Hilarity Ensues

Wes Anderson used to be one of my favorite writer/directors while growing-up. The symmetrical pageantry displayed with the camera movements, the dead-pan humor, and the highly detailed quirky characters. Rushmore still, and most likely will always, stand as a top-10 film favorite of mine. Sadly, however, Anderson steadily fell after The Life Aquatic. Maybe even Life Aquatic wasn’t that great (personally, I loved it, but it was a huge departure after Tenenbaums), and I absolutely hated Fantastic Mr. Fox. You’ll notice I’m not mentioning Darjeeling Limited…why? I actually enjoyed it.

All these things aside, it was fair to say Anderson’s quality fell-off, regardless of my personal opinion of his films. His style, hipster-worshiped as it is (and was), is what set him apart. His influences bleed through the celluloid, and mix with his own input to make a unique, quirky style. Everything after Tenenbaums felt off…like Anderson on a bad day.

…until Moonrise Kingdom. The plot revolves around Sam, a hapless, emotionally disturbed Khaki-trooper, and his pen-pal/love, Suzy. Their childhood world is peppered with overly zealous scout troopers, over-bearing, feuding ex-lawyer parents, and a glimpse of what Sam could be as an old man without Suzy. At heart, it’s a cute film, and a sort of adolescent love story to boot.

Anderson’s style is in full effect, here. Suzy reads from a perfectly packed suitcase, set-up like a mini-bookstore with various 50’s-styled book-covers (the film does, afterall, take place in 1965). Anderson’s opening montage, revealing the core cast of characters, flows perfectly, just like his camera movement. It may seem linear, the way he uses movement, but deep down it’s not. Anderson also uses his French new-wave influence a little heavy handed, but it moreso add’s to the film that it detracts.

If there’s any set-back to the film, it’s that it’s almost overly-packed with characters. While the core concerns Sam and Suzy, alongside Suzy’s parents and Bruce Willis, there’s a lot to examine in the background. No character alone is there for decoration. Even the Khaki-scouts have their own issues, thoughts, and personalities (along with names and code-names). This can seem like a lot to cover in a short 98 minutes, although he does well with what he can.

Moonrise Kingdom is easily one of the best films to come out of 2012 as of late. Wes Anderson has become aware how hip he is, however, he pulls back the reigns on his reputation just enough to not make the film’s style overly abrasive. Characters will seem familiar, and so will the themes (you tell me if little Sam doesn’t remind you of a pre-teen Max Fischer). However, when all it said and done, it’s dead-pan humor mixes with sugary cuteness and character studies to give us Anderson’s best in quite some time.

OVERALL: 4/5

I’ve never been a Marvel guy. My reading interest planted itself firmly in the DC/Vertigo realm (if we’re excluding smaller companies, that is) until the Marvel movies started coming out. Iron Man opened a lot of eyes, as well as a lot of minds, as to what a super-hero movie could entail. Up to that point, Marvel’s had these silly, overblown, top-heavy films concerning their A-game superheroes (and while we all love Wolvie, let’s be honest: the X-Men movies just weren’t that damn good). Iron Man wasn’t a hero you’d see plastered all over t-shirts and lunchboxes. Rather, that was still a job for Batman and Superman…until this plan started to assemble the Avengers.

Time went on and, oddly enough, the Hulk got a remake…that was a genuinely fun movie! Eventually we got Thor and Captain America, both incredibly solid (not origin Iron-Man, but still better than the Daredevil-ish films of the early 2000’s). Let’s forget that during this time Christopher Nolan absolutely knocked it out of the park twice with Batman, and I’ll dismiss the Green Lantern movie (which I really enjoyed, as well) in lieu of talking about Marvel heroes.

Somewhere after The Incredible Hulk and the after-credits scene of Iron Man 2, audiences actually began to give two shits about what’s coming down the pike. Reading spiked, cross-over’s were born, and super-heroes quickly started becoming the great American mythology I truly believe they have always been. By the time Captain America came out, fans of the Marvel films were well-versed in these heroes, ready to see the big Daddy of them all: The Avengers.

That day is finally here…but is it worth the hype? More importantly, is it worth your time? Despite my distaste for Joss Whedon, I can answer that with a resounding YES. Blockbuster films just aren’t supposed to be this good…or, should I say, they stopped being this good? Regardless, The Avengers is like a bullet fresh from the chamber and headed directly to your face: it’s everything a true-blue comic-book movie should be.

The characters aren’t changed, and each component works together so fluidly that we generally admire and care about those little backstories that were left open. “What happened to Natalie Portman?”, “Does Captain America still think of Peggy?”, “Who is Hawkeye deep down?”. The film concerns itself with answering all these questions and more.

Michael Bay has seemingly hi-jacked the stylized action sequences, fusing styles from every big budget Blockbuster stretching back from the late 70’s. Whedon allows the action to breathe, perfectly using camera movement subliminally to add panache and story.

What must be ignored here is what The Avengers is: the build-up and an answer to a series. Forget that. Forget that The Avengers is commissioned through Disney. Forget that Marvel’s had it’s past failures. Forget all of this shit and experience the film for what it is: undeniable, mythological fun. Super-heroes have truly become America’s mythology. It took quite some time, but the stories of these fantastic characters have finally come to light as entertaining, thought-provoking, and, most of all, important to our culture.

Your move, Nolan.

OVERALL: 4.5/5

Those of you who don’t know Bobcat Goldthwait are sorely missing-out. In fact, if you’re seriously unaware of who the Bobcat is, you probably shouldn’t be reading my fucking blog. That being said, here’s a review of God Bless America.

Coming off of his surprise sleeper hit of 2009 (World’s Greatest Dad with Robin Williams), Goldthwait seemed to have a license to produce thoughtful satire on American society as he saw fit, as any great comedian would do. It took a whie, but he’s back with a pitch-black comedy aptly titled “God Bless America”. Joel Murray (brother of Bill, John, and Brian-Doyle) is Frank: a hapless divorcee with an inoperable tumor the size of a baseball planted in his skull. Frank is a ticking time-bomb: he has inconsiderate neighbors with an inconsolable baby, a daughter that refuses to spend time with him (even if they’re court-appointed visits), and an extreme distaste for modern American society in all forms (seemingly sprung from pop-culture).

In a prod against MTV, Frank stalks and finds the star of a “Sweet 16”-ish birthday show and proceeds to blow her brains out inside her car. This not only starts a nation-wide killspree, but the beautiful friendship (very Harold And Maude-esque), between Frank and the adorable, yet jaded, Roxy. Without going into too much detail, Goldthwait uses the script as a personal soapbox, however, unlike other directors I criticize for using their films as soapboxes (Rodriguez, you know damn right well you did this with Machete), his social commentary actually makes sense.

Nothing American is safe, just like how nothing in America is sacred. From American Idol, shock jocks, violent films, all the way to Frank’s personal thoughts on pedofiles (“Fuck Nabokov!”) Goldthwait reminds us that he’s truly a humanist, albeit a very pissed-off one.

A lot of criticism has been springing up over this film, but mostly in a comparison to James Gunn’s Super (a personal favorite). Yes, both characters are seemingly manic depressives named Frank, and both second-banana’s are cute, perky, and mildly sociopathic, but that’s as far as the similarities go. Super commented on society, but in a different way…in fact, a much more fucked-up way. Super’s Frank was a broken man, God Bless America’s Frank is not. If anything, GBA’s Frank see’s the world for what it truly is, and as a man with limited time left, he chooses to express it through the art of violence.

Obviously, GBA is not without it’s faults. At moments, even though the dialogue may be highly agreeable, it almost gets TOO preachy, alienating a big lump of the audience. The budget becomes apparent in certain circumstances as well (for instance, the first scene where Frank imagines his revenge against his neighbors). That being said, Goldthwait’s follow-up may not be as highly regarded critically, but it’s a film made to shove any criticism straight back up the ass of where it came from.

OVERALL: 4/5

The controversy, the publicity, the secrecy, the mania, the parodies…for a while, it seemed The Human Centipede was all we heard about as far as the horror genre goes. It was an interesting enough idea: mad scientist sews three people ass-to-mouth and trains them to be codependent in order to survive. Watching it on Netflix when it first came out…it seemed tame. The acting was atrocious (except for Laser), the budget seemed VERY limited, and it was just a slow movie.

Low and behold, Tom Six comes back packing heat with the follow-up: Human Centipede II: Full Sequence. Enter Martin (casted and played BEAUTIFULLY by Laurence R. Harvey with a set of freaky popped-out eyes that rival Peter Lorre in “M”): a mentally-challenged dwarf of a man who spends his days and nights hold up behind a desk at his local car park, listlessly watching the original Human Centipede back-to-back. His Mother hates him, his Father raped him, and his own friend is his pet centipede and his scrapbook of the events in the film.

It should come as no surprise that Martin is contemplating pulling-off his own centipede with a rousing twelve people, arranged from all sorts of places and even including one of the original film’s stars.

The review from here will do you a massive favor: I’ll stop. If you’re interesting in seeing HC:II, you MUST go in blind. A simple synopsis of the plot is fine, as that’s how I went into it, and seriously…I’ve seen Troma films, I’ve seen hardcore horror, I’ve seen Takashi Miike, Michael Haneke, and any other demented film you could possibly imagine…but HC:II totally flipped my expectations. For those of you in the same boat as me, thinking the original was tame (we’re apparently a select few), this one is more than enough to shut us all up.

How this film was made totally shocks me. I could see Necromantik being made with a high budget before a film like this being made. Even me going on like this could ruin it…so I’ll just stop and say enjoy the ride…if you can.

OVERALL: 3.5/5

Detachment is the film you’d get if you mushed all of those angsty gangster high-school films together and sifted out the bullshit. Tony Kaye (of American History X fame) continues his gritty, black hole emptiness directional style, and with good reason: it fits the source material.

Adrien Brody is Henry Barthes (the “s” is silent), a highly recommended substitute teacher, who is juggling various different hats: a care-giver for his dying grandfather, an overly caring teacher who burns to impart wisdom and knowledge, a slight nihilistic-bend, a man detached from life—looking in from the outside, and finally: someone who needs to help others. Along the way, Barthes substitutes at an inner-city hellhole with test scores and disaffected youths to match, meeting students who write eloquent epitaphs for themselves (“dem’ bitches be cryin’ cause’ they ain’t get mah’ dick no mo’”) an overweight clinically depressed teen, and a lost girl turned prostitute.

One could surmise that this sounds like all too much to take it, and to a point…it is, but that’s not truly what Detachment wants you to take away from it. The “No Child Left Behind” act and all it’s bullshit act as a firing pin for the proverbial “shit” to go down. What’s left are poetic inner-monologues and characters that either speak as if they’re on their deathbed questioning “what it all means” or overly zealous, worn-out burn-out’s (see Lucy Liu’s ridiculous, unfitting rant).

The deal is this: Detachment is a very good film, but it certainly shows it’s flaws in some areas. Brody is wonderful, as expected, and so is a much welcomed “cameo”-sort of performance by James Caan, a teacher who Brody describes as a guy who “kept his humor” about him. Add-in first-timer Sami Gayle (who is both a blossoming attractive actress and very talented beyond her years) and you’ve got a very solid cast. Once again, however, Bryan Cranston is criminally under-used. I’m looking at you, John Carter.

Where the film fails is where is gets an almost Oliver Stone soapbox about itself. Namely, the scene where Lucy Liu unloads on a disaffected youth, not just about her own problems, but her views on almost everything under the sun. It’s sort of a lousy scene, along with the things that surround it. Honestly, it’s meant to portray how over-caring and shrugged shoulders can break a human being down, but it comes off a bit too strong.

Aside from the obvious, the film is, as I stated, very good. It’s reality at it’s core and most blackest. This is a film that certainly tells it like it is, in the vein of Larry Clark or, to a lesser extent, Catherine Breillat. The kids aren’t candid about their feelings and neither are the teachers. The film works better as a poem about Adrien Brody’s character rather than an actual character-study, and that is where the screenplay falls off just a bit. Aside from that, however, the strong performances and magnetic emotional core make for very strong, very thought provoking film-making.

Best scene: Adrien Brody speaking to his class about the importance of reading and building your own thought process.

OVERALL: 3.5/5

Channing Tatum is one of the most repugnant human beings to ever be captured of celluloid. He literally is one big chimpanzee…and yet women fall all over him. Maybe I’m a little bitter cause’ of the whole G.I. Joe thing (and watching my childhood get flushed down the shitter), but I seriously can’t stand this guy.

That being said, I was shocked when I enjoyed 21 Jump-Street. When the lights first went down, I started asking myself “am I REALLY sitting here, about to watch this?”. Me, the guy who greatly dislikes Channing Tatum…going to a Channing Tatum movie? Well, yeah…but I give the credit to Jonah Hill…and a healthy fourth wall broken early on in the film.

The police chief says it all: “they already did something like this in the early 90’s, but you know, they just keep remaking the same bullshit over and over and over” (I’m paraphrasing). That line right there was pretty much the screenwriter (Michael Bacall) pointing out the skeptics in the audience and screaming: “yes, this is stupid, yes, this is a remake, and yes, it will be good regardless. Sit down, shut the fuck up, and enjoy the ride.” Without this line…I fear the film would seem totally different.

21 Jump-Street only shares it’s name with the premise: a bunch of under-cover cops on a special assignment. Tatum and Hill are obviously the screw-up’s sent over to this last ditch-effort in order save their careers (and reputations) at the hands of a Samuel L. Jackson-ized Ice-Cube (who spouts “MOTHERFUCKER!” almost as much as Jackson…cept’ not as good).

Michael Bacall wrote the screenplay for Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World, so finding this out AFTER the fact, I’m not all the surprised over the film’s great sense of humor. There’s a lot of different jokes on display, from slapstick to raunchy to drug humor. It’s all handled well. Chris Miller, who’s past (and only) film was Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs (which I enjoyed) strangely does great as far as comedies go.

I think the best aspect of Jump-Street is it’s overall skewed world-view. The nerdy kids are now the popular kids, and the really nerdy kids only get nerdier. Dave Franco (James Franco’s brother…and it’s obvious) does a damn good job being the popular vegan asshole drug dealer. Jonah Hill is probably the best aspect on the film actor-wise, however, especially coming off of his first serious role in Moneyball. There’s an underlying motivation behind the comedy, and that is something you can’t teach or impart, you can only learn…and only the greats truly know how to pull it off. Say what you will about Hill, but the kid’s still funny. Judging the guy on how much weight he put on or lost is just plain silly, especially when there’s that much talent oozing from him.

But back to the world-view: this is both your typical and NOT-so-typical high school. The only true way to “get” what I mean is to see it for yourself and study the subtext. The script itself works so well simply because it is such a tight script. There’s establishing aspects, things that come back, interesting characters, and the best thing: it doesn’t take itself too seriously! 

Honestly, I can picture Jonah Hill and Michael Bacall smoking a bowl and, purely in jest, piecing together a reason to remake 21 Jump-Street…and almost by accident, the project grew organically. 

The buddy-cop comedy has been done, and done to death. From Kevin Smith’s Cop-Out, to last year’s 30 Minutes Or Less, it seems to be making a slight comeback. It takes a lot to pull this sub-genre off correctly, and luckily, 21 Jump-Street does so with flying colors.

I still don’t like Channing Tatum.

OVERALL: 3.5/5

Ever wondered what $250-million dollars can get you? Well, for one, it can get “John Carter” made. Yes yes yes, John Carter: the Disney movie nobody asked for based on a classic sci-fi saga almost nobody remembers. To me, it seems like Disney’s trying to jump-start another Narnia saga…or anything. Really: Harry Potter’s gone, Twilight’s almost done, and the Hunger Games is just starting, so what could the next fifty-installments of a mythology-based series be?

Honestly, John Carter’s idea seemed good on paper…you’ve got all the classic elements: aliens, civil war, sword battles, big flying death machines, and a princess to save. What bogs it down is an almost Dune-like series of words and phrases, all words of which seem worthless to the story, and impossible to memorize in the seconds in-between important vocabulary plot enhancers. Of course, no disrespect to Dune.

The worst aspect of John Carter normally wouldn’t truly ruin a film: the acting. We’ve all seen Transformers, and despite Shia Lebouf stumbling over himself and screaming “BUMBLEBEE!”, we all pretty much enjoyed the series. (shrugs) I know I did. The problem with John Carter is simple: Taylor Kitsch is one of the worst actors I’ve ever seen. Let’s forget that he completely slaughtered Gambit in Wolverine…being John Carter, a supposed epic character with all these heroic qualities, is not a simple task. That being said, Kitsch fumbles over every last fucking line. You can really tell how bad it’s going to be when he attempts to match wits with the brilliant Bryan Cranston. Add in Lynn Collins, who plays the princess (and yes, was in Wolverine, too), and you’ve got two bad leads already.

For the love of God, please stop giving Mark Strong work. He does the same fucking thing EVERY. FUCKING. MOVIE. It is seriously exhausting to watch his penguin-like face enunciate syllables and words, attempting to pull of his best Emperor Palpatine impression. Honestly, the only time I enjoyed him was Kick-Ass…and that’s because his bad acting was warranted.

In fact, the only GOOD acting (and the only GOOD members of the cast) come in voice-actors (with the exception of Cranston). Willem Defoe, Thomas Jayden Church, Samantha Morton: they all portray true emotion with only their voices! Why couldn’t they piece together a cast that could do better.

But I digress: Andrew Stanton (the director/co-screenwriter) is no stranger to an epic feel behind his work. Finding Nemo, Wall-E, A Bug’s Life…all of these were well executed. His direction in John Carter is no exception. In fact, his scope and use of CGI add the best pieces of the film together. Certain scenes made me want to run home and rewatch the Lord Of The Rings trilogy and compare battle scenes. Yes, they truly ARE that good…if not only too brief.

The CGI doesn’t look cheap, either…but for a budget of $250 million, I suppose you get what you pay for.

John Carter isn’t a BAD film…but with it’s flaws, I have a difficult time saying it’s a GOOD one. It’s the kind of film you shrug-off and buy on blu-ray just for certain scenes to show-off your TV (or sound system). If only the source material were treated with a little more explanation, John Carter could have truly been a damn fine film.

OVERALL: 2.5/5

If there’s one thing to take away from “The Adventures Of Tin-Tin”, it’s just how fluid CGI-animation is getting. Compare films like The Polar Express to Tin-Tin and it’s like night and day. Obviously, Polar Express looked amazing in it’s day, but Tin-Tin ushers in a whole new fluid movement system. On blu-ray, this really pop’s, alongside the colors and the water animation. Sadly, a film cannot be judged on looks and looks alone, so here we go…

Tin-Tin wasn’t a bad film by any stretch of the imagination: it’s just bogged-down by it’s flaws. Co-penned by Edgar Wright (who makes a “Hot Fuzz” reference with the twin cops “there’s an awful lot of paperwork involved in police work”), the story, although interesting, moves at a snail’s pace at moments. When the action sequences finally break-out, you quickly lose that boredom and perk-up…but, naturally, this too must go back from whence it came.

Tin-Tin’s running-time is also an issue. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all about epic, four hour films (if they’re good, obviously), but at an average hour and forty-five minutes, Tin-Tin runs more like a bulbous, deflated kickball. Sure, it’s still some semblance of fun to play with, but it won’t keep you satisfied for the entire recess period.

It comes down to this: shave a good twenty-minutes off the film (hit the climax RIGHT after the massive—and awesome—bike chase) and it’d run a lot more smoothly. Another thing: when films tend to whip their dicks out before they get their weekend box-office report, it annoys me. The ending was way too open-ended, which only served less as a satisfying conclusion, and moreso an “oh great” feeling. Another problem: the stakes are no longer there in the end…so why even hint towards a sequel? It seems like shoddy craftsmenship, honestly. What, they’re going to go back to treasure hunting and OH FUCK, A KRAKEN! Yeah, the drunk Cap’n forgot about that one during his twenty minute, almost worthless, sober binge.

OVERALL: 3/5

Diablo Cody is not a screenwriter. Diablo Cody “thinks” she’s a screenwriter…mostly, because she is constantly TOLD she is a screenwriter. This is a problem.

I’ll give you Juno, Cody, simply because Ellen Page pulled-off your pre-teen rambling better than anyone else could’ve, and with a lot of bravado. Jennifer’s Body was an abortion. Ok, so you’ve got a vehicle for the Transformers girl…that’s asses in seats to 20th Century Fox. Naturally, you get a pass cause’ nobody gives a shit about the script, only signing-on Meghan Fox.

So now we reach Young Adult. First-off, I’m going to be the bad guy here: Jason Reitman ain’t all that as far as writing/directing goes, either. Most of the time, his films lack any real plot or reasoning, other than the same trend: a fuck-up who finally realizes how badly they’ve fucked-up. Smart, right? It’s been done…and much better, too.

Young Adult follows Charlize Theron (who, for all intents and purposes, does a very good job), a YA-author who suddenly rekindles feelings for her high school sweetheart. So, she goes back to her redneck, podunk town to save him from a life of what she see’s as “boring”.

Now, I slam Diablo Cody because this script was striving to grasp any straw that it could. Was it a comedy? Was it a drama? Was it a mid-life crisis? Yeah, it’s all of these things, and it’s a mess. Cody treads in emotional waters that are simply too big for her depth. Cody’s the Juno lady! Remember?! “Hamburger phone”?! The phrases that launch a thousand teenage pregnancies and Hot Topic t-shirts. “THUNDERCATS ARE GO!”. Oh-ho-ho, Diablo Cody (stupid pen name, by the way) you slay us all! You remember cartoons fondly! Wow…nostalgia. Who’da’ thunk we all had some of that lying around.

Young Adult is a shapeless mass with a shapeless mass for a main character. People slammed “I Melt With You”, claiming their characters were simply unlikeable. I challenge those same critics to find a single likeable thing about Theron’s character in Young Adult. Maybe she plays the part too well, who knows? She’s not a bad actress…but the script is 93 minutes of mid-life crisis dribble that Patton Oswald sums up a good 75% through the movie: “Good luck being an adult, it’s not like you’ve ever learned to be one” or something to that effect.

Diablo Cody, you don’t use taglines as actual lines in a dramatic beat.

Dipshit.

OVERALL: 1.5/5

Every now and then I see a film that blows my mind so completely, that I am stunned for some time afterwards. Similarly, many times I find that almost nobody else, no matter who I recommend said film to, will enjoy it. I’ve done this with Buffalo’ 66, Daniel Johnston, and now I’m prepared to do the same with “I Melt With You”.

Directed by Mark Pellington (Mothman Prophecies, Arlington Road…nothing very stellar, I know) and based on a thought of his and screen-writer Glenn Porter, I Melt With You works very similar to the way a Bret Easton Ellis novel works. At this point, I should admit that Ellis is my favorite author. Bias aside, IMWY’s characters are all emotional vampires, surrounded by an air of drugs, sex, and rock-n-roll. The world around them casts them out as “old men” or assholes, in a strange paradox between who we are, who we want to be, and ultimately who we have become.

Thomas Jane (a favorite), Rob Lowe, Jeremy Piven, and Christopher McKay star as college-buddies with a annual ritual: rent out a beach house in Big Sur, get fucked-up, and revel in their nihilistic tendencies. In fact, nihilism is such a big factor, you could surmise it’s placement as a character. 

The structure is a tad bit different from what ritual screenplays are: there’s two big acts, and thus both follow their own themes and stories. The second half must wait to be discovered, as it would ruin the first half for anyone who hasn’t seen it, but I must say, it works wonderfully.

The film itself feels like an art-house/experimental meditation on growing old and failure, and the bonds of friendship during these rough times. Even to a cast of characters whose entire thought behind everything is to “fuck shit up and get fucked-up”, their loyalty bonds themselves tightly to one another. Some will no doubt deem this slightly homo-erotic, and perhaps that may or may not be the point, but that doesn’t over-power the strength of the overall arc.

The film never once asks for sympathy for these four fools, at least, not explicitly. The emotion you feel will be purely your own…as it should be, but it’s nice that a film these days is purely in perspective.

OVERALL: 4/5