Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[dell71]

Jiro Dreams of Sushi
Directed by David Gelb.
2011. Rated PG, 81 minutes.
Cast:
Jiro Ono
Yoshikazu Ono
Masuhiro Yamamoto
Takashi Ono

What if I told you one of the best restaurants in the world doesn’t serve appetizers desserts, doesn’t even let you decide what to eat, what you get only takes fifteen minutes to finish, and only seats ten? Sound preposterous? That’s exactly what we have in Jiro’s, s sushi restaurant in Japan. It’s named after it’s owner, Jiro Ono, a tireless eighty-five year old master chef. He is a master largely because sushi has completely consumed his life. It is the only thing he prepares and serves. It has been that way since World War II. As the title infers, he even dreams of the stuff. He tells us he sometimes wakes in the middle of the night with ideas for new sushi dishes, or how to refine his technique. It has worked tremendously. A highly respected journal published by Michelin, yes the tire company, gave Jiro’s a three star rating, their highest possible score. We’re told this means a restaurant is so good it is worth traveling to whatever country it’s in just to eat there. Apparently, people agree. They come from everywhere to partake in the product of his passion. To get one of those ten seats, you must make reservations at least a month in advance.

Jiro has no plans on retiring, but obviously he can’t go on making sushi forever. One day, his now fifty year old son Yoshikazu will take over. In reality, Yoshikazu already makes sushi as his dad’s second-in-command with no noticeable difference in quality. He also does much of the leg work. He goes to the market to pick out the fish, handles most of the training of their small group of eager apprentices, and oversees much of the preparation that must be done every day. Though we get the sense he would never say it while his father is still breathing, he’s a master in his own right. He is patiently awaiting the day he must take over completely. And I do mean patiently. We never feel like he’s chomping at the bit to put dad out to pasture. In fact, there is a hint of him dreading the inevitable day. This is understandable. Who wants to step directly into the shoes of a legend? Still, this is no point of contention. The bond between the two men is strong. This comes across beautifully as we spend a good chunk of time with Yoshikazu. He shows us all the hard work that goes into their world class sushi. The various types of fish are picked meticulously and prepared for service with near surgical precision. The staff he trains with his father are in class for the long haul. It is a ten year apprenticeship. At the end of this time, former trainees are sent out into the world to open their own restaurant. Yoshikazu himself has been by his dad’s side for over thirty years.

A documentary about a guy who loves sushi doesn’t sound like it should be a long one and it isn’t. However, I think it short-changes us just a bit. A little more time could be invested in the relationship between Yoshikazu and his brother Takashi. Maybe we could get some testimonies from people who have eaten there, besides the food critic Masuhiro Yamamoto. Certainly, I would like to have met his wife and gotten her two cents. We’re told she’s still alive, but nothing more than that, and she never appears. All of these could have been included with less than ten more minutes of run-time. That said, it’s a fun, lighthearted film about a guy better at one thing than most of us will ever be at anything. This leads to my biggest gripe with the movie. Oddly, this complaint is because of what is perhaps the movie’s greatest quality. Throughout, we get gorgeously framed shots of the various types of sushi. We get so many of them, many have described this film as food porn. Here’s the problem: I can’t taste it!

MY SCORE: 8/10

[dell71]

The Paperboy
Directed by Lee Daniels.
2012. Rated R, 107 minutes.
Cast:
Matthew McConaughey
Nicole Kidman
Zac Efron
John Cusack
David Oyelowo
Scott Glenn
Ned Bellamy
Nealla Gordon
Macy Gray

Hillary Van Wetter (Cusack) is sitting on death row after being convicted of murdering the local sheriff. Charlotte Bless (Kidman) is a groupie for inmates who has fallen in love with Mr. Van Wetter through the letters they exchange. She has also sent some letters to big city newspaper reporter Ward Jansen (McConaughey) who happens to be from this particular small town, claiming Hillary was framed. Ward comes home, writing partner Yardley (Oyelowo) in tow, to investigate this possibly huge story and potentially save a man’s life. Also helping out is Ward’s little brother Jack (Efron) who still lives with their parents. Almost forgot, it is the nineteen sixties and we are in the south, so it is of some importance that Yardley, as well as Jansen family maid Anita (Gray), is black. Also vital to the tale is that our prisoner is certainly no angel.

What The Paperboy wants to be is a hyper-sexual, racially charged, and shocking thriller. To that end, it does things that are hyper-sexual, racially charged, and shocking. The problem is they don’t come together in a manner allowing it to be what it wants. The ones that work are undeniably memorable. I, for one, will never forget the scene of Charlotte’s first visit to Hillary in jail. The ones that don’t work merely add to the clutter.

Believe it or not, seeming to fly by the seat of its pants is not this movie’s worse offense. All of the different strands, even though they don’t congeal properly, are intriguing in their own way and could have made a really fascinating movie. The bigger issue is the mechanics it uses to tell these stories. An old adage that applies art in any medium is that it is better to show than to tell. Lesser artists often tell, robbing their work of its power. Think of it like the punchline of a great joke. People who “get it” will probably laugh. Those you have to explain it to, will probably not. Through the use of Anita as a narrator, The Paperboy constantly explains itself. Nearly every time we hear her in voice-over, she’s either telling us what we just saw, or what we are about to see. This is a common pitfall for movies to fall into when employing a narrator. It’s one The Paperboy never even tries to avoid.

On top of being the annoying narrator, Macy Gray gives a terrible performance whenever she appears within the story. She often sounds as if she is reading. Even then, her words are garbled in a way that doesn’t fit the character. She has a cameo in Tyler Perry’s most ambitious film, For Colored Girls. I am not a fan of Perry’s, but Gray combines with his direction to give us a wonderfully harrowing two minutes of film. She also has a solid, but brief turn in Training Day. Her performances in those movies versus what we get here lead me to believe she’s best in small doses. Very small.

Zac Efron as Jack, the actual focal point of all the goings on, also fails to impress. He doesn’t do anything egregiously wrong. He just is not believable. He never feels as naïve and innocent as he should. I know that’s an odd thing to say about a guy best known for the High School Musical trilogy. The truth is, he’s become a sex symbol and wears the status like a second skin, giving off a confidence this character is not supposed to have.

If there is a saving grace for this movie, it’s the rest of the cast. Matthew McConaughey is his typically magnetic self. The man has undeniable presence and it is once again on full display. As the man on death row, John Cusack matches McConaughey, if not surpassing him. He completely takes over whenever he is on the screen. I fear that because this will not be noted as one of his better movies, it will be some of his most overlooked work. David Oyelowo is also very good. We’re never really sure how to take his character, but he’s awfully convincing doing all the things he does.

Outdoing all of the guys, we get our biggest kick out of, or are most disgusted by, a vamped up Nicole Kidman. She keeps the gas pedal to the floor all the way through the film. Her character is not likable and doesn’t seem to be all there. She often only vaguely resembles a human being. It is just a ridiculously bad role. She couldn’t possibly make it believable. Still, she plays it to the hilt, bringing an element of “so bad it’s awesome” to the proceedings. Watching her, Basic Instinct 2 came leaping to mind. About that movie, the late great Roger Ebert wrote “The Catherine Trammell role cannot be played well, but Sharon Stone can play it badly better than any other actress alive.” The same applies to Kidman, here.

As for the rest of the movie, things keep happening that appear independent of each other that the movie keeps trying to persuade us are part of a cohesive whole. Many of these seem to have been done simply for shock value. Our conclusion is fun, but doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Let me backtrack for a sec. What happens makes perfect sense. How it happens does not. We’re left with a film that has an awful lot going on and can be fun because of all the zaniness. However, it never feels like it actually works.

MY SCORE: 5/10

[dell71]

Happy Thanksgiving, folks!!! I couldn't let the day pass without an appropriately themed movie, so today you get Deadfall. It's not exactly going to give you the warm and fuzzies, but...well...let's just get into the review...

Deadfall
Directed by Stefan Ruzowitzky.
2012. Rated R, 95 minutes.
Cast:
Eric Bana
Olivia Wilde
Charlie Hunnam
Kate Mara
Kris Kristofferson
Sissy Spacek
Treat Williams
Patrick Kerton
Allison Graham

We meet Liza (Wilde) and her brother Addison (Bana) as they are riding along a snowy road in the getaway car after a casino heist. Our movie watching experience tells us that when a movie starts inside a vehicle, something bad is about to happen. And so, it does. As they tend to, a deer runs out into the middle of the road, which the driver slams into. We won’t be seeing either of them again. As for Liza and Addison, they survive. Since the car did not, they have to find a way to the Canadian border to complete their escape. Addison decides they will split up. Liza is to hitchhike her way to someplace safe. He will have the money and call her later tonight to find out where she is and get there any way possible. As an unsuspecting police officer who happens upon the crash site learns, killing anyone in the way is certainly an option for Addison. Something else we learn about him is that his relationship with his sister is probably a lot different than yours with your siblings. They take the phrase “keep it in the family” way too literally. Anyhoo, Addison takes off through the woods, taking a chance he’ll freeze to death, while Liza manages to get a ride from Jay (Hunnam). Unbeknownst to her, Jay has not only just gotten out of prison, but he is also on the run. Of course, they discover they kind of like one another. Hmmm, wonder what Addison thinks of all this. We find out over a rather tense Thanksgiving day feast.

The movie alternates between Addison’s countryside adventure and Liza’s road trip with Jay. It also lets us get to know Jay’s parents: his loving mom June (Spacek) and his grouchy dad Chet (Kristofferson) who won’t speak to him. Local cop Hannah (Mara), who grew up with Jay and now works under her overbearing father Sherrif Becker (Williams), is also in the mix. With all of this going on, Deadfall manages not to feel cluttered. It ably bounces around the various subplots and keeps them well tethered to the larger narrative. The motivations of each person is revealed in no uncertain terms. Within each, a different aspect of family dynamics plays out. Unfortunately, this also renders them all rather flat. We get the idea we know what any of them are going to say before they actually speak.

Addison is the one person who manages to escape the trap of predictability. Sure, his ultimate goal is transparent, but he gives us surprises along the way. This makes whatever is going on with him the most interesting thing in the movie. Eric Bana has some issues with his southern accent, his character is from Alabama, but is otherwise great. We get that this is a guy with a warped sense of morals. It is certainly understood that his screws are rolling around unfastened to anything in his noggin.

The elders in the cast: Spacek, Kristofferson, and Williams are all excellent. Spacek is particularly good. Where her male cast mates all huff and puff through much of the movie, she gives a very nuanced performance. Our pair of instant lovers doesn’t fare as well. Olivia Wilde is actually solid, giving off enough naivete to sell her roll. Unfortunately, she shares most of her scenes with Charlie Hunnam. He gives the type of performance that makes it difficult to believe he has a pulse.

What Deadfall has going most for it is the way it all comes together at the end. Leading up to the finale things are a bit uneven. It’s fun when Bana is on the screen and the dynamics betwee the various characters works. During our time with the lovebirds the movie doesn’t sizzle the way it wants. However, from the moment Bana shows up in Spacek’s kitchen, the tension is ramped up and carries us through the third act. The actual ending is on the predictable side, but it works. It takes the movie from being one we could go either way on to the one that’s not too bad.

MY SCORE: 6.5/10

[dell71]

Hope Springs
Directed by David Frankel.
2012. Rated PG-13, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Meryl Streep
Tommy Lee Jones
Steve Carell
Jean Smart
Elisabeth Shue
Ben Rappaport
Marin Ireland
Brett Rice
Mimi Rogers
Ann Harada

Kay (Streep) has been married to Arnold (Jones) for thirty-one years. For at least the last four, every day has been exactly the same. They eat a quick breakfast before going off to their separate jobs, and a quick dinner when they return home. He then proceeds to fall asleep watching The Golf Channel while she cleans the dishes. When she’s done, she wakes him and he retires to the guest room. She sleeps in the master bedroom. Needless to say, the sparks are no longer flying. In an effort to change this, Kay makes reservations for the two to spend a week in Maine where they will see Dr. Feld (Carell), a famous marriage counselor. Even though he doesn’t see anything wrong with their relationship, Arnold reluctantly goes along. By the way, he is also a grumpy penny-pincher whose favorite activity is complaining. A very tough week for the couple ensues.

The best thing that can be said about Hope Springs is that Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones really feel like two people who have been together for three plus decades. They each inhabit their characters fully and let us understand who these people are. We get to know them as thoroughly as they should know each other, but don’t. It helps that we have all known couple like this. They have been together so long, they don’t know anything else. Some of us are that couple. In them, we recognize our own hopes and fears of what marriage will be like once the nest empties.

Right away, Kay is established as the more sympathetic figure. It is easy to see that her frustrations are not only born of her husband’s cluelessness, but of his comfortableness with the way things are. For him, sleeping in separate beds and barely talking to his wife beyond greetings and salutations are merely facts of life. That’s simply the way it is. Of course she desires a deeper connection, both physically and emotionally. She just needs help communicating this. We feel her pain.

To the movie’s credit, it doesn’t just attack the problem from one angle. Eventually, we get into why things have gotten this way from Arnold’s point of view. It’s fitting that it takes a good portion of the movie to get to this because he is not a guy given to expressing any feelings that make him appear vulnerable. He’s the proverbial turnip we’re trying to draw blood from. This works wonderfully as we begin to sympathize with him more and more as the film progresses.

Though billed as a rom-com, Hope Springs is much more “dramedy” than anything else. There is lots of angst, some hurt feelings and tears shed. The focus is really on this authentic feeling marriage and whether it can be fixed, not on a succession of jokes. We do get some laughs. Most of them come from Arnold’s incessant grumbling. He is our dad, or grand-dad, and nothing is ever quite good enough or cheap enough for him. Kay is our mother, or grandmother. She’s sweet as pie and struggles to keep it together when she’s upset. We love her to death, but she rarely makes us laugh. The only other character of consequence is Dr. Feld. Steve Carell plays the role surprisingly straight.

This is a movie that hits a lot of right notes and has two marvelous performances. In the end, it comes across as more lightweight than it actually is. Therefore, almost no one will rank this among the best from either actor. That’s a shame because while I don’t think this is a truly great movie, I think they are both great in it. I also fear there is probably a clear line of demarcation separating those who will enjoy it and those who will not. I’d set that line at about age thirty-five and having been in at least one long-term monogamous relationship. In other words, use another Meryl Streep vehicle, It’s Complicated, as a guide. If that’s not your cup of tea, don’t sip from this one, either.

MY SCORE: 7/10

[dell71]

Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning
Directed by John Hyams.
2012. Rated R, 114 minutes.
Cast:
Scott Adkins
Jean-Claude Van Damme
Dolph Lundgren
Mariah Bonner
Andrei Arlovski
Rus Blackwell
Audrey P. Scott
David Jensen
Roy Jones, Jr.

John (Adkins) is woken up in the middle of the night by his daughter who says there are monsters in the kitchen. Like a good father, he goes to investigate. When he gets there, he discovers she was right. Three men in ski masks are waiting for him and proceed to beat half to death with a crowbar. While he lies in a pool of his own blood, the men bring down his daughter and his wife and murders them right in front of him. Fast forward nine months to John waking up in the hospital. He’s told by the FBI that a man named Devereaux (Van Damme) is responsible. Our hero trying to find this man ensues. His quest is made a bit more difficult because Devereaux’s second-in-command, Scott (Lundgren), has sent the maniacal goon known as The Plumber (Arlovski) after John to kill him. If that weren’t bad enough, all these bad guys are hopped up the Universal Soldier Serum which makes the stuff Captain America got seem like a B-12 shot.

Immediately, it becomes clear that our focus is on brutal and bloody violence. At this, it succeeds. The next knock-down-drag-out is never too far away. Everything in the vicinity gets smashed, blood splatters everywhere, and body parts are left among the debris. Don’t worry, they get regenerated. No, I’m not joking. Anyhoo, without overextending itself, it is enough to satisfy your average action junkie.

Between all the noisy parts, we get a story that’s simple at it’s core, a bit convoluted in execution, and holds together barely enough to get us through. A few things don’t quite make sense, but not enough to ruin the movie. However, if you’re looking for all of this feature Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren, you will be sorely disappointed. Neither guy has very much screen time. It is all about this young guy, Scott Adkins. He provides a solid enough protagonist. After all, it’s not like Van Damme and Lundgren were ever accused of being great actors. Okay, maybe once. Van Damme was excellent in JCVD, but that’s it so the point remains. Besides, they do get in on the action a little bit.

In case the title and the presence of two 80s action gods didn’t clue you in, this is another entry in the Universal Soldier canon. I have no idea how many this makes, nor do I really care. The very first one is the only one I have seen. I must confess that happened so long ago I don’t remember much about it. What I’m getting at is this: familiarity with the franchise is not a must to enjoy Day of Reckoning. It works well enough as a stand-alone. For those of you that are familiar, I have no idea how well this fits or doesn’t with the series motif. In any event, it’s perfectly acceptable as a mile-a-minute, turn your brain off action flick.

MY SCORE: 6/10

[dell71]

Battlefield America
Directed by Christopher B. Stokes.
2012. Rated PG-13, 105 minutes.
Cast:
Marques Houston
Mekia Cox
Lynn Whitfield
Christopher Michael Jones
Jojo Wright
Tristen Carter
Valarie Pettiford
Gary Anthony Sturgis
Russell Ferguson
Big Boy

Sean Lewis (Houston) is a young, hot shot exec who is climbing the ladder of success at breakneck speed. That speed gets him in trouble on the road as he has accumulated a string of traffic violations. He is so busy with his career, he merely tasks his lawyer to handle it without his presence. When informed he must appear in court for his latest discretion or risk being thrown in jail, he does, but takes a very cavalier attitude with him. Luckily for him, instead of getting sent to the slammer, his lawyer brokers a deal for him to perform community service. The catch is that it must be done for eight hours a day over the next two weeks. This is to be performed at a rec center in the hood where he is put in charge of a group of boys who want nothing more than to win the Battlefield America kiddie dance crew competition. Of course, they’re not the most disciplined or talented group. Sean trying to connect with the boys, keep his career intact, and woo Sara (Cox), the gorgeous rec center director, ensues.

Everything that happens in this movie pertaining to our hero’s relationship with the boys occurs exactly as you think it would. He forms a special bond with the tough kid, wins over the heart of the pretty girl, disappoints them when he reverts to his old selfish ways, etc. Surprisingly, this predictability is less of an issue than how we get from one overly familiar plot point to the next. Instead of flowing into one another, developing things as we go, we get a succession of disjointed scenes. As each begins we get the sense that something was left out between the beginning of the one we’re watching and the end of the one we saw before it. This renders character attitude changes jarring and events feel like they’re happening only because they are supposed to, not out of the organic growth of the story. This is worsened when there is a dance set between two dramatic scenes. The movie uses the dance sequences as excuses to jump to whatever the next item on the checklist is without actually navigating the waters to arrive there. This calls attention to other things that are so illogical they seriously stretch the idea that this is taking place in our world. For instance, after our hero is caught red-handed not performing his community service in the time mandated his punishment is not jail, as it would be for you or I. Instead, he’s merely given more community service. Matters are not helped by the fact that not one actor brings enough weight to their roles to really sell it and help us get past such things. The whole thing is not just paint-by-numbers. It is coloring with a highlighter so that all of the numbers are still visible.

Most things aside from what happens between Sean and the crew are laughable, at best. How he handles his work situation is simply ridiculous and the inevitable outcome of it is an eye-roller. The bigger problem, however, is its falling into the same trap as countless other urban dance flicks. We’re dropped into yet another underground dance culture where most dancers are evil thugs and the most thuggish ones dominate all of the competitions. Of course, many of these competitions take place at night in back alleys and change locations often as if an attempt to avoid police detection. It’s already silly in movies featuring people in their late teens and early twenties. Here, where none of the dancers have even reached puberty it’s goofy on hyperdrive.

Here’s the thing: dance movies are largely critic proof. You can slap together any story, no matter how lazy or sloppy, and people who love dance movies will enjoy it as long as the dancing is good. Why do you think they keep making sequels to Step Up? It’s not because some great saga needs to be continued. It is because the high energy and inventive dance routines keep drawing crowds. No, they’re not raking in comic book movie dough but these are low budget affairs, relatively speaking, and bring in big returns. For instance, Step Up Revolution cost $33 million to get on the big screen and hauled in $140 million at the box office. True, Battlefield America was a commercial failure, but may earn years of returns from cable networks running it ad nauseum, like the Jessica Alba dance movie Honey. In other words, there is an audience for this. I can’t say I blame people for liking it. For all of it’s many faults, being dull is not one of them. To the point of this review, to help you figure out whether or not you should see this, I’ll say that the big selling point on the DVD cover is that this is “from the writer, director and Creator of You Got Served.” You decide whether that is an invitation or a warning.

MY SCORE: 3/10

[dell71]

The Last American Virgin
Directed by Boaz Davidson.
1982. Rated R, 92 minutes.
Cast:
Lawrence Monoson
Diane Franklin
Steve Antin
Joe Rubbo
Louisa Moritz
Kimmy Robertson
Tessa Richarde
Brian Peck

Way back when I myself was a virgin, I stumbled upon this movie late one summer night on HBO. In those days, I spent my break from school with my grandparents. The very first time I tried to watch it, I actually didn’t get very far. In true 1980s teen sex romp fashion, there is a good deal of nudity, particularly early on. What I didn’t know was that, upstairs, my grandfather had also come across this movie. Seconds after the first boob pops out, he appeared at the top of the steps and told me to “Turn off that X-rated show!” The Last American Virgin isn’t really X-rated, but in his eyes nudity was equivalent to hardcore porn. I’m only guessing that he continued to watch himself since I never had enough courage to ask.

As for me, all was not lost. At least in back then, if not still, whatever appeared on HBO would likely be aired at least three or four times a week throughout whichever month it happened to be. I studied the TV guide and memorized a number of the upcoming airtimes. Over the course of the next thirty days, I must have watched this movie a dozen times at all hours of the night. I also saw it a few more times over the next couple of summers. To a curious and horny young boy, it was one of the greatest films ever made. That was thirty years ago. Though I hadn’t seen it since, it was still a piece of my adolescence I could never forget. By now, I figured it was time for a rewatch to see if it really is the sacred cow I’d built it up to be in my head.

After all this time, I once again meet Gary (Monoson). Unfortunately for him, he is the title character. He may not actually be the last virgin in the entire country, but he sure feels like it. Like lots of teenage boys, his entire existence is dedicated to changing that status. Things would probably go a lot easier for him if he weren’t so awkward around the opposite sex. To help him break the seal, so to speak, he has his two bestest buds Rick (Antin) and David (Rubbo), plus the very liberal use of his boss’ car when he is not using it to deliver pizza. We join the boys on their adventures in tail-chasing which includes run-ins with a trio of girls looking to get high, a very horny Latin cougar, a prostitute, and a couple regular girls from their school. Of course, one of them is Karen (Franklin), whom our hero has a very big crush on. Rick, with the help of his boys, trying desperately to get into someone’s pants ensues.

Early on, the movie takes on a sketch-comedy quality as the boys bound from one escapade to the next. All of these are merely to drive home the point that Rick is a ladies’ man, David picks up his left-overs, and something outrageous is going to happen to prevent Gary from getting some. To its credit, these situations are generally funy in the most juvenile way. It’s just believable enough that any of these things could happen that really sells the jokes. Granted, they often in a manner that’s way too slapstick, but up until that point we have fun with their sexual misadventures.

Between these, our hero agonizes over Karen whom eventually starts dating Rick. This part of the movie works, but doesn’t come off quite as intended because Lawrence Monoson is not a strong enough actor to pull it off. The script helps him out as it gives us easy pointers on where the emotion should be. Overall, the writing is actually fairly courageous for the genre. It brings up the debate on pro-choice vs. pro-life, and is actually ambiguous enough that its stance is open to interpretation. Perhaps even braver, it does not end the way we expect it to. It’s actually a fairly harsh conclusion, especially for a teen sex comedy. For me, this finish elevates the movie above most of its ilk.

Often, when I go back to movies I loved during my youth I’m sadly disappointed to discover them to be not nearly as good as I thought. Watching The Last American Virgin again, I was bracing for this strong possibility. I must say I was pleasantly surprised. It still makes me laugh and it holds up pretty well. After all, the theme of a boy efforting to lose his virginity is timeless. Aside from that, it manages to include many of the type of antics the genre is known for, but also takes it in a less traveled direction.

MY SCORE: 7.5/10

[dell71]

Kinyarwanda
Directed by Alrick Brown.
2011. Not Rated, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Cassandra Freeman
Hadidja Zaninka
Mazimpaka Kennedy
Edouard Bamporiki
Cleophas Kabasita
Hassan Kabera
Abdalla Uwimana
Marc Gwamaka
Mutsari Jean
Kena Onyenjekwe

The Rwandan genocide of 1994 has been, and continues to be, widely documented. It has even made its way to mainstream American cinema with 2004’s Hotel Rwanda which starred Don Cheadle. In case none of this rings a bell, I’ll give you a quick and oversimplified history lesson. People of the two predominant ethnicities in Rwanda, the Hutu and the Tutsi’s were engaged in a civil war. Even though the Hutu comprise a much larger portion of the country’s population, the Tutsi controlled the government for much of its history. However, in 1994, the Hutu had been in power for roughly thirty years. Rebel Tutsi’s organized in an effort to seize power, thus resulting in war. After Hutu leader Juvénal Habyarimana was assassinated, members of a powerful Hutu group known as the Akazu initiated the mass killings of Tutsi’s. Through pointed and unfiltered propaganda, they convinced many that the Tutsi’s aim was to enslave the Hutu and for this, all of them should be exterminated. They openly referred to Tutsi’s as “cockroaches.” Also targeted were any Hutu who opposed these genocidal tactics, were thought to be hiding Tutsi, and of course, those who were married to someone of Tutsi descent. They were labeled traitors. Over a period of 100 days (from early April to mid-July of ’94) men, women, and children alike, often whole families at once, were murdered in the streets, in their homes, schools, churches, and wherever else they might be by Hutu death squads. Many of these squads were part of the Hutu military, but a disturbing number of them were made up of civilians taking up arms against their neighbors. Often, these executions were carried out by machete leaving maimed those who didn’t die from their attack. When it was over, somewhere in the vicinity of one million people had perished. That is an estimated twenty percent of the country’s entire population at the time. Most of them were Tutsi’s. Imagine if one of every five people you know were violently murdered over the summer. Eventually, the RPF (Rwandan Patriotic Front), a mostly Tutsi rebel group defeated the Hutu army and seized control of the country. This is the backdrop for our movie.

The tale of Kinyarwanda is told mostly through three intertwining plot lines. The firs involves a young girl named Jean (Zaninka). She is half-Tutsi and returns home from a day hanging out at a friend’s house to find that the rest of her family has been slaughtered. The next has us follow Father Pierre (Kennedy), a Tutsi Catholic priest who is highly sought after by the Hutu since he is viewed to be in a position of leadership. Finally, we ride along with Lt. Rose (Freeman), a female officer in the RPF, as they try to extract people from dangerous situations. Each story is well told. The danger within them is undeniably real, helping invest us in the fate of these people. Also helping is the almost constant playing of the radio. During this time, Hutu run stations blatantly advocated the mass killing of Tusti through incendiary broadcasts. Hearing the call for murder is, in itself, a scary thing. Much more frightening is then seeing ordinary citizens answering that call. It’s the worst of mob mentality on an exponentially larger than normal scale. Therefore, we realize death is almost always quite literally right around the corner.

Through jumps back and forth in time, the movie also sets up a redemption tale. Parts of the movie take place some time after the genocide with many of the Hutu perpertrators we’ve met in some sort of de-programming or re-education camp. It is run by Lt. Rose. Here, we get some heart-wrenching group counseling sessions. We worry that the mental state of at least one person is not healing so well. We try to put ourselves in the shoes of the Tutsi survivors and figure out if we could forgive such atrocities. This is no easy task.

The are some small dings in the movie’s armor. Most noticeably, the acting is not quite top notch. In fact, many of the performers are first-timers. This renders the individual stories just a bit less powerful than they should be. None of the individual actors reach out and grab us by the throat, the way this material is begging someone to. Also, the Hutu characters need to be fleshed out a little more. We only get to know anything about one of them as the they were before they took up killing as a mission. It works wonderfully, but it is a tactic not applied elsewhere. This also may have strengthened Kinyarwanda even further. However, these are somewhat minor in the grand scheme of things. It overcomes its flaws to deliver a truly harrowing tale worthy of your attention.

MY SCORE: 9/10

[dell71]

This is the End
Directed by Evan Goldberg and Seth Rogen.
2013. Rated R, 107 minutes.
Cast:
Seth Rogen
Jay Baruchel
James Franco
Jonah Hill
Craig Robinson
Danny McBride
Michael Cera
Emma Watson
Channing Tatum
Rihanna

You may know actor Jay Baruchel from such movies as The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, She’s Out of My League, and Goon. He finally has some time off so he goes to Los Angeles where he wants nothing more than to kick back at his buddy Seth Rogen’s house while the two smoke some weed and play video games. When Seth informs him there is a party tonight at James Franco’s place, Jay very reluctantly agrees to go. The problem is Jay doesn’t like Franco or any of the other people he is told will be there. Though he’s having a miserable time, things get considerably worse for Jay and everyone else as the apocalypse seems to be upon them, literally. Some people are instantly lifted towards the heavens while the ground opens up and swallows others, including many of Franco’s famous party guests, all playing themselves. Inside the actor’s home seems to be the only safe place for our remaining players: Franco, Baruchel, Rogen, Jonah Hill, Craig Robinson, and Danny McBride.

Early on, the movie gives us ridiculous thing to laugh at. We get things like the drug fueled lunacy of Michael Cera, Craig Robinson leading a group of revelers in a rendition of “Take Yo Panties Off,” and Rihanna being the target of a few sexual advances. There are also many more celebrity cameos, most of which comprise of the stars making fun of their own images. Once we transition into the survival portion of the film we explore the dynamics of the various relationships of our survivors, and of course, a number of power struggles. Weaved into all of this is the debate over whether or not what is going is biblical. With death waiting outside the door in the form of seldom seen, but very deadly creatures, it functions as a monster flick, too.

Comedy is the thread that holds it all together. If you’re familiar with any of these guys, you should know what type of humor to expect. It’s profane, over the top, completely irreverent, homoerotic, and especially when the guys get really thirsty, flat out gross. Thankfully, it works far better here than it has in any of their other recent comedic efforts. The guys settle into their roles quickly, caricatures of themselves, and play it for all it’s worth. Save possibly for Jay, none of the guys are particularly concerned with developing empathy for themselves. Each is just a portion of the joke. They all make their portion work.

Eventually, the movie gets into good vs. evil, and just what it takes to be accepted into the kingdom of Heaven. Don’t expect any deep meditation on the subject. In fact, if you’re serious about your religion you might bristle at the conclusions that are reached. Though, to be fair, it doesn’t question anyone’s beliefs as much as it pokes fun at them. More attention is given to the friendship between Jay and Seth in particular, but we also delve into each guy’s relationship with the other guys, and some of theirs with each other. This is the End becomes a amalgamation of bromances held together by outlandish humor. Therefore, if you just want something fun that’s not afraid to offend or appear stupid, yet still woks as a story, this will suit you quite nicely.

MY SCORE: 7.5/10

[dell71]

Amour
Directed by Michael Haneke.
2012. Rated PG-13, 127 minutes.
Cast:
Jean-Louis Trintignant
Emmanuelle Riva
Isabelle Huppert
Alexandre Tharaud
Rita Blanco
Ramon Agirre
William Shimell
Carol Franck
Dinara Droukarova

Georges (Trintignant) and Anne (Riva) are one of those great couples who have been together forever and still appear to be in love. They do everything together and life is good. Unfortunately, things change drastically when she has a stroke. To correct the blockage that caused it, she undergoes surgery. However, that goes wrong and leaves her paralyzed on her right side. She returns home from the hospital and the two immediately become more care-giver and patient than husband and wife. The two trying to navigate the suddenly tough waters of their lives ensues.

The entire movie depicts the sad, downward spiral of their lives. It is filled with gut-wrenching emotion and deep devotion. There is really nothing we can do but feel sorry for Georges and Anne. She grows increasingly dependent on him and he gets more and more protective of her. His frustration also grows as his wife’s lucidity fades. As viewers, we become frustrated with him because of how secretive he is about her condition. He does what he can to care for her, employing nurses to aid them and whatever else is necessary. However, he flat refuses any help or suggestions their daughter offers. Through skillful writing and acting the entirety of the pain caused by every aspect of this situation transfers to us. Effectively, it keeps us engaged.

Something else that works to set the mood is the startling quiet of it all. In her younger days, Anne was a respected music instructor. Her prized pupil is now a famous musician. On occasion, there are bursts of classical music. However, much the movie is silent in places other films, particularly American ones, would fill with sound. Rather than artificially manipulate us with a rousing or saddening score, the lack of musical accompaniment adds to both the realism and the bleakness of that reality. Within the realm of this film, the take away is simple. Where there is music, there is hope; where there is none, there is not.

As in all situations such as this, decisions must constantly be made. Ultimately, the point is reached where that decision is the hardest one possible. Once Georges makes it, we immediately have one to make, ourselves. We begin to decide if we think he’s right or wrong, selfish or selfless. Then, how do we feel about what happens next? There are deep, philosophical conversations to be had about what transpires here. This is what gives Amour a lasting effect. It elevates itself from being a typical love story to one not only worthy of our viewing, but our contemplation.

MY SCORE: 9/10

[dell71]

The Croods
Directed by Chris Sanders and Kirk De Micco.
2013. Rated PG, 98 minutes.
Cast:
Emma Stone
Nicolas Cage
Ryan Reynolds
Catherine Keener
Cloris Leachman
Clark Duke
Chris Sanders
Randy Thom

The Croods are the last remaining family of cave people. They have managed to suvive because patriarch Grug (Cage) keeps a suffocatingly short leash on the whole clan. This includes his wife Ugga (Keener), his son Thunk (Duke), the baby Sandy, mother-in-law Gran (Leachman), and most troublesome, his eldest daughter Eep (Stone). She’s a free spirit who loves to explore her surroundings, much to her father’s chagrin. For him, the key to survival is remaining within the confines of their cave as much as possible. While out one day, she happens upon Guy (Reynolds), a more evolved human whom she finds dreamy. Guy tells her the end of the world, at least as they know it, is coming very soon. Sure enough, things start to change drastically and the Croods’ beloved cave collapses. Reluctantly, Grug agrees to go on the long journey to find a safe place to live. With Guy’s help, they try to make it to a mountain way off in the distance.

If you haven’t already guessed, this is basically an Ice Age movie with prehistoric people in place of animals. I’ll let you figure out which characters are equivalents. However, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The formula works well enough and enough things are draped over top of it to make this a fun ride. The family dynamic is fairly universal and the jokes about those dynamics are solid. In particular, the father-daughter relationship is thoroughly and enjoyably explored. The running gag about Grug secretly hoping his mother-in-law has finally passed away is morbidly funny. Jokes about the entire family’s lack of intelligence also work well. The action scenes give us both adventure and physical humor. It all comes together for a good time. And it never hurts that these things are gorgeously rendered.

Where The Croods sags a bit is not in the middle like most movies, but at the end. It draws out its inevitable conclusion for too long. It threatens to close on a dark note for quite a while. This would’ve been a shock welcome by me, but probably not for most parents or their kids. Still, it makes us wade through a less jovial section of the film that doesn’t quite work as it is intended because we have no doubt about how things will turn out. Instead of heightening the suspense it is merely delaying the obvious.

For the most part, The Croods is exactly what it wants to be: an adventure for the whole family. The kids won’t be bored by it and there are plenty of jokes that adults can laugh at. Honestly, my wife and I had at least a good a time watching this as our young’uns. Sure, dock it for being almost entirely derivative. How big demerit that should be is up to you. Just not that what it lacks in originality, it makes up for in fun.

MY SCORE: 7/10

[dell71]

The Imposter
Directed by Bart Layton.
2012. Rated R, 99 minutes.
Cast:
Frédéric Bourdin
Carey Gibson
Bryan Gibson
Beverly Dollarhide
Nancy Fisher
Phillip French
Adam O’Brian
Anna Ruben
Cathy Dresbach
Ivan Villanueva
Ken Appledorn

Every now and again we see something in life, on television, or on the internet that makes us wonder just how stupid people can be. Other things make us shudder at the thought of the human capacity for being sinister and deceptive. The Imposter is a documentary that does both. It starts with the 1994 disappearance of Nicholas Barclay, a thirteen year old Texan boy. After three years of searching, with no luck, the family has just about lost all hope when they receive a phone call informing them Nicholas has been found. In Spain. Big sis Carey immediately boards a plane to retrieve her now seventeen year old brother. However, she does not yet know what we’ve already learned. The boy she is coming to get is not Nicholas. He is, in fact, a twenty-three-year-old man named Frédéric Bourdin posing as the lost teenager. He happened upon this identity in a desperate attempt to conceal his own. Logically, he assumes the jig will be up once Carey gets a look at him. After all, judging from a picture he obtained, he looks nothing like Nicholas.

This is where it gets really interesting. When Nicholas shows up to take her brother home, she embraces and accepts this guy as if he actually is her brother. She brings him back to Texas where the entire family, mom included, accepts him as Nicholas. Given the differences between Nicholas and the person they now have, this is beyond baffling. Nicholas was a fair-skinned, blue-eyed, blonde-haired boy. The man they trust is an older version of him is blonde, but because he colors his hair. Aside from this, he has a dark complexion and, most damning, brown eyes. In fact, it appears obvious that he is of a different ethnicity than anyone in the family. If none of that rings alarms, let’s throw in the fact he speaks with a heavy French accent. Still, no one in the family seems wise to the facts. Local officials are suspicious and begin investigating. Things hit the fan when the “new” Nicholas becomes a minor celebrity as news of his harrowing ordeal and miraculous return. He tells a sensational tale of mental and sexual abuse during his time as a captive, at the hands of military men from various nations including the U.S.

The movie proceeds from there while we watch in slack-jawed amazement. The first question is how long can this charade go on before indisputable evidence is uncovered, forcing the family to realize this guy is a fake. We hear several authorities involved in piecing together this puzzle give their recollection of their interactions with and pursuit of Bourdin. There are also lots of interviews with the family and, most interestingly, with Bourdin, himself. Mixed into all of these are some dramatizations of actual events. This stroke of genius helps the movie almost feel like a fiction narrative and is a nice change of pace from all of the talking heads.

The other questions The Imposter raises is where it runs into trouble. Why would Bourdin do such a thing? What really happened to him before he was picked up by the police in Spain while pretending to be a sniveling lost child? The film never dares to approach either one. It does touch on another, but in an unsatisfactory manner. That question is did the family have something to do with Nicholas’ disappearance in the first place. This would give them a motive for going along with the façade. We hear allegations from Bourdin about what he thinks happened. However, he is not exactly trustworthy. A few members of the family refute these claims. No surprise there. There is the private eye who has been snooping around trying to find out what happened to the boy and potentially comes upon an answer. The movie even ends as if he makes some startling discovery. The issue is that what we are told next, just before the credits roll, totally undermines this. In essence, the movie finishes when it feels like it should be shifting into another gear.

What’s here is still a fascinating story. It is the kind of movie that could only be a documentary. Had this been some screenwriter’s concoction, it would be laughed off for being too ridiculous. Think about it. How do you sell a work of fiction in which a teenage boy from Texas with classic All-American looks returns home as a darkly complected Frenchman with different color eyes? I suppose it’s possible as a farce starring Adam Sandler, or Will Ferrell, but certainly not as a serious thriller. This is precisely what makes The Imposter work as well as it does. We simply cannot believe what we are seeing, yet can’t look away. We wait for someone to make sense of it all. Even though that wait is largely in vain, we still have a film that’s hard to shake loose from our heads.

MY SCORE: 8/10

[dell71]

Spring Breakers
Directed by Harmony Korine.
2013. Rated R, 94 minutes.
Cast:
James Franco
Selena Gomez
Vanessa Hudgens
Ashley Benson
Rachel Korine
Gucci Mane
Heather Morris
Ash Lendzion
Emma Holzer

Four gal-pals are all pumped for spring break. Unfortunately, they realize they don’t have enough money to get down to St. Petersburg. Apparently, that’s where all the action is going down. One of the girls is the heavy-handedly named Faith (Gomez), a goody two-shoes who spends lots of time in church. Unbeknownst to her, the other three come up with a plan to get the rest of the cash they need in a hurry. They don ski masks and burst into the local diner while brandishing a sledgehammer and some water guns. The heist goes well. They take money from the register, rob the patrons and gleefully flee to the dorms. Very shortly, the three of them plus the clueless Faith do indeed get down to St. Pete’s. By the way, the felonious three are Candy (Hudgens), Cotty (Korine), and Brit (Benson).

Anyhoo, our crew does what lots of other college kids do and have a little too much fun in the sun, indulging in drugs and destroying hotel rooms. For this, they find themselves in jail with no way of bailing themselves out. Riding to rescue is Alien (Franco), a local drug dealer and aspiring rapper. He happens to be in the courtroom to spring one of his buddies when he spots our bikini clad foursome being sent away for a few more days unless they can come up with the money to pay the fine they’ve incurred. Alien takes it upon himself to pay it for them, and as waiting for them as they get released. Before you know, they find themselves immersed in a completely different world than what they bargained for.

For some, the veneer of Spring Breakers will be difficult to penetrate. It’s easy to think you’re watching an R-rated music video. There is seemingly an endless succession of naked and/or gyrating bodies. Large quantities of alcohol are not only drank, but flung about in celebratory fashion, splashing everything in sight except for the various parts of the anatomy that cocaine is snorted off. Finally, the music blares while much of this happens in slow-motion. That there is actually a story is efficiently hidden for a large chunk of the movie. On top of this, the way the plot moves forward is slightly different than what many people are used to. We expect long stretches of dialogue during which information is delineated for us to follow. Here, we get short bursts of conversation intertwined with cutaways to its results. There is also lots of echo assisted voice-over and shots of one or another of the characters alone, either smiling or deep in thought. It gives the whole movie a dreamy, Terence Malick inspired feel and does nothing to dispel the notion of this being a music video. That is, until we notice how slyly things have progressed. It becomes a warped love story with potentially dire consequences for all involved.

Where the movie flounders is in its depiction of the individual characters. The girls are quite literally handled as Faith and “the other three.” She is the only one clearly distinguishable from the rest. Her personality, beliefs, and innocence make her stand out. The others are interchangeable, for the most part. This includes Vanessa Hudgens whom I was surprised didn’t get a meatier role, if for no other reason, she’s the most famous of the remaing trio. Alien is a bit problematic, as well. Franco does very well here, but his appearance makes us unsure how to take him for quite a while. Is he merely a stereotype, or a walking mockery of hip hop culture, particulary of whites within that culture? In other words, is he a joke, or not? Eventually, we settle on an answer, but it takes longer than it should. An even bigger issue is the film’s de facto villain Archie, played by real life rapper Gucci Mane. Yes, he is definitely a stereotype, but that’s not my biggest beef with him. More germane to the movie than what type of character he appears to be is that it mishandles him. He tells us point blank what he must do in the scene that drives home the point that he is definitely the bad guy. However, when he gets the chance to do it, he doesn’t, which is of not benefit to him whatsoever. Even worse, he does something at that same juncture that we know will be detrimental to his cause. It’s not that he couldn’t take this course of action, but why he would in not clear. If it’s there, Gucci’s blank facial expressions don’t sell it. Whatever you think of his music, you’ll probably agree his acting is terrible.

Earlier, I mentioned Terence Malick. I’m not at all a fan. Despite all the critical acclaim it received, I hate Malik’s Tree of Life. Still, the best parts of it were mostly in the second act where the narrative is propelled by small pockets of interactions by the family involved and lots of quick cuts to flesh things out. As I have already noted, director Harmony Korine, who wrote Kids and Gummo (also directing the latter), employs similar tactics here, with great success. Combined with all the chaotic imagery, they give the movie a wonderfully surreal feel. He and his editor, Douglas Crise, are the real stars of Spring Breakers. They have put together a story that is twisted, manic, and disturbing with a current of very dark humor running through it. Its sights and sounds bombard our senses, but doesn’t dull them. It is part odd and Shakespearean romance, part skin flick, and part sociological satire all with arthouse aspirations.

MY SCORE: 8.5/10

[dell71]

That’s My Boy
Directed by Sean Anders.
2012. Rated R, 116 minutes.
Cast:
Adam Sandler
Andy Samberg
Leighton Meester
James Caan
Vanilla Ice
Susan Sarandon
Will Forte
Tony Orlando
Rachel Dratch
Eva Amurri Martino
Nick Swardson
Peggy Stewart
Luenell
Ciara
Milo Ventimiglia

As a thirteen year old, Donny Berger (Sandler) lives out the fantasy of many a young boy when he enters into a sexual relationship with Ms. McGarricle (Martino in ’84, Sarandon in the present), the hottest teacher in school. When this bit of info becomes extremely public, Ms. McGarricle is shipped off to jail. There is just one little complication. She is pregnant. Donny and his family are awarded custody of the baby whom he names Han Solo Berger. Fast-forward almost thirty years. Donny is now a loser former celebrity in deep to the IRS. In fact, he has just a few days to come up with $43,000 or he will go to prison, himself. Han Solo, now going by Todd Peterson (Samberg) is now a successful executive and about to marry his fiancée Jamie (Meester). Donny cannot ask him for the money because the two are not on speaking terms. However, a friend of Donny’s who hosts a smutty talk show, offers him fifty grand if he can organize a family reunion of sorts, with Todd and Ms. McGarricle at the women’s prison where she is still an inmate.

There are basically two distinct versions of Adam Sandler. The one that fares best is the rather bland Everyman whose either a family man or a rather normal dude looking for love. As this person, Sandler generally makes his better movies. They appear to have a heart and Sandler, while not great, is usually likeable. The other version is the zany Sandler. This version usually has some goofy voice and/or accent, drinks heavily and/or does drugs, uses lots of slapstick and anatomy humor, and often uses a sexual fetish as a running gag. The movies featuring this Sandler are routinely dumber and have a few laugh out loud moments hidden within a crowd of jokes that don’t work. This latter version is the one we get for That’s My Boy.

If you can’t tell by my in-depth analysis of the two sides of our star, we get a string of jokes that are all loud and crass, but fail to be funny. The biggest reason for this is that we’ve seen this from Sandler before. It’s all way too familiar. Everything is a retread of stuff we got from You Don’t Mess with the Zohan, Little Nicky, The Waterboy, Happy Gilmore, etc. Donny has a thing for old ladies, masturbates a lot, winds up in a fist fight with an old man, there are a number of cameos from sports personalities, and so on. On top of that, there are a number of dated references to things that were funny for about five minutes back in the nineties.

To his credit, Adam Samberg does the best with what he has to work with. Admittedly, that’s not much, but he at least gives us someone to root for. For most part, he’s the straight man for all the knuckleheads running around in this movie. Though they try, I wouldn’t call any of his scenes even remotely touching. Still, they are by far the most bearable ones in the entire film. Most of our laughs are reserved for him making an innocent mistake, not from the outlandish antics of any of the others.

For me personally, this was a chore to sit through. It has a few funny moments, but they are few and far between. As with most comedic actors who have been around for a while, use how normally feel about their work as a guide to make your own decision. You know if you are a fan of Sandler’s wackier work, or not. It really is that simple. Don’t trick yourself into thinking this might be somehow different, or better, than what we’ve come to expect from him. If you like zany Sandler, by all means, go for it. If you prefer the tamer incarnation, skip it.

MY SCORE: 3/10

[dell71]

After Earth
Directed by M. Night Shyamalan.
2013. Rated PG-13, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Will Smith
Jaden Smith
Sophie Okonedo
Zoë Kravitz
Glenn Morshower
David Denman
Kristofer Hivju
Monika Jolly

Kitai (Jaden Smith) is in training to be a ranger just like his dad Cypher (Jaden’s real life dad Will), the most famous soldier of them all. Things aren’t going as well as planned and the kid is very frustrated. Dad isn’t exactly the nurturing type so he just barks orders at junior. At mom’s urging, Cypher agrees to take Kitai with him on his next assignment since it is just a training exercise. Of course, it’s on another planet but them’s the times. On the way, the ship they are in runs into some serious problems and has to crash land on Earth which they most certainly did not leave from. The problem with this is Earth has been declared uninhabitable by humans for quite some time. We are also told that everything on this planet has evolved to kill people. In addition, the man-eating monster known as an Ursa that was locked up in cargo got out during the wreck. If this isn’t bad enough, except for our father-son combo, the accident kills everyone else on-board, both of dad’s legs are broken, and the only device capable of letting anyone know they need help is in the other end of the ship which landed quite far away. It is going to take a few days on foot. So off goes young Kitai to save both their lives.

We follow along on our hero’s trek while his old man tries to guid him from the ship. From both, we occasionally get flashbacks in an effort to flesh out the story. Through these, we find out what happened to Kitai’s sister Senshi (Kravitz) and how it affected both guys. This part of the movie should be much more fascinating than it is. As it plays out, it adds some depth to Kitai, but not so much to his father. Throughout it all, dad is intentionally hard to read, a true stone-face, burying his emotions beneath a Vulcan-like adherence to logic and protocol. His trademark is that he is completely without fear, the smell of which is how an Ursa finds its prey since it cannot see. Cypher tells tells the story of how he got that way, but it comes across as nonsense if you think about it for just a moment. In other words, we never really connect with him.

Cypher’s bond with his son comes across a bit better. Still, it’s strained by their lack of screen time together. Curiously, if I remember correctly, the flashbacks are never of the two them together. We don’t even get much, if any, of Cypher with his wife. Instead, we get drilled repeatedly with the singular event that traumatized both father and son.

In classic fashion for director M. Night Shyamalan, After Earth moves a tad too slow, as well. If the drama playing out were sufficient, this would not be a problem. The drama is not. Rather than building to a thrilling crescendo, it trudges forth like a child who knows he or she is about to be punished. I will give him credit where it is due, though. When there is action, it works. The most exciting sequences involve a giant bird. Trust me, it’s not as lame as it sounds. The special fx showing this and other creatures, Ursa included, are well done. They help create a real sense of danger. In other places, Shyamalan’s cinematic flourishes don’t quite flourish. His use of foreshadowing is way too obvious, making it feel completely contrived and transparently manipulative. As a result, the moment meant to be a tear-jerker comes across as hokey. The ending is also truncated in what seems to be an effort to save run-time. That pacing is to blame. If earlier events were moved along quicker, the finale would not have to be abbreviated.

What is most frustrating about After Earth is that the pieces to make a great piece of sci-fi are there. We have two charismatic stars. Whether you think he is simply the product of nepotism or not, the younger Smith has a presence about him. Of course he probably can’t help it since charisma is his dad’s calling card. Truthfully, it’s toned down here, but Will is a good enough actor to pull it off. The movie also gives us a dire situation which should cause almost unbearable tension. And, as mentioned, the special fx carrying out the narrative are good. Somehow, the puzzle doesn’t quite fit together.

MY SCORE: 5.5/10