The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent / *** (R)

 

Nick Cage: Nicolas Cage

Javi Gutierrez: Pedro Pascal

Vivian: Tiffany Haddish

Olivia: Sharon Horgan

Lucas Gutierrez: Paco León

Richard Fink: Neil Patrick Harris

Addy Cage: Lily Sheen

Gabriella: Alessandra Mastronardi

Carlos: Jacob Scipio

Martin: Ike Barinholtz

Nicky: Nicolas Kim Coppola

Lionsgate presents a film directed by Tom Gormican. Written by Gormican & Kevin Etten. Running time: 107 min. Rated R (for language throughout, some sexual references, drug use and violence).

Oh, how we love Nicolas Cage. He’s an actor about which I’ve never heard anyone say, “I hate that guy.” And I’ve heard people say that about many a great actor. We love him when he’s good, and we love him even more when he’s bad. We love his great movies, like Raising Arizona, Moonstruck, and his Oscar-winning performance in Leaving Las Vegas. We love him in over-the-top action films, like The Rock, Con Air, and Face/Off. We even like him in movies that we hate, like The Wicker Man, Drive Angry, and (count them) two whole Ghost Rider movies. This is probably because Cage has the ability to let all self-consciousness go as the role requires, which makes him the perfect subject for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent.

You might go into this movie thinking it was written specifically for Cage. Maybe it was. I don’t know. However, the filmmakers really could’ve chosen any aging Hollywood star who seems to have his best roles behind him. It is no surprise, though, that it was Cage who was willing to put himself out there as the subject of a film in which he plays a version of himself named Nick that is so desperate for a gig that he agrees to make a birthday appearance at an eccentric European billionaire’s party for $1 million. What Nick is unaware of is that despite the fact that Javi is a superfan of his, he is also suspected by the CIA to be the head of a major crime cartel. On his way to the gig, a CIA agent, Vivian, recruits Cage to help them gather intel and locate the kidnapped daughter of a politician being manipulated by the cartel.

With Cage perfectly cast in the lead role, it’s no surprise that he is surrounded by an amazing supporting cast. Hot of his success in quirky roles in Wonder Woman 1984 and the Disney+ television series The Mandalorian, Pedro Pascal plays the rather strange Javi in such a way it is hard to tell whether the CIA has mistakenly identified him as a vicious crime lord or he is just good at separating his fanatic love of all things Cage from his criminal calling. Tiffany Hadish and Ike Barinholtz are given the task of representing America’s possibly faulty world police as the CIA agents in charge of the rescue operation. Using Cage to achieve their goals is a questionable approach to say the least and the two squeeze a great deal of comedy out of that premise, but unfortunately, are under-utilized in the film’s plot as a whole. I definitely would’ve liked to have seen much more of both of these actors. 

British actress Sharon Horgan, who has had a great deal of success as a comedienne in her home country in television shows like Catastrophe and The Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margaret, plays Cage’s ex-wife, Olivia, who along with their daughter inadvertently gets mixed up in the strange plot that he finds himself. Olivia is fed up with Cage’s inability to be present as a father to their daughter, Addy (Lily Sheen). There is no correlation between Olivia and Addy and any of Cage’s real life family, but Horgan does a wonderful job balancing the scales of the ridiculousness of Cage’s life as a famous actor and helping to ground this heightened world with a sense of reality to make the audience believe these characters are real. Finally, Neil Patrick Harris is Cage’s aptly-named talent agent, Richard Fink. Although Harris plays the constantly pivoting character perfectly, I do wonder whether Fink might’ve been served better with a less famous actor in the role. I kept expecting that Harris was also playing a version of himself, rather than someone who wasn’t famous.

Cage even gets the chance to provide two versions of himself to the audience as he is often visited by a younger version of himself, seemingly modeled after his role in David Lynch’s Wild At Heart. The younger Cage goads the “real” Cage to take more risks and grab life by the balls, the way he’s rumored to have in his younger years in Hollywood. This is where the audience really gets to enjoy that over-the-top flair that Cage so often uses in some of his more questionable projects, like Vampire’s Kiss and Deadfall. 

The success of the movie really falls on the shoulders of both Cage and Pascal, however, as their budding friendship is key to both the plot of the film and its comedy. There is a wonderful scene when they’re being chased through a beautiful Tuscan village by men with guns not long after they’ve dropped some acid together. In a moment of respite, paranoia begins to set in with Pascal as he begins to think just about any random person on the street could be someone who wants to kill them. Cage is starting to get into his own eccentric groove at this point and the way their two performances compliment and conflict with each other is just comedic perfection.

I am unfamiliar with writer and director Tom Gormican’s previous film That Awkward Moment, but I did watch the television show he created, Ghosted. He seems to specialize in putting opposing characters into serious situations that he approaches from a comedic point of view. That is certainly the realm in which this film is operating but with a particularly meta bent due to the fact that Cage is playing a version of himself. What this film is particularly adept at is navigating the real conflicts and self-interests involved in such an endeavor. Cage is constantly conflicted because he feels he must work but his recent output has been artistically negligible. He wants to be a good dad, but is out of touch with any aspects of what that entails. And he wants to be a real life hero and help the CIA but has found what he feels to be a genuine friend in Javi. Surprisingly, this isn’t the one of the most Nicolas Cagey Nicolas Cage movies you’ll ever see, but it is one that knows exactly what it is and uses that knowledge to make it a better Nicolas Cage movie than a great deal of them out there.

Unsane / **½ (R)

Bleeker Street

Sawyer Valentini: Claire Foy

Nate Hoffman: Jay Pharoah

Violet: Juno Temple

David Strine: Joshua Leonard

Angela Valentini: Amy Irving

Bleeker Street Media and Fingerprint Releasing present a film directed by Steven Soderbergh. Written by Jonathan Bernstein & James Greer. Running time: 97 min. Rated R (for disturbing behavior, violence, language and sex references).

When reviewing a movie like Steven Soderbergh’s latest feature, Unsane, a critic is faced with a dilemma of split purposes. On the one hand, you are reviewing a thriller that depends upon the tropes of the genre and the storytellers’ abilities to surprise and create tension for the audience. On the other hand, you’re reviewing an experiment of sorts. Soderbergh’s second feature film back from his brief “retirement” is not the first feature film to be shot on an iPhone, but the success of such films—mostly in terms of box office—has yet to reach a point where any sort of verdict has been made as to an audience’s willingness to accept such a film medium as mainstream. For the most part, Soderbergh’s experiment is a success in that it doesn’t feel like an experiment in the slightest; which raises the question, why exactly was this screenplay chosen for this experiment?

The screenplay by Jonathan Bernstein and James Greer raises questions about the mental health industry in this country. These questions are important and legitimate, focusing on the very real practices of a select few voluntary admittance facilities that take advantage of their clients’ lack of knowledge about their rights and the willingness of insurance companies to cover such admittances without question for short periods of time. Unfortunately, other aspects of the screenplay bring into question the legitimacy of the mental health industry as a whole and could be seen as exploiting the realities of mental health issues for the purposes of schlock entertainment. I’m all for schlock, but there were times while watching this film that I felt uncomfortable about how little understanding the filmmakers were displaying in order to pump up the horror entertainment value of their story.

Unbroken / **½ (PG-13)

Louis Zamperini: Jack O’Connell

Wantanabe: Miyavi

Phil: Domhnall Gleeson

Fitzgerald: Garrett Hedlund

Mac: Finn Wittrock

Cup: Jai Courtney

Universal Pictures presents a film directed by Angelina Jolie. Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen and Richard LaGravenese and William Nicholson. Based on the book by Laura Hillenbrand. Running time: 137 min. Rated PG-13 (for war violence including intense sequences of brutality, and for brief language).

The story of Louis Zamperini, an Italian American Olympic athlete who served his country as a bombardier in the Pacific Theater of WWII and was captured after surviving for 47 days at sea only to suffer the torments of a prisoner of war camp in Japan, is certainly the stuff of Hollywood. His story and life are testaments to what Tom Brokaw called The Greatest Generation. Zamperini experienced more in the first quarter of his life than many ever experience in a lifetime. While the life is great, the movie leaves much of it unexplored in detail and emotions.

Penny Thoughts ‘14—Under the Skin (2014) ***½

R, 108 min.

Director: Jonathan Glazer

Writers: Walter Campbell, Jonathan Glazer, Michel Faber (novel)

Starring: Scarlett Johansson

“Under the Skin” is one of those cerebral sci-fi flicks that leave the majority of viewers cold. It’s meant to. I’m sure many people will go into this film expecting something like Scarlett Johansson’s recent “Lucy”. After seeing this bleak film set with the backdrop of a beautiful but bleak Scotland winterscape, many will wonder what they just saw. Some will complain that it was slow and depressing and that nothing happens. This opening paragraph is for those people who will feel that way. You can stop reading now.

Penny Thoughts ‘14—The Unknown Known (2014) ***½

PG-13, 103 min.

Director/Writer: Errol Morris

Featuring: Donald Rumsfeld

Voice: Errol Morris

In his first feature, “Gates of Heaven”, documentarian Errol Morris interviews an old woman who just lets loose on his camera with a five minute monologue that goes from one end of the spectrum to the other in a way that sees her contradicting her own point by the time she reaches the end. “The Unknown Known” is a feature-length version of that same monologue, this time with former two-time U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld as the interviewee.

Penny Thoughts ‘13—42 Up (1998) ****

NR, 139 min.

Director: Michael Apted

Featuring: Bruce Balden, Jacqueline Bassett, Symon Basterfield, Andrew Brackfield, Suzanne Dewey, Nicholas Hitchon, Neil Hughes, Lynn Johnson, Paul Kligerman, Susan Sullivan, Tony Walker

I post this review on my own 42^nd birthday. Back in 1964, British television embarked on a grand social experiment that involved a group of children of varying social classes, 7 years of age. The filmmakers would return to this group of people every seven years to see where they had come in life in a series of films called the “Up” documentaries. Just this past year the most recent installment “56 Up” was released. I’m only on “42 Up”. I suppose that is fitting.

Penny Thoughts ‘13—The Umbrella Man (2011) ****

NR, 7 min.

Director: Errol Morris

Featuring: Josiah “Tink” Thompson

I’ve never dwelled much on the assassination of JFK. It’s not something that ever gained my fascination in the way it does many people. Certainly, I’m a fan of Oliver Stone’s film, but beyond that the only time I ever seem to think about it is every November 22, when everyone rolls the conspiracy theories back out for the anniversary. This year is the 50^th.

Penny Thoughts ‘13—Under the Dome, season 1 (2013) **

TV-14, 13 45-min. episodes

Creator: Brian K. Vaughan

Directors: Niels Arden Oplev, Jack Bender, Paul A. Edwards, Kari Skogland, Miguel Sapochnik, Roxann Dawson, Sergio Mimiaca-Gezzan, David Barrett, Peter Leto

Writers: Brian K. Vaughan, Stephen King (novel), Rick Cleveland, Adam Stein, Peter Calloway, Soo Hugh, Caitlin Parrish, Daniel Truly, Andres Fischer-Centeno, Scott Gold

Starring: Mike Vogel, Rachelle Lefevre, Dean Norris, Natalie Martinez, Britt Robertson, Alexander Koch, Colin Ford, Mackenzie Lintz, Nicholas Strong, Jolene Purdy, Aisha Hinds

Guest starring: Jeff Fahey, Samantha Mathis, Beth Broderick, Dale Raoul, John Elvis, Josh Carter, R. Keith Harris, Ned Bellamy, Leon Rippy, Andrew Vogel, Jaret Sears, Linds Edwards, Natalie Zea, Mare Winnigham, Ray Hernandez, Crystal Martinez, Jason Alexander Davis

I rarely stay on the fence about a television show for as long as I have with “Under the Dome”, the continuing series based on Stephen King’s best-selling novel about a small town whose citizens suddenly find themselves mysteriously trapped under an invisible dome. The premise is compelling and lends itself well to an extended series, rather than a two-hour movie. It should be a great series in this day of the mythology series as opposed to the episodic television of old. Truth be told, it even lends itself to some episodic exploration as well.

Penny Thoughts ‘13—Upstream Color (2013) ***½

NR, 96 min.

Director/Writer: Shane Carruth

Starring: Amy Seimetz, Shane Carruth, Andrew Sensenig, Thaigo Martins

I’m going to describe the plot of “Upstream Color” and you’re going to get an idea of what type of movie this is, and you’re going to be totally wrong.

Shane Carruth’s directorial follow-up to his brilliant ultra low budget time travel film “Primer” is another surprise in independent science fiction. “Upstream Color” is about a drug that is developed by a thief that allows him to take control of other people’s actions. He abducts them and administers his drug. Then he has them empty all their bank accounts in such a way so as not to arise suspicion. He controls them for a long period of time and then leaves them to the repercussions of their interrupted lives.

Penny Thoughts ‘13—Undeclared (2001-2002) ***½

TV-14, 17 22-min. episodes

Creator: Judd Apatow

Directors: Jake Kasdan, John Hamburg, Greg Mottola, Judd Apatow, Jay Chandrasekhar, Paul Feig, Jon Favreau

Writers: Judd Apatow, Rodney Rothman, Jennifer Konner, Alexandra Rushfield, Seth Rogen, Nicholas Stoller, Kristofor Brown, Joel Madison, Brent Forrester

Starring: Jay Baruchel, Carla Gallo, Charlie Hunnam, Monica Keena, Seth Rogen, Tim Sharp, Loudon Wainwright

Guest starring: Jason Segel, Christina Payano, Kevin Rankin, Jarrett Grode, P.B. Smiley, Simon Helberg, Jenna Fischer, Amy Poehler, Will Ferrell, Katherine Towne, Elisa Bocanegra, Leroy Adams, Greg Mottola, Adam Sandler, Allen Covert, Jonathan Loughran, Kyle Gass, David Krumholtz, Sarah Hagan, Sam Levine, Steve Bannos, Lacey Beeman, Jake Hoffman, Jeremy Howard, Matt McKane, Seth St. Laurent, Felicia Day, Fred Willard, Ted Nugent, Geoffrey Arend, Adam Alexi-Malle, Gerry Bednob, Joanne Cho, Kevin Hart, Cathy Lind Hayes, Joel McKinnon Miller, Mary Kay Place, Kimberly Stewart, Amy Wright, Clement Blake, Busy Phillips, Blake Shields, Alexa Davalos, Bhavana Kundanmal, Erica Hubbard, Kelly Karbacz, Sarah Carter, Martin Starr, Youki Kudoh, Alex Breckenridge, Jim Brooks, Kim Fifield, Sarah Ann Morris, Ben Stiller

It was fortuitous that I should finally get around to watching this cult favorite, typically canceled, Judd Aapatow-created sitcom in the same month that Seth Rogen released his feature film “This Is the End”. Otherwise, I might not have realized just how he and Jay Baruchel were connected. Baruchel is technically the lead in the ensemble college-based comedy that gets just about everything about being a campus college student correct. How could this series not have succeeded?

Penny Thoughts ‘13—Up All Night, season 2 (2012) **

TV-PG, 11 23-min. episodes

Creator: Emily Spivey

Directors: Michael Blieden, Bryan Gordon, Eric Appel, Jennifer Getzinger, Alex Reid

Writers: Emily Spivey, Tucker Cawley, DJ Nash, Erica Rivinoja, Chadd Gindin, Austen Earl, Joel Church-Cooper, Rene Gube, Tim McAuliffe, Vera Santamaria, Kayla Alpert

Starring: Christina Applegate, Will Arnett, Maya Rudolph, Luka Jones, Carly Prince, Delaney Prince

Guest starring: Matthew Braunger, Jean Villepique, Sean Hayes, Chuck McGee, Rachel Dratch, Rob Huebel, Tony Hale, Tymberlee Hill, Quinn Friedman, Will Sasso, Azita Ghanizada, Jayden Maddux, Mary Elizabeth Ellis, Romy Rosemont, Jerry Lambert, Joey Pollari, Caroline Aaron, Mary Pat Gleason, Blythe Danner, Bob Gunton, Mimi Kennedy

Although NBC has yet to officially pull the plug on this show, the final nail is all but in the coffin. While the recent developments of changing the format from single camera to multi camera and the departures of the show’s creator Emily Spivey and star Christina Applegate are being cited as its death knell, I think everyone knows that the show’s demise began as they entered the second season.

Horror Thoughts ‘12—Underworld: Awakening (2012) *½

R, 88 min.

Director: Måns Mårlind, Björn Stein

Writers: Len Wiseman, John Hlavin, J. Michael Straczynski, Allison Burnett, Kevin Grevioux (characters), Danny McBride (characters)

Starring: Kate Beckinsale, Stephen Rae, Michael Ealy, Theo James, India Eisley, Kris Holden-Ried, Sandrine Holt, Wes Bentley, Charles Dance

Oh, dear. Oh, dear. Oh, dear. This franchise is beginning to make the “Twilight” franchise look brilliant. “Underworld” goes in the opposite direction as that franchise. While “Twilight” took the horror out of vampires by making them sparkly and celibate, “Underworld” took the horror out of vampires by giving them machine guns and allowing them to die.

Penny Thoughts ‘12—Up All Night, season 1 (2011-12) ***

NR, 24 23-min. episodes

Creator: Emily Spivey

Directors: James Griffiths, Randall Einhorn, Troy Miller, Joe Russo, Jay Chandrasekhar, Michael Blieden, Beth McCarthy-Miller

Writers: Emily Spivey, Caroline Williams, Erica Rivinoja, Tim McAuliffe, Tucker Cawley, David Iserson, Alex Reid, Brian Rowe

Starring: Christina Applegate, Maya Rudolph, Jennifer Hall, Will Arnett, Jean Villipique, Mat Braunger, Jason Lee, Nick Cannon, Steven Pasquale, Chris Diamantopoulos, Will Forte, Molly Shannon, Megan Mullally, Blythe Danner, Eve Best

The term ‘bubble’ gets thrown around a great deal at this time of year in respect to television shows. Shows that are “on the bubble” are ones the may or may not get renewed for the next season. There’s often a group of shows that lead the pack and there’s no chance they’re going to be cancelled unless the producers have chosen to end it. Other shows are quite obviously going to be cancelled because of their poor ratings, or have already in fact been cancelled. All of the rest of the shows are “on the bubble.”

Penny Thoughts ‘12—The Undefeated (2011) *

PG-13, 117 min.

Director: Stephen K. Bannon

Writers: Stephen K. Bannon, Sarah Palin (excerpts from the book “Going Rogue: An American Life”)

Starring: Sarah Palin, Andrew Breitbart, Kurt Gibson, Rick Halford, Mark Levin, Kate Obenshain, Mary Rutherford, Gene Therriault

OK, so here’s the thing. I don’t want to talk about politics, or Democrats and Republicans, or any of all that. The thought of Sarah Palin as president has scared me. I was also as impressed by her speech at the GOP’s Convention as everyone was when she was announced as McCain’s running mate. Hell, maybe she would be a good financial guide for our country. I don’t know.

Unstoppable / **** (PG-13)

Frank: Denzel Washington

Will: Chris Pine

Connie: Rosario Dawson

Galvin: Kevin Dunn

Inspector Werner: Kevin Corrigan

Ned: Lew Temple

Dewey: Ethan Suplee

20^th Century Fox presents a film directed by Tony Scott. Written by Mark Bomback. Running time: 98 min. Rated PG-13 (for sequences of action and peril, and some language).

When I first heard about “Unstoppable”, the fifth feature film collaboration between star Denzel Washington and director Tony Scott, I didn’t think much of it. Their best film together was their first, the submarine thriller “Crimson Tide”; and they’ve had diminishing quality returns ever since. When I discovered it was a runaway train picture, I thought, didn’t they just do a train flick with “The Taking of Pelham 123”? When I saw the previews, I thought that it looked even more preposterous than the totally testosterone driven “Runaway Train” from 1985.

Then, the reviews started coming in. They were surprisingly positive for a Tony Scott movie and for what appeared to be merely a popcorn thriller. Even then I was surprised to find “Unstoppable” to be one of the most efficient, exciting, and poignant thrillers I’ve seen in years.

Claiming to be “based on true events”, not that it matters, Scott and screenwriter Mark Bomback (“Live Free or Die Hard”) model their film on the basic disaster flick structure. First, they set up the crisis; in this case a train yard employee loses control of a train he is moving when he gets out to change a track switch. As this situation develops we are introduced to several unrelated characters, who all end up becoming contributing factors to the developing crisis before it all comes to a head. Wisely, Bomback chooses to hold back the cast of characters to the bare essentials, unlike the ridiculous Irwin Allen disaster flicks of the 70s.

We meet the heroes. Frank (Washington) is the veteran train driver, who is saddled with a new conductor, Will (Chris Pine, “Star Trek”), for a day of on site training. Will is dealing with a troubled marriage along with carrying the burden of being the lower paid rookie who has been recruited by corporate to replace the higher paid veterans before they reach retirement age. We meet Connie (Rosario Dawson, “Seven Pounds”), the dispatcher who is the only one who seems to realize that their “coaster” train is a major threat.

We also meet Galvin (Kevin Dunn, “Transformers”), vice president of train operations, the man who makes all the wrong decisions. Ned (Lew Temple, “Waitress”) is the grease monkey who ends up providing a key to the resolution of the crisis and would threaten to steal the show were he allowed more screen time. Finally, there’s railroad Inspector Werner, a character that in a lesser movie would be used to provide false tension to the events by threatening to close everything down and have everyone’s jobs. Here he’s handled with intelligence by the filmmakers and by actor Kevin Corrigan (“Big Fan”). He provides valuable insight to the developing events including the information that some of the train’s cargo is a highly toxic chemical. He provides an anchor for everyone who is trying desperately to do the right things.

This material is perfect for Scott’s kinetic direction and quick cut editing style. The events begin almost innocuously; with the initial loss of control over the train presented as something that happens occasionally. Scott keeps the multiple storylines of the characters shuffling at a compelling rate until the runaway train angle really gets under way. The tension felt between the two stars is typical of this type of story, but handled well with each character biting a little too hard at the other at some point. These seem like real emotions they’re dealing with. And, it doesn’t hurt that nobody’s going to complain about having to watch either Washington or Pine.

What really separates this material from the standard action thriller, however, is its commentary on our current economic climate. This is a movie made for and about the recession. The conflict between the two heroes involves the fact that Frank has been forced into early retirement with half benefits so the company can make room for cheaper inexperienced labor like Will. The main reason Galvin makes all the wrong decisions is that the board makes them by committee with more considerations for profit loss than what will actually work. There’s one scene where one of the biggest decisions on how to handle the crisis is made by an executive from a golf course while Galvin ignores the experienced advice he receives from Connie. Of course, the ideas of the blue-collar workers would lead to the safest and best resolution, while the moneymen end up costing everyone.

Some viewers may not see the economic metaphor, and therein lies the movie’s overall power. It works as both kinds of movies. Some will just enjoy a thrilling popcorn tosser. Others will see their own troubles coming up with their monthly mortgage on screen. “Unstoppable” is a classic use of great genre entertainment as social commentary that is filled with the spirit that imbues Americans’ lives today. Perhaps even the title, “Unstoppable,” is meant to imply something about our American spirit as well. Let’s hope so.

Up / **** (PG)

Featuring the voice talents of:
Carl Frederickson: Ed Asner
Charles Muntz: Christopher Plummer
Russell: Jordan Nagai
Dug/Alpha: Bob Peterson
Beta: Delroy Lindo
Gamma: Jerome Ranft
Construction Foreman Tom: John Ratzenberger

Disney•Pixar presents a film directed by Pete Docter and Bob Peterson. Written by Peterson. Running time: 96 min. Rated PG (for some peril and action).

I think I’ve finally figured out how Pixar Animation Studio can so consistently turn out the best quality filmed entertainment in American cinema at the moment. They make films for adults and children. What’s more, they aren’t afraid to treat the kids like adults, nor are they afraid to treat the adults like kids. Kids can enjoy a mature story that operates on levels they can relate to, and adults can be swept back to childhood without being insulted by childish pandering.

While “Up” is the first official release of the Disney•Pixar partnership, it comes as the 10th film the two studios have released in collaboration with each other. After nearly 15 years of making movies together, their creative juices don’t seem any more worn than they were when “Toy Story” became the first feature-length entirely CGI animated movie to be released. Many saw last year’s “WALL•E” as a height the studios couldn’t match; but with “Up”, they have.

The movie begins on a sad note. We meet Carl Frederickson as a child, awed by the newsreels at the movie theaters—ah, if not for the 24-hour news cycle we might still have the pleasure of gathering our news in such a grand format. The big news is that explorer Charles Muntz (voiced by Christopher Plummer, “Inside Man”) is returning to the wilds of South America in his Spirit of Adventure dirigible to prove that a giant bird skeleton he says he found there is real.

On his way home from the theater—while pretending to be the famous explorer—Carl meets a girl who will become the love of his life. Ellie is perhaps an even bigger fan of Muntz, and the two make a pact to go to South America one day. As they grow older together, their travel plans keep getting put on hold; and before he knows it, Carl has grown old and alone once again after the passing of Ellie. That’s the sad part, but what a grand adventure it will lead to for the old geezer.

Ed Asner (“Elf”) provides the voice of the curmudgeonly old Carl, who remains in the house where he met his Ellie even though a city of high-rises has grown up around it. He delights in torturing the “suits” who desire his land and in sending the local Wilderness Explorer, Russell (Jordan Nagai), on “snipe” hunts. But at the end of the day Carl is alone. When forces determine it is time for him to leave his domicile, he chooses another option and ties thousands of helium balloons to it to sail it down to South America. Poor Russell becomes an unwitting stow away.

“Up” is one of those gloriously joyous stories that you want to just keep on telling once you’ve started, but I will save the rest of it for you to discover on your own. However, permit me to discuss one of the amazing minds behind the Pixar curtain and this movie in particular. Director Pete Docter’s work seems to embody one of the best ideals of the Pixar philosophy. Docter co-wrote the stories for “Toy Story”, “Toy Story 2”, “Monsters, Inc.”, and last year’s spectacular “WALL•E”. He also directed “Monsters, Inc.” All of these stories are fantastical tales about make believe lives and worlds that don’t actually exist. Yet all of these stories are rooted in our own humanity. Docter’s toys and monsters suffer the same failings of human individualism and survive the same bonds of friendship upon which we base our own survival. His child-like robot, WALL•E, shares our best qualities of curiosity, the yearning to explore, and loyalty in love.

Perhaps what allows these non-human characters to strike such a resonant chord with movie audiences, beyond their fundamental human qualities, are their very specifically observed human behavior and mannerisms. While “Up” marks Docter’s first story with human characters in the spotlight, it’s his attention to those human qualities that bring his animation to a level far superior to so many animated stories. Take the romance and life of Carl and Ellie for example. For a cartoon to take on the entire lifetime of a shared love is an extremely ambitious task, but Docter manages it by capturing those moments that we may not experience in love but dream of from the moment we are aware of the concept of a deep shared love with another person.

There are moments of serendipity and moments of realization, like when the couple sees shapes in the clouds together and Carl realizes that Ellie is only seeing babies. There are moments of deep heartache, such as when they are silently informed that Ellie cannot have children. Some may feel moments like these are too much for children to fully comprehend, but the essential human experience is there and translates as if it were our own lives these cartoon characters are experiencing.

Yet “Up” is also as pure a fantasy as any of Docter’s other credits. Carl and Russell fly a house to South America using helium filled balloons and we never once question the validity of such impossibility. Once there they make two friends—one a dog, the other a giant bird. We accept these unlikely bonds because this is fantasy and the animals are rich in the animation tradition of human-like qualities attributed to animals. Somehow Docter never betrays the line drawn between these characters as animals and the humans.

The dog is named Dug (voiced by co-director and screenwriter Bob Peterson, “Finding Nemo”). Never has a dog’s name fit so indubitably. Dug has been fitted with a collar that is programmed to translate his thoughts into words. A dial allows for the language setting to be changed, but Dug would prefer it if you left that dial alone. Who among dog owners hasn’t imagined the dialogue you might have with you own dog if they were able to speak your language? My wife and I have practiced interpreting our dog’s thoughts for years. However, the capability of speech doesn’t make Dug entirely human. His sentences are often interrupted by the thought that he might’ve seen a squirrel, and everything stops for squirrels.

There is really no way for me to express in an analytical review just how wondrous the movie will make you feel. All I can really do is assure you that no movie you see this year will make you feel as warm and happy as this one will. No other movie will touch your heart in the same loving way. “Up” isn’t a movie you want to read about; it’s one you need to experience.

Up | Movie Trailers

The Uninvited / * (PG-13)

Anna: Emily Browning
Alex: Arielle Kebbel
Rachael: Elizabeth Banks
Steven: David Strathairn

DreamWorks SKG presents a film directed by The Guard Brothers. Written by Craig Rosenberg and Doug Miro & Carlo Bernard. Based on the screenplay “Janghwa, Hongryeon” by Ji-woon Kim. Running time: 87 min. Rated PG-13 (for violent and disturbing images, thematic material, sexual content, language and teen drinking).

“The Uninvited” is a dull, tarnished, and muddled example of how sometimes Hollywood just doesn’t get it. It’s one thing to make an original horror movie and think you need to drag an audience along with mugs and suspicious behavior, all flashing like some neon sign that announces “Now is the time to be scared”; but to take a shining example of the Asian horror phenomenon and misread everything that makes it work and replace those elements with unnecessary schlock is utterly inexcusable.

My vehemence toward this movie is possibly exaggerated by the fact that the Korean film that inspired it, “A Tale of Two Sisters”, is one of my favorite films to come out of the Asian ghost story market of movies that drove J-Horror to become one of the most popular genres to find new life in Hollywood remakes. Looking at “The Uninvited” is like taking a course on what not to do in telling a horror ghost story.

Just for the Guard Brothers, the directors of this mess of a movie, and their screenwriters, I’ve prepared this list of “don’ts” so they might avoid this sort of unfortunate outcome again.

1. Don’t give your horror movie a title that announces the movie as a “scary movie.” While this may be something the studio wants in order to sell the movie more easily to a mindless audience, this particular story actually works better if you have no idea it is a horror movie to begin with. I have no idea what the original Korean film’s title “Janghwa, Hongryeon” translates to in English, but that movie’s U.S. title “A Tale of Two Sisters” is a nearly perfect title. The story follows two sisters, and until about the midway point in the movie there are no strong indications it is an outright horror film, just hints that something isn’t quite right. Putting the girls’ relationship in the title is also effective because it plays such an important role in the plot.

2. Since that sibling relationship is so important to the story, don’t focus the set up and so much of the plot so single-mindedly on only one of the sisters. I will not spoil the importance of their relationship here, although the Guard Brother’s have done their best to do just that by making their relationship so peculiar. Anna (Emily Browning, “Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events”) is clearly the protagonist of this story, which runs more than ten minutes before we even know she has a sister. Her sister Alex (Arielle Kebbel, “The Grudge 2”) is so poorly drawn, she seems to have no reason for even existing in most of the scenes she’s in. While there is a reason for that, it shouldn’t be obvious that she could be removed from a scene at any point without any further mention of her whereabouts—a phenomenon that actually occurs in many of her scenes.

3. Don’t give the audience reason to question the heroine’s credibility before the story even begins. I’ve seen many movies end about ten minutes after they should’ve. This movie begins about ten minutes before it should. The movie opens with Anna talking about her dreams to a psychiatrist. Soon she is released from an institution to her father’s care. This knowledge that she has suffered a mental breakdown puts her perceptions in question from the start of the film. It would be much more effective had the filmmakers introduced the knowledge of her institutionalization after the audience had already begun to relate to her.

She’s returning home after the tragedy of losing her mother in a boathouse explosion, and she’s returning to find her mother is being replaced by her mother’s nursemaid. Isn’t the replacement of Anna’s mother a big enough point of tension between her and her father’s new squeeze? Wouldn’t that situation explain why they’re treating her with kid gloves? But then, after we’ve sided with her in the matter, it would be a shock to learn of her breakdown; changing everything we’ve seen up to that point.

4. If you must turn the nursemaid, Rachel, into a villain, don’t make her actions so reprehensible that we can’t understand just what Anna’s and Alex’s father sees in her. Elizabeth Banks (“Zack and Miri Make a Porno”) is a talented actress, and I find it hard to believe she chose to mug and behave like such an obvious witch. David Strathairn (“The Spiderwick Chronicles”) as the father is the perfect reasonable man, so how could he not understand why his daughter is so resentful of this erratic woman. I can’t blame these accomplished actors, so the director’s must have been foolhardy enough to suggest this less than subtle inconsiderate behavior toward the sisters.

5. Don’t change the age of children in a horror remake from younger children to teenagers. There is nothing more frightening to an adult than subjecting small children to the horrors of adult behavior. But teenagers are just getting what they deserve with their “I’m a grown up too” attitudes.

This list of don’ts could go on for quite a while, but what it boils down to is the question, “Why did they remake this movie?” In some cases, movies are remade because technologies have improved and they can now be made better. In the case of an Asian horror flick that’s only a few year old to begin with, it’s usually because the filmmakers felt the original was good and there is a need to share its ideas and techniques with a new audience. If this was the case with “The Uninvited”, then how come so much of the original “A Tale of Two Sisters” has become lost in the Hollywood shuffle? Didn’t the filmmaker’s like what they had seen in the original? Didn’t they want to achieve much of the same response from their audience that they had gotten from their experience with it? Or more to the point, did they even watch the original? Considering how “The Uninvited” turned out, it’s hard to imagine they did.

The Uninvited | Movie Trailers

Underworld: Rise of the Lycans / **½ (R)

Lucian: Michael Sheen
Viktor: Bill Nighy
Sonja: Rhona Mitra
Tannis: Steven Mackintosh
Raze: Kevin Grevioux

Screen Gems presents a film directed by Patrick Tatopoulos. Written by Danny McBride and Dirk Blackman & Howard McCain and Len Wiseman & Robert Orr. Based on characters created by Kevin Grevioux, Wiseman & McBride. Running time: 92 min. Rated R (for bloody violence and some sexuality).

Most movies inspire a definitive opinion. It’s good. It’s bad. There are varying degrees of each, but what it really comes down to is the question, “Did I enjoy watching this movie?” But, should a critic take the intended audience’s opinion into consideration? Certainly there is a degree to which it is important to consider what a film is trying to accomplish. The fact is, a movie like “Underworld: Rise of the Lycans”—which is about how the eternal battle between vampires and werewolves began—is only going to appeal to a very small percentage of film going audiences. The truth is I did enjoy watching this movie, after I got over a few indiscretions within its premise, that is.

This is the third film in the “Underworld” series, of which I have not been an avid fan. The first movie was fun enough, although it left much of the mythology of vampires and lycanthropes feeling a bit empty. The second movie was an absolute mess, trying to come off as cool and profound while miring itself in sloppy special effects and silly plot resolutions. This third entry, in its own way, goes back to the basics of this particular mythology, if still missing the overall point of the vampire and werewolf metaphors. It tells the fairly simple origins of the series’ conflict between vampires and werewolves based on just a few lines of dialogue taken from the first film.

The heroine of the first film is said to be the favorite of the vampire leader Viktor because she reminds him so much of his daughter Sonja. “Underworld: Rise of the Lycans” tells the story of Sonja’s fate and the werewolf uprising that lead to it and the ages-long war that has raged between these two supernatural species. Taking place in some long ago dark age, vampires appear to be the ruling race in a world where normal humans seem only to exist as fodder for the vampires. Rich humans offer monetary compensation to the vampires for protection. Their slaves and other wanderers act as vessels to feed and grow the vampires’ werewolf army. Oddly no human ever seems to be fed on by any vampire.

The werewolves are the vampires’ slaves. Well, no wait… There are two different kinds of werewolves. Ones that live wild and don’t have the ability to change back into men and those bred by the vampires as their protectors, who can change form at will. The vampires need protection from the wild werewolves when they sleep during the day, yet the werewolves only seem to come out at night. Huh?! The set up is just exhausting. It serves only to set up a simple class uprising tale, rather than as a dissection of the sins of man’s lust and savagery that these two mythological creatures were created for.

Anyway, the shape-shifters are all descended from Lucian, a slave spared at birth by Viktor because he didn’t retain his wolf shape. Lucian is a skilled blacksmith and warrior, who helps keep the other slaves under control; but he seems troubled by his shackles. Meanwhile, Sonja recklessly risks her life nightly to keep the wild werewolves out of the vampire sanctuary. We soon learn there is a reason Lucian is not so willing to break his bonds and rise up against his vampire oppressors.

The movie finally starts to come together once it is revealed that Lucian and Sonja are lovers. Lucian is determined to lead his fellow werewolves in a mutiny but desires to continue his affair with Sonja. Sonja is not yet willing to betray her father and her race, although she agrees the inequality between the races is unfair. Viktor’s relationship with his daughter and his slave becomes unhinged when Lucian frees himself to save Sonja during a particularly savage attack by the wild werewolves. Not only does Lucian reveal a newfound disposition to disobey, but he also reveals an ability to communicate with the wild lycanthropes. Viktor’s none to happy about the prospect of a werewolf son-in-law either.

For the most part, every detail of the plot exists to create darkened action sequences where many beasts are beheaded and limbs are severed. Once the plot turns into a forbidden love story, there seems to be a great weight lifted off the material, and the three leads get a chance to reign in some of the wayward plot. Rhona Mitra (“Doomsday”) as Sonja looks remarkably like Kate Backinsale, who played the heroine of the first two movies. Michael Sheen (“The Queen”) brings a quite dignity that suggests a remarkable performance could have been found had he been allowed to develop a more traditional werewolf role. And Bill Nighy (“Valkyrie”) continues to chew up the screen returning as Viktor for the third time. Nighy is even allowed a chance to bring just a little humanity to the character.

“Rise of the Lycans” still suffers from much of the typical ailments as most of these pop cult phenomenon do. The overly complex setup requires more thought than has been put into it. Some shoddy special effects are covered up with dim lighting and quick edits, but still a few sloppy CGI effects come glaring through. However, the action is intense, and the performances pull the story together. For those invested in the “Underworld” series and the current trend of supernatural monsters as superheroes, “Rise of the Lycans” will be a welcome escape from boredom and inadequacy.

Underworld: Rise of the Lycans | Movie Trailers

United 93 / **** (R)

Universal Pictures presents a film written and directed by Paul Greengrass. Running time: 111 min. Rated R (for language and some intense sequences of terror and violence).

Note: I chose not to include a cast list for this review because no one performance or role is singled out by the screenplay. It is a wonderful acting effort by the cast as a whole and to truly recognize any one performance, it would be necessary to recognize them all. Also, due to the nature of the depiction of real events, honoring any performance would be secondary to honoring the lives of those people involved in the events depicted.

After watching “United 93”, one of two Hollywood releases this year about the events of 9/11, my wife and I sat in silence in our dark basement for several minutes. This was to be expected. What surprised us was that after our silence my wife and I did something that more often films based on real events should inspire. We entered into a long and involved conversation. At first our thoughts on the film and the events of that day were the major topics of conversation, but eventually the dialogue drifted into important issues of politics, religion, faith, and fate.

United flight 93 was one of four planes hijacked on September 11, 2001, in a terrorist attack against the American public. Two planes successfully reached their targets of the Twin World Trade Center Towers, one was crashed into the Pentagon. The fourth, flight 93, crashed in a field in rural Pennsylvania after the passengers lead a revolt against the hijackers to prevent them from reaching their intended target.

Was it fate that the passengers and flight attendants on that that fourth airplane had the courage necessary to prevent those terrorists from reaching their assumed target of the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.? What if they hadn’t? If one man can affect so many lives in a small town as Jimmy Stewart did in “It’s a Wonderful Life”, the actions taken on that day changed the world and the actions taken by the people on that flight may have immensely lessened the blow from those terrorists.

Writer/director Paul Greengrass (“The Bourne Supremacy”) makes the point that although the passengers seem to accept they are all going to die, they go into their siege on the terrorists with the hope that they might actually be able to pull the plane out and survive some sort of emergency landing. His documentary-style approach places us audience members in the fray as if we are one of those passengers.

Just as the passengers on any flight are strangers, Greengrass avoids any sort of introduction to the people involved. We are all strangers in this film who eventually band together in a valiant act of bravery. In retrospect, it seems disrespectful to place myself on that flight with those people, but Greengrass does such a good job of never glamorizing or even highlighting the events on that plane that it is almost unavoidable to feel transported to those people’s reality.

He is not content, however, with simply showing us what he and the relatives of those heroic passengers imagine happened during that attempt to avoid tragedy. The actions of the UA 93 occupants only make up half of the story Greengrass wants to tell about what was done to prevent the worst on 9/11. While the second half of the film concentrates on flight 93 itself, the first half depicts the efforts of Air Traffic Control and NORAD to decipher just what is happening from the point when the first plane crashes into Tower One of the World Trade Center to the point when they realize United 93 is likely to be a fourth hijacked plane.

The early Air Traffic Control scenes of the Boston and New York controllers reminded me of a scene at the beginning Steven Spielberg’s “Close Encounter of the Third Kind”. In that film, like in this one, the Air Traffic Controllers looked at what they saw on their radar screens with shock, not even comprehending what they were witnessing. The difference is that Spielberg’s controllers were in a fantasy where their reactions had little effect on the outcome of the story. “United 93”’s controllers realize that if they do not react immediately and intelligently many lives could be in danger. It is not important for them to understand what they are seeing. They do their duty to the best of their abilities, while others try to figure out what is going on.

It is here that Greengrass takes the opportunity to show the breakdown of authority that occurred. Focusing both on the National Air Traffic Controllers Association headquarters and command central for NORAD, it becomes apparent there is no communication between the two or with any other agencies that might be able to act as a deciding trust. Greengrass depicts the efforts of both NORAD and NATCA as noble and unflinching, but he does take aim at other entities that either act as obstacles in allowing a defensible position (the FAA) or just simply skip town (the White House).

Greengrass is not kind to the FAA or President Bush and his administration, but for those portrayed at NORAD and NATCA he shows us just how tough their jobs are with or without help from higher authority. Once again, little is done in terms of introduction to these characters and although it takes some time to figure out just who is who and which organizations we are witnessing, the audience is like a fly on the wall. We see these people astonished by what they are seeing, yet still able to function when the rest of the world was looking on.

This scrutiny over how the crisis was handled fed even more into the conversation my wife and I had afterward. I understand the President needed to disappear for his own protection, but why wasn’t there some sort of way for him to get authority to NORAD to protect the country’s airspace? I mean, I certainly don’t know a hell of a lot about what went on that day, but even I suspected a terrorist attack as soon as I had heard about the first tower being hit by “possibly a small plane.” Shouldn’t someone have been able to contact or get contact from the President to give NORAD the authority they needed to protect our airspace? It may not have changed much about that day, but it scares me that our government seemed to have so little concept of what the possibilities were that day. It scares me even more that we elected to keep those that dropped the ball on that day in power.

The Upside of Anger / ***½ (R)

Terry Wolfmeyer: Joan Allen
Denny Davies: Kevin Costner
Andy: Erika Christensen
Popeye: Evan Rachel Wood
Emily: Keri Russell
Hadley: Alicia Witt
Shep: Mike Binder

New Line Cinema presents a film directed and written by Mike Binder. Running time 118 min. Rated R (for language, sexual situations, brief comic violence and some drug use).

I’ve been on a bit of a kick of late appreciating actors who have been held in less than high regard for their acting abilities. Certainly at the level to which marquee stars rise in their success they must have more than just luck behind them, even in those cases where those stars seem a bit monotonous in their performances. At about the time My Own Private Idaho made its Criterion Collection debut this spring I was watching a lot of Keanu Reeves films. His ability was arguable during his early efforts, but the kid made some incredible artistic choices in material and eventually came into his own as an actor. A few weeks ago I was surprised to find myself taking in all the William Shatner performances I could find, an underrated performer if ever there was one. I was very happy to see he snagged himself an Emmy nod for his work on Boston Legal. The new video release The Upside of Anger may just spur on my next underappreciated performer obsession with its wonderfully light and seemingly out of somber character performance by Kevin Costner.

While Costner’s performance is worth the rental price, The Upside of Anger is really Joan Allen’s movie. Allen (The Contender) plays Terry Wolfmeyer, a mother of four daughters whose husband has left them for a European rendezvous with his twenty-something Swedish secretary. Her story is told mostly through the eyes of her youngest daughter, nicknamed Popeye (Evan Rachel Wood, Thirteen), who fears her mother has lived her life through bitterness and anger since her father’s indiscretion. This observation is true, although her mother has a lot of help from alcohol.

Terry is a controlling woman, whose life has unraveled out of her control. It doesn’t help that this upheaval happens when her daughters have reached that age where they begin to take control of their own lives. Her oldest, Hadley (Alicia Witt, Mr. Holland’s Opus), is graduating from college with some surprises for her mom. Emily (Keri Russell, TV’s Felicity) wants to pursue an artistic career in dance, but seems to suffer from an eating disorder. And Andy (Erika Christensen, The Perfect Score) has decided against higher education all together in order to get a jump-start on her broadcasting career, taking a job at a local radio station as a PA for a womanizing producer who quickly mixes work and pleasure.

Amongst this whirlwind of female chaos Terry finds her somewhat floating along neighbor Denny Davies (Costner, Open Range), an aged (not aging) ex-ballplayer who is high half the time, drunk all the time, and has a whimsical approach to life that has appeal and relief to it. Denny saunters his way into the family, setting a series of events in motion that both add to and act as release from Terry’s slipping grasp on her life as she knows it.

The film, like its characters, segues back and forth between great comedy and great drama. Even in the tragic moments of Terry’s life there is comedy and even the levity is laced with poignancy. It is the idea of a relationship with Denny that causes the greatest distress at first. Denny is obviously glad to hear about the departure of Terry’s husband, and quickly tries to fill the physical and emotional void left in Terry. Denny, with his carefree existence as a radio jock, seems at first to be a minor league prize for a major league lady; but his charm is undeniable and soon Terry finds herself offering a roll in the sack to a startled Denny.

There are wonderful relationships explored between mother and daughters here, but the courtship between the film’s two stars is so endearing and odd and funny and real, it steals the whole show. Costner’s turn here reminds me of the wacky brother gunslinger he portrayed early in his career in the western Silverado. This character is a far cry from that one; but he is so free to be silly and just a little off kilter here, I smiled every time he came on the screen. Allen, on the other hand, embraces the severity of her character, utilizing some stern looks that have served her well in previous roles, but the character is put through such conflict emotionally that her severity works both ways, providing the wrenching drama from the actress we have come to expect and also providing stark contrasts with the way she wants to control a situation and how it comes out that her stern nature often becomes a tool of comedy.

Writer/director Mike Binder (HBO’s Mind of the Married Man) shows a natural affinity for presenting the calamity of real life. He puts just the right amount of absurdity into the lives of these characters to sell them off as the genuine articles. He casts himself as Denny’s producer and Andy’s boss/boyfriend Shep, and builds a great deal of comedic and cathartic material out of this essentially sideline player. Much of Terry’s titular anger is directed at Shep during his relationship with her daughter. Her imagining Shep’s head exploding at the dinner table one evening provides one of the film’s biggest laughs, while it is also Shep that shovels a load of hard to take truths at Terry when he can finally stand no more of her.

There are developments that should be left for the viewer to discover, but The Upside of Anger really looks at those happenings of life that people are always going through, yet can never imagine having to go through. Its absurdity and seriousness are important in their relationship to each other. Terry and Denny play important roles in each other’s lives that mirror that relationship of these seeming opposites. It is one of those films that is a pleasure to know someone had to realize it in order to conceive of it. Binder promises with this film to be a director and writer of keen insight into the human soul and condition.