so one thinks. As the film unravels, we are introduced to a myriad of characters and dilemmas as Warren Schmidt makes us understand the

monotony and tediousness of his life. Payne opens the film with a smart little series of shots displaying the building where Schmidt works. After a quirky few shots presenting the high rise building as the centerpiece in the middle of a small town, Payne thrusts the viewer right into the empty office of a lonesome Schmidt counting down the seconds until his retirement. Without saying a word for the first three minutes of the film, we can already feel the loneliness and discontent of this man. Payne unravels his characters at a ‘snails pace' intentionally so the audience can appreciate and understand the complexities of these well written

characters. Schmidt's biggest complexity is his unhappiness. The character

deliciously incarnated by Jack Nicholson is a treat to watch as he wrestles with his inner angst. Payne's screenplay tackles issues many grapple with on a

regular basis: Have I made a difference in the world? Was my life worth

anything? Did I lead a good life? All these questions arise when Nicholson retires and is forced to travel the US to celebrate his daughter's wedding. Without giving too much away, the

script is just superb. The character of Warren Schmidt is a sad and insecure

individual who for all of his life despite his wife, or his child, has never really spoken with anyone. Payne uses an unconventional outlet for Schmidt to vent,

for not even his adulterous best friend can be turned to anymore. Schmidt's

character seemed cold and frail, but he warmed up to an overseas child foster care program. For twenty two dollars a month, Schmidt was not only able to help a child in Tanzania, but he was able to help himself as those letters sent to his foster child were testaments of his repressed good nature and dire loneliness, Some hurdles discovered along the way are close deaths within the family, an idiotic future son in law and a daughter he would do anything in the world for. Payne paints a miraculous portrait of appreciation and zest for life and does so in at times a quite comedic manner without being overbearingly funny. Payne directs the film with a touch of class as he presents us with a fresh and awe inspring tale of insipdness and hostility for one's life. It is a coming of age film without the coming of age. It simply tells the story of a man searching for inner peace. It shows us how easy it is to get caught up in our careers, in our successes, that many tend to forget the riches far past those of monetary value. The film is a remarkable journey into a thorough soul searching session and additional marvelous performances add to the anti-generic film that it is. Kathy Bates, Howard Hesseman and Dermot Mulroney add to the brilliance of this film. A categorically great film for anyone who has dealt with crises of their own and wants to see how other would deal with their troubles.

Giancarlo's Rating: ***