Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[dell71]

True Romance
<strong>Directed by Tony Scott.</strong>
<em>1993. Rated R, 120 minutes.
Cast:
Christian Slater
Patricia Arquette
Gary Oldman
Christopher Walken
James Gandolfini
Dennis Hopper
Bronson Pinchot
Brad Pitt
Michael Rapaport
Saul Rubinek
Samuel L. Jackson</em>​

The setup is nearly too unbelievable for words. Since words are all I have, I’ll just tell you what happens and let you make of it what you will. Clarence (Slater) is a loner who has way too much love for Elvis Presley and decides to spend the night of his birthday alone in a theater showing a triple feature of all threee of Sonny Chiba’s <em>Street Fighter</em> movies. While there, he meets the beautiful Alabama. The two hit it off, he shows her the comic book shop where he works and spends a good deal of his off time and they end up making love in his hole-in-the-wall apartment. In the wee hours of the same night she admits to him she’s a call-girl that was hired by his boss who wanted to make sure his top employee would get laid for his birthday. She also admits that what started as an act became genuine and she is truly in love with him. Not the least bit upset about any of this because he had a great time, he admits that he’s also in love with her. Clearly, he needs to get out more. Then again, even if he had he might never meet another girl who’s not only into martial arts flicks but is really interested in his endless pontification on all the things in pop-culture he’s passionate about. Anyoo, our two lovebirds get up first thing in the morning, head to the Justice of the Peace and get hitched. Um…yeah, I guess.

I’m with you. It plays like a geek’s wet dream come true. It’s the ultimate affirmation for those of us who tend to spend too much time in fantasy land. Keep immersing yourself in the alternate reality of your choice, without compromise and sex with beautiful women will miraculously (immaculately?) occur because you’re just that cool. Before any of you geek gods try to strike me down with the bolt of lightning you acquired from the roll of twenty-sided die, spare me. I’ve been called a geek more than once by people who actually know me. Luckily for you strangers, my ridiculously sexy exterior conceals the analytically superior processor within my skull. Oh, wait…you wanna read about the movie, don’t you?

The reason the open plays like a fanboy’s fantasy is because, essentially, that’s what it is. For those unaware, this was written by a then video store clerk, still pop-culture and b-movie enthusiast named Quentin Tarantino. An opening like this only makes perfect sense.

Enough of this. I’ve spent way too much time on the first fifteen minutes of the movie. The truth is, even though we’ve got a flimsy basis for love, the rest of the film absolutely sizzles. In no way is this a conventional love story. All you really need to know to prove that is that what sets the story in motion is Clarence's stupidity…er…bravery causes him to try and get Alabama’s things from her pimp, Drexel (Oldman). That’s former pimp, unbeknownst to him. Bada-boom, bada-bing Clarence accidentally ends up with a suitcase full of cocaine and our loving couple goes on the run from the people it belongs to.

Like the best of Tarantino what makes the movie is not the plot but the situations the plot puts the characters in. The more tense the situation, the better the writing is a general Tarantino rule and it applies here. These moments are deliciously outrageous, violent and often clever. This is what drives the movie, makes it a thrilling watch.

The other major factor in making it a good movie are the characters. Really, most of them aren’t well developed. What they are is purpose driven, extreme and totally willing to say whatever comes to mind. Many of them are people we love to hate. Filling these roles is a superb cast that delivers every line perfectly. Stealing the show, however, are two guys who were relative newcomers at the time, James Gandolfini and Brad Pitt. Pitt plays a great stoner and Gandolfini is flat scary.

To his credit, director Tony Scott seems to stay out of the way of the screenplay. It doesn’t feel like his other movies. It’s less him, but in this case that works out well. It does, in fact, feel like a Tarantino movie except it doesn’t bounce around the timeline the way most of his self-directed films tend to. That said, atop what seems to be a faulty foundation an excellent movie is built.

<strong>MY SCORE: 8.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

35 Shots of Rum
AKA 35 Rhums
<strong>Directed by Claire Denis.</strong>
<em>2009. Not Rated, 102 minutes.
Cast:
Alex Descas
Mati Diop
Nicole Dogue
Grégoire Colin
Jean-Christophe Folly
Djédjé Apali
Eriq Ebouaney
Julieth Mars Toussaint</em>​

You know what they say about us Americans who like watching foreign films? We think we’re smarter and more sophisticated than the rest of you. Along comes a movie like <em>35 Shots of Rum</em> to remind me I might not be as artsy-fartsy as I’d like to think. I’ll explain.

It’s subtly written and filmed likewise. Of the movie’s 102 minutes of runtime, roughly 100 of them are very quiet. It’s beautifully acted, also subtly. It is so subtle the characters really do feel like actual people. There really is no plot to speak of so it plays like a true slice of life type of film. It’s even in French. It’s arthouse in every sense of the word. Yet, I was bored to tears and pissed off about the ambiguous ending. That last bit is most surprising. If you’ve been paying attention, you know I generally love those types of endings. Usually, the more questions I’m left with, the better. Here, not so much.

What is <em>35 Shots</em> about? To be honest, I’m still not sure. We spend lots of time with Lionel (Descas) and Joséphine (Diop), a father and daughter who share an apartment. He works as a train conductor and goes out drinking with his buddies from work every now and then. She goes to college, does housework and occasionally works at a Virgin music store. I didn’t know they still had those. No, it’s not set in the past, either. I know this because the very whiny René is given an I-Pod as a retirement gift. Anyhoo, Joséphine seems to have a thing for Noé (Colin), the guy who lives in the apartment upstairs. There is also Gabrielle (Dogue), the cab driver who lives in the apartment next door. She seems to have been carrying a torch for Lionel since she learned to walk. The feeling isn’t really mutual. He likes her, he just doesn’t <em>like</em> like her. Oh, and there’s whiny René. He pops up every five or ten minutes to…um…whine…until he eventually does what I knew he would the first time he opened mouth.

Why was I bored? It was far too realistic. I realize that’s an odd complaint to make, but hear me out. If someone stuck a camera in most of our homes and just observed our true dailyu lives without forcing us to vote someone out, compete for a prize or give us random tasks and jobs to prove our worth, most of the viewing public would be hard-pressed to be entertained. In movies about families, dramatic devices occur at fairly regular intervals to advance the plot and/or add intrigue. Personalities are exaggerated to create sympathy, empathy, heroes and villains. In <em>35 Shots</em>, it feels as if we’re watching reality without the TV. There are no votes, hypersexual tension or grand prize. These people go through their mundane existence in a mundane manner.

It takes courage and patience to make a movie like this but it lacks the magic to make its players transcend the screen. What passes for a romance feels disjointed and barren of hope until it is hastily resolved. The resolution, however, feels unreal and out of very deep left field. For all of the movie, we’re watching what seems to be everyday of their lives from the time we meet them and then, we suddenly fast-forward to a conclusion.

The 35 shots in the title is perhaps most perplexing. About midway through, we learn that Lionel either celebrates or rues a major event in his life, we’re not sure which, by downing 35 consecutive shots of rum. If he’s able to walk the next day I’d be shocked, but I digress. We’re told there is a story behind this ritual that he won’t tell at this time. This comes up again at the end of the film. Sadly, without having seen it you know as much as I about the significance of this practice. Justifying alcoholism? Probably not. If any of you brainiacs has happened to watch this movie, feel free to enlighten me.

This is a difficult film for me, if you couldn’t already tell. The writing is lyrical and sparse. People have conversations without saying a whole lot. Their pauses aren’t pregnant with the possibility of an earth-shattering revelation in the next sentence. They’re just pauses. There are no complaints to be made about any performance here. Many of the elements critics are thrilled by are present. Still, it doesn’t add up to winning cinema, for me. In my eyes, the whole equals much less than the sum of its parts.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5.5/10</strong>​

 

[Hitman]

Happy you liked True Romance, Dell. I try to sell this movie to anyone that I know that hasn't seen it but likes Tarantino. Most people don't know it exists. What did you think about the scene with Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper? :shifty:

 

[dell71]

Happy you liked True Romance, Dell. I try to sell this movie to anyone that I know that hasn't seen it but likes Tarantino. Most people don't know it exists. What did you think about the scene with Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper? :shifty:

Outstanding, one of the best in the movie. I did notice the Colonel's first scene in Inglourious Basterds is a lot like it, though. But that's a good thing.

 

[Cody]

Keep 'em coming!!

 

[KillaK]

I just watched Man on Wire and your review is spot on. That had to be one of the craziest acts I had ever seen.

 

[dell71]

Harry Brown
<strong>Directed by Daniel Barber.</strong>
<em>2009. Rated R, 103 minutes.
Cast:
Michael Caine
Emily Mortimer
Charlie Creed-Miles
David Bradley
Ben Drew
Sean Harris
Iain Glen
Jack O’Connell</em>​

Harry Brown (Caine) is having a tough go of it. He spends his days at the side of his long-time wife’s hospital bed. She doesn’t even know he’s there. At night, he medicates himself with a few beers and a game of chess with Leonard (Bradley). Though Leonard is his only friend, it’s not the greatest company. Leonard spends most of their time together complaining about the young thugs that have overrun his neighborhood and his run-ins with them.

Shortly, Harry’s wife passes away and Leonard goes and gets himself killed. Harry copes by really getting sloshed. On the way home from the pub, Harry walks everywhere by the way, one of the hooligans Harry thinks was involved in Leonard’s murder tries to mug him at knife point. This apparently re-ignites whatever it is in Harry’s past he refuses to speak of on several occasions. Harry going vigilante ensues.

Obviously, two questions arise. First, will Harry be able to wipe out all the riff-raff in the hood? Second, will he be caught? Well, since the movie holds no real surprises in that area, the question then becomes how does the movie go about its business? The answer to that begins with the star, Michael Caine.

Caine has long been a brilliant actor. He doesn’t disappoint, here. His Harry is a weary old man with a dark past whose world is crumbling around him. On top of everything else gone wrong in his life, he has to take the long way around in his travels to avoid the knuckleheads. That’s how the role is written. The magic of Michael Caine is he makes us feel it. He’s perfect, as usual.

<em>HB</em> is also graphically violent, and for a short time sexually also, in a good way. It creates a hyper-realistic world that doesn’t pull any punches when it comes to depicting who these people are. Neatly, it turns the trick of not having any of these moments fell like they’re just for effect. Of course, this brilliantly gives it an unsettling effect.

There are issues, though. First, and foremost, it’s formulaic. As I wrote earlier, there are no real surprises except for one out of left-field character development. The only big difference between this and any other vigilante movie is the age of our hero. That would be enough if it explored that angle better. Instead of us getting to know more about the mysterious old chap, particularly about his time in the Marines and how that has affected him, which it obviously has, his age is merely a plot device that plays into the action. It works for that purpose but isn’t as satisfying a factor as it should be. This plagues the entire movie. Things are brought up as if their depths are about to be plumbed, yet time and again the movie is content to skim the surface.

Overall, it’s a solid watch that Michael Caine makes better than it has any right to be. He’s worth the price of admission because he is so undeniably believable. He alone, is not enough to make <em>HB</em> anything more than decent. That’s because you’ve seen this movie before. Think of it as <em>Death Wish</em> for senior citizens.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Unstoppable
<strong>Directed by Tony Scott.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 98 minutes.
Cast:
Denzel Washington
Chris Pine
Rosario Dawson
Kevin Dunn
Ethan Suplee
Kevin Corrigan
Lew Temple
Jessy Schram
Dylan Bruce</em>​

It’s Will Colson’s (Pine) first day on the job with the railroad company. He’s assigned to train under the tutelage of Frank Barnes (Washington). Barnes and the other vets are more than a little ticked they’re all being phased out in favor of youngsters like Colson. Will gets a double-dose of hateration because he’s got some family connections with the company. However, these two guys are just a subplot.

Our primary tale is about train 777, or Triple 7 as it’s sometimes called. It begins with a bumbling idiot simply failing at his job. Suffice it to say, the train gets away from him. Of course, it slips into the full throttle position. This means the unmanned locomotive with enough cars to be “the size of the Chrysler Building” is barreling down the tracks at 70+ miles per hour. As if that weren’t bad enough, many of the cars contain toxic and presumably highly flammable and combustible materials. If the train reaches the heavily populated Stanton it’s sure to fly off the tracks due to it going way too fast to make it through the elevated curve that has a speed limit of 15 mph. Attempts to stop this particularly dangerous runaway ensue.

To both the movie’s credit and detriment, it remains just that simple. We get to know a bit about the personal problems of our heroes, Frank and Will. There’s also the back and between Connie (Dawson), who runs the railroad and her boss back at HQ, Galvin (Dunn), but that’s all about the train. This makes <em>Unstoppable</em> remarkably free of clutter and effective at being exactly what it wants to be: a popcorn flick featuring a train.

However, since it is so committed to the action, we never really meet the loved ones of our heroes that we hear so much about and see so much of. Throughout the film, there are plenty of shots of them and they get a few lines here and there, but that’s it. They qualify as characters only in the strictest sense of the word.

Between scenes of our train raging out of control, the dialogue is surprisingly solid for a popcorn movie. It’s not terribly original, but the actors give it plenty of life. Pine and Washington play off one another well with Denzel playing the sort of wise old man usually portrayed by Morgan Freeman. Rosario Dawson turns in a stock performance. Since average for her is better than most, there are no problems there.

<em>Unstoppable</em> is a solid action flick that manages not to do anything egregiously wrong. Well, if you’re even remotely paying attention you should be able to spot one major movie gaffe (unless <em>I</em> saw it wrong). Other than that, it rather efficiently goes about its business. It’s a nice diversion of a movie, but nothing earth-shatteringly special.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Lottery Ticket
<strong>Directed by Erik White.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 99 minutes.
Cast:
Bow Wow
Brandon T. Jackson
Naturi Naughton
Loretta Devine
Ice Cube
Keith David
Terry Crews
Charlie Murphy
Mike Epps
Gbenga Akinnagbe</em>​

Kevin (Bow Wow) lives with his grandmother (Devine) in the projects. Through a stroke of luck, they win the Mondo Millions lottery grand prize of $370 million. That probably works out to somewhere between $170 million and $200 million after taxes, but that’s not the point. The point is, they’ve suddenly changed tax brackets. However, before they actually make the jump they have to claim the winnings. The problem with that is its Fourth of July weekend and the claims office is closed until Tuesday. The task then seems simple enough: keep quiet about the windfall at least until Tuesday so the vultures don’t start immediately start circling. As it turns out, keeping quiet lasts about 30 seconds. Of course, news spreads like wildfire and everyone wants a piece of Kevin. Everyone includes Lorenzo (Akinnagbe), the local thug and Sweet Tee (David), the local loanshark. Trying to survive until Tuesday and maintain possession of the winning ticket ensues.

It has its moments. Enough funny things happen between chase scenes to keep us at least mildly entertained. The zany cast of characters are all given their brief chance to shine and usually make the most of it. One of the zanies is the recluse Mr. Washington, played by Ice Cube made up to look like an old man. How ironic that he figures prominently in an ending so clearly inspired by and reminiscent of <em>Friday</em>? It becomes doubly so when you pay attention to Brandon T. Jackson as Kevin’s best friend Benny. He seems to be doing his best Chris Tucker impersonation.

<em>LT</em> is also wholly predictable. We know which girl he’ll end up with, when he’s going to have a falling out with his best friend, when the thug is going to pop up out of nowhere and finally, how it ends. Strangely, we also know that for some reason unbeknownst to any logical human being, he will carry the ticket with him everywhere he goes.

In the end, this is a cute and light-hearted movie content to breeze through it’s runtime. It brings up a few things that could’ve lead to more poignant social commentary but never goes any further than just mentioning them. It makes no examinations, only smirks at us as if to say ‘we could do something meaningful here, but we don’t want to’. Like its star, the movie as a whole has an innocent charm that will make it likeable for many. However, its lack of substance or any originality whatsoever means it won’t be particularly memorable.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Grown Ups
<strong>Directed by Dennis Dugan.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 102 minutes.
Cast:
Adam Sandler
Chris Rock
Kevin James
Rob Schneider
David Spade
Salma Hayek
Maria Bello
Maya Rudolph
Joyce Van Patten
Ebony Jo-Ann</em>​

A group of friends reunite for the funeral of their youth basketball coach. Sandler’s character is a big time Hollywood agent married to a big time fashion designer played by Salma Hayek. This means we get a lot of his kids acting ridiculously spoiled and him trying to hide how rich he is by pretending his nanny is a foreign exchange student. Chris Rock feels underappreciated by his wife, played by the most underrated Saturday Night Live alum in recent memory, Maya Rudolph. Kevin James has also done pretty well for himself despite being a goofball and having a wife, played by Maria Bello, that still breastfeeds their four year old son anytime, any place. Rob Schneider is a neurotic vegetarian married to a woman at least 25 years his senior, Joyce Van Patten does the honors. He also has some very attractive daughters from a previous marriage. Finally, David Spade enjoys the single life. Go fill in the blanks.

Yup, this happens and that, and that too. Oh, forgot to mention the guys they beat in the championship game way back when want a rematch. So yeah, that happens too, just like that. Nothing takes place we don’t see coming.

All of our heroes are their usual wacky selves, with each pretty much sticking to the personas they’ve crafted over the years. Sandler fares best because his “everyman” act requires the least effort. While everyone else is typically over the top, he’s pretty even keel. He provides a solid foundation for the others to stand on, or jump off as their penchant for shenanigans might dictate.

What we end up with is a slapstick comedy that’s predictable, but funny in spots. Perhaps, the most interesting thing about it is that the cast is an extremely polarizing one. Most of us either love these guys or hate them with no middle ground. Decide accordingly.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5.5/10</strong>​

 

[CrimsonGhost56]

^ i thought rob schneider was the best one in that movie and thats pretty sad considering the cast it had.

 

[SOS4Prez]

I liked Grown Ups for what it was. It had some brutal lines, but I thought it also had constant chuckles.

 

[Cody]

Great review Grown Ups is a top 5 favorite of mine.

 

[dell71]

Bitch Slap
<strong>Directed by Rick Jacobson</strong>
<em>2009. Rated R, 109 minutes.
Cast:
Erin Cummings
Julia Voth
America Olivo
Michael Hurst
Ron Melendez
William Gregory Lee
Minae Noji
Kevin Sorbo
Lucy Lawless</em>​

Three women dressed in extremely tight and revealing clothes are bickering with one another and digging for some sort of buried treasure. There’s Hel (Cummings) who seems to the leader, Camaro (Olivo), the psychotic butch of the bunch, hopped up on some sort of pills and Trixie (Voth), the daintiest and most frantic. The treasure was buried by a Vegas gangster named Gage (Hurst), whom the ladies have just killed. Don’t worry that’s of minimal importance.

What is important is that this movie desperately wants to be so bad it’s awesome. It’s the type of film where each lady makes their big entrance by exiting a car cleavage first and in slow-motion. There are lots more slow-motion shots throughout the movie of the girls whipping their hair, bending over, throwing water on one another, touching themselves suggestively, twisting their faces into orgasmic visages and making out with each other. It’s often like one of those Playboy Playmate videos, but without any actual nudity except for a briefly bare chest of some random character’s only two seconds on screen. We also get more slo-mo in the middle of the action scenes as kicks, punches, recoils from automatic weapons and other strikes to the body causes hair to whip, lips to purse, boobies to jiggle…you get the idea. I’m sure this flick is an absolute goldmine for horny virgin boys lucky enough to come across it.

Those action scenes are manufactured by the girls arguing, other people interrupting them or one of the far too many flashback scenes. The flashbacks reveal a little at a time about each of the girls. Well, they’re supposed to. What they really do is play a major part in the story becoming an incoherent glob of B-movie madness that’s not nearly as enjoyable as it should be. It’s got all the elements needed to be truly craptacular: attractive women, guns, catfights, explosions and wacky villains. It just doesn’t know what to do with them all. Condensing this to a 10 or 15 minute clip on YouTube might have made it an internet sensation, worthy of all the lonely boy praise that would surely come its way. In its current form, stretched way too close to two hours, it’s repetitive, stupid and never quite perverse, bizarre or truly brazen enough to be what it so obviously wants.

<strong>MY SCORE: 3/10</strong>​

 

[Pitty]

Unstoppable
<strong>Directed by Tony Scott.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 98 minutes.
Cast:
Denzel Washington
Chris Pine
Rosario Dawson
Kevin Dunn
Ethan Suplee
Kevin Corrigan
Lew Temple
Jessy Schram
Dylan Bruce</em>​

It’s Will Colson’s (Pine) first day on the job with the railroad company. He’s assigned to train under the tutelage of Frank Barnes (Washington). Barnes and the other vets are more than a little ticked they’re all being phased out in favor of youngsters like Colson. Will gets a double-dose of hateration because he’s got some family connections with the company. However, these two guys are just a subplot.

Our primary tale is about train 777, or Triple 7 as it’s sometimes called. It begins with a bumbling idiot simply failing at his job. Suffice it to say, the train gets away from him. Of course, it slips into the full throttle position. This means the unmanned locomotive with enough cars to be “the size of the Chrysler Building” is barreling down the tracks at 70+ miles per hour. As if that weren’t bad enough, many of the cars contain toxic and presumably highly flammable and combustible materials. If the train reaches the heavily populated Stanton it’s sure to fly off the tracks due to it going way too fast to make it through the elevated curve that has a speed limit of 15 mph. Attempts to stop this particularly dangerous runaway ensue.

To both the movie’s credit and detriment, it remains just that simple. We get to know a bit about the personal problems of our heroes, Frank and Will. There’s also the back and between Connie (Dawson), who runs the railroad and her boss back at HQ, Galvin (Dunn), but that’s all about the train. This makes <em>Unstoppable</em> remarkably free of clutter and effective at being exactly what it wants to be: a popcorn flick featuring a train.

However, since it is so committed to the action, we never really meet the loved ones of our heroes that we hear so much about and see so much of. Throughout the film, there are plenty of shots of them and they get a few lines here and there, but that’s it. They qualify as characters only in the strictest sense of the word.

Between scenes of our train raging out of control, the dialogue is surprisingly solid for a popcorn movie. It’s not terribly original, but the actors give it plenty of life. Pine and Washington play off one another well with Denzel playing the sort of wise old man usually portrayed by Morgan Freeman. Rosario Dawson turns in a stock performance. Since average for her is better than most, there are no problems there.

<em>Unstoppable</em> is a solid action flick that manages not to do anything egregiously wrong. Well, if you’re even remotely paying attention you should be able to spot one major movie gaffe (unless <em>I</em> saw it wrong). Other than that, it rather efficiently goes about its business. It’s a nice diversion of a movie, but nothing earth-shatteringly special.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

Train-ing Day. Get it?

 

[Maynard]

the grown ups review is spot on. its rare for me to think the normal sanders pack of comedians could be funny together, but with rock and james added in they actually made me laugh thru most of this.

 

[dell71]

Macgruber
<strong>Directed by Jorma Taccone.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated R, 90 minutes.
Cast:
Will Forte
Kristen Wiig
Val Kilmer
Ryan Phillippe
Powers Boothe
Andy Mackenzie
Maya Rudolph
Jasper Cole</em>​

Macgruber (Forte) is an ex-Navy SEAL with more awards than you can count. He’s already saved the world numerous times. For the last ten years, he’s been declared dead but has been living peacefully in another country. His old buddy Col. Faith (Boothe) comes calling for him to rescue us once more.

Since this is supposed to be a spoof of the thousands of movies with similar plots, Macgruber isn’t your typical strapping buck oozing testosterone with every step. Nor does he possess off the charts intelligence he was to outwit his foes. He’s regular enough in appearance, which is fine. However, he’s a total moron in every sense of the word that we’re supposed to believe was once a hero.

The character Macgruber is where the biggest problem with the movie <em>Macgruber</em> lies. The movie insists there was some greatness there to be lost. The neverending acts of buffoonery which follow, sink that notion. It doesn’t help that he still looks very young and hardly world-weary, not to mention he’s an ex-SEAL that doesn’t know how to use a gun. We never believe he was ever capable of the heroism assigned to him. Essentially, this means we’re not deconstructing a hero, we’re watching an idiot try really hard to make us laugh by doing idiotic things. The latter is never as fun as the former. Think back to the far less hyped but better <em>Shoot ‘em Up</em>, starring Clive Owen. The man who saves the day didn’t have to be a dunce for us to get that the whole thing is a ruse, one that actually makes us laugh.

Having an imbecile for a hero can work if the jokes are smart. The entire <em>Naked Gun</em> franchise is built on the dim bulb we’ve come to know and love as Frank Drebin, played by the recently late and always great Leslie Nielsen. However, the jokes themselves are exceedingly clever, for the most part. The ones that aren’t are far more forgivable and still make us laugh because of the ones that surround them. The best <em>Macgruber</em> can muster is our title character sticking celery up his butt, humping a tombstone and offering oral sex to men to get his way. That last one was done much funnier by a couple puppets in <em>Team America</em>, another better spoof.

There are a few occasions where <em>Macgruber</em> makes us laugh. It takes so many cracks at it, it will inevitably hit the target at least a few times. I’m reminded of the old saying about how often broken clocks are right.

<strong>MY SCORE: 4/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Train-ing Day. Get it?

:facepalm:

 

[dell71]

The Secret in Their Eyes
El secreto de sus ojos
<strong>Directed by Juan José Campanella.</strong>
<em>2009. Rated R, 129 minutes, Spanish.
Cast:
Ricardo Darín
Soledad Villamil
Guillermo Francella
Pablo Rago
Javier Godino
Carla Quevedo
Rudy Romano
José Luis Gioia</em>​

Esposito (Darín) is a retired cop and an aspiring novelist. He wants his first book to be based on a case he worked 25 years ago, but still haunts him. Shortly, we find out why. He caught the killer and there was even a conviction. However, the bad guy weasled his way out of jail time and no one has spoken of the case ever since. What happened?

In trying to figure things out, Esposito goes to see Irene Hastings (Villamil), his long-time friend and colleague and one of the people that worked with him on the case. It was the rape and murder of a pretty and recently married young young woman. Esposito and Hastings also seem to have a thing for one another. Through numerous flashbacks, the two reminisce about the case and their uncomfortable, unpursued relationship. She is married.

Back and forth, we effortlessly jump through time. There’s never any need to inform us where or when we are, we intuitively know. The outstanding makeup jobs feel so natural that the actors don’t have to work very hard to pull off their roles at either end of a quarter century. Though I will say, the costuming and an overall better sense of time for the portion of the film set in 1974 would be welcome. The difference between the two eras is generally boiled down to not having a cell phone back then.

Makeup jobs and costuming aside, the actors turn in fine work. Our two leads are excellent. Still, they’re outdone by Guillermo Francella who plays Esposito’s almost constantly drunk partner Sandoval. He manages to give the movie both wisdom and comic relief. When doing either he’s as brilliant as he is at the other. It’s a terrific performance.

Most of the movie plays like a mixture between a whodunit murder mystery mixed with a story of a love affair that never actually happened. Ostensibly, the reason is those are the two subjects on which Esposito seems hellbent on writing about. What elevates this from being a routine movie of either genre is first how the two topics are woven together. Second, and more importantly, it’s where our tale ends. The finale involves two people, Esposito and one other I won’t reveal. Actually, there is a third party involved but that person, though an integral part of the final scene, has no say so in the matter.

That last scene creates one of those ambiguous endings I’m such a fan of. The question here: did either person do the right thing? Another question that begs to be asked is what would you have done? In discussing those, more questions may arise. The case that has haunted Esposito for 25 years, now haunts us.

<strong>MY SCORE: 8.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
<strong>Directed by Edgar Wright.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 112 minutes.
Cast:
Michael Cera
Mary Elizabeth Winstead
Ellen Wong
Kieran Culkin
Anna Kendrick
Alison Pill
Mark Webber
Johnny Simmons
Chris Evans
Brandon Routh
Jason Schwartzman</em>​

Every now and then you watch a movie that just shouldn’t work, but absolutely does. <em>Scott Pilgrim vs the World</em> is one of those movies. On paper, it seems to have nothing going for it. It’s based on a graphic novel I’m apparently not cool enough to have ever heard of. The story feels ripped from the early days of fighter games, not exactly profound literature. There is going to be lots of action, but our hero, Scott Pilgrim, is played by Michael Cera, the wimpy whiny dude from <em>Juno</em> and a number of other teen focused flicks. Unconventional heroes are fine. After all, I loved <em>Kick-Ass</em>. This just seems to be too much of a stretch. A comic book movie with a video game plot? Or is that the other way around? Either way, I’m not exactly overwhelmed by anticipation as I press “play” on my remote.

An odd thing happens once the movie actually starts. It strikes a perfect tone and absolutely relishes in how ridiculous things are going to get. It knows its premise is dumb and that our hero is something less than our ideal of heroic. However, unlike <em>Macgruber</em>, which I recently had the displeasure of watching, in this film the script, sight gags and action scenes are actually very smart. Together, they take the last three decades of what was once strictly nerd culture, comics and video games, and morphs it into a clever, funny imagining of those two worlds colliding on the screen. It uses cartoonish, but still flesh and blood people full of the attitudes prevalent among those in their late teens and early twenties taken to absurdist extremes. There’s even some sly social commentary and an obvious moral. And all of it works.

That dumb premise? Scott Pilgram has an odd dream one night. The next day, he meets the girl from that dream, strangely enough. He falls head over heels for her that instant and hounds her until she goes out with him. Where does all the action come from? Shortly after starting to date Ramona (Winstead), the girl of his dreams, it is revealed that to continue seeing her, he will have to defeat each of her “7 evil exes”. These guys pop up out of nowhere and have all sorts of powers and fighting skills.

If you’re a fan of the original <em>Super Mario Bros.</em> and fighting games like <em>Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Tekken</em>, or any number of classic video games, you’re prepared to love this movie. The same goes if you’re a comic book fan as a number of scenes are made to look like panels from the hero mags. Then there’s the occasional narration that is spot-on. Finally, Cera’s usual self deprecating humor is perfect.

Here’s the thing: I get the sense this is a love it or hate it type of deal. People like me will sing its praises. Others will roll their eyes at all the madness, complain about how unrealistic it is, proclaim it moronic, and me a moron for liking it. It boils down to this: if you can’t understand the brilliance behind the “pee meter”, you’ll never get this movie.

<strong>MY SCORE: 9/10</strong>​