post

Sherlock Lives in Teaser Photo for Season 3

by Posted in Pictures

Sherlock-season-3-promo-image-570x380.jpg
Anyone up to date with BBC‘s Sherlock (turn away now if not) saw Sherlock (Benedict Cumberbatch) jump to his death at the hands of arch-nemesis Moriarty. While he may be a magician of the intellect, Sherlock is still a human and a 60-foot jump onto concrete has a tendency to kill humans. Nevertheless, Sherlock continues to live – a fact made clear by this first official from season three.

While the writers certainly have a hole to dig themselves out of – especially if they don’t want to be seen as “jumping the shark” – there is no shortage of internet theories as to how Sherlock could have faked his death in the moment for them to pursue through and pull from. While probably not a common tactic for show runners, it will be interesting to see how closely their solution to Sherlock’s death hems to the heft of fan theories. One way or another, they’re really gonna need to pull something brilliant to win the trust and confidence of fans.

As evident by the opening scene in the final episode of season two, Martin Freeman‘s Watson has become a man broken by Sherlock’s death. We can expect some fierce butting of heads when Sherlock reveals his latest stunt to just be yet another rouse but could it potentially lead to the end of Watson and Sherlock’s odd friendship?

Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter

post

Taking a Second Swing at the 2014 Oscar Predictions

by Posted in Awards Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

2014-Oscar-Predictions.jpg
A lot has changed in the weeks since my first Oscar prediction post. A big contender is now out of the running with Monuments Men unexpected move to a 2014 release, while Saving Mr. Banks debuted to soaring reviews, and The Wolf of Wall Street secured its chance in this year’s Oscar after solidifying a Christmas release date.

Although buzz has Gravity and 12 Years a Slave going head-to-head for the title, that conversation is nothing more than preemptive positioning, as there’s just so much more to see before the we start setting things in stone. One thing is for sure though, Gravity’s continued praise and high box office numbers make it a stronger contender than expected and it’s pretty much locked in nominations across the board. Nonetheless, expect it to pull an Inception/Life of Pi manuever and mostly walk away with technical accolades. Although unlikely, a director-picture split could potentially see Alfonso Cuaron taking home his first Oscar but after last year’s Affleck, Argo drama, don’t cross your fingers.

After seeing 12 Years a Slave, Blue is the Warmest Color, and Nebraska, I had to shake up a few categories, first and foremost, the Best Actor category, as I can’t imagine Bruce Dern not seeing some recognition. As for Chiwetel Ejifor‘s lead role in 12 Years, it’s beyond powerful, and he’s very likely to take home the gold. Nipping at his heels, Robert Redford continues to climb the charts for his near silent role in All is Lost and could just end up playing a legacy trump card when it comes voting time.

Another black man playing a role tailor man for the Oscars, Forest Whitaker got pushed out of the top five for now but it wouldn’t be unlikely for him to step back in sooner or later. Perhaps the biggest unknown quality in this category though is Leonardo DiCaprio, who leads Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street. Criminally undernominated, DiCaprio was pegged for an Oscar for this role early on but now his odds are shakier with the knowledge that Wolf is a nearly three hour long dark comedy. Now that the film will definitely see the light of day in 2013, there’s still a chance he can pull some last minute punches. For once, it’s a rather interesting race for Best Actor with some massive talent pining for those top five spots.

The Best Director category seems pretty firmed up as none of the top five spots managed to budge. Expect further momentum in that category in December when Saving Mr. Banks, American Hustle, and Inside Llewyn Davis play for a wider audience. For now, it’s a race between McQueen and Cuaron but if American Hustle is the success story that so many people expect, a win for David O. Russell would be more than understandable.

Glancing through the list for now, you’ll notice a bit of a 12 Years a Slave domination. Does that mean I expect 12 Years a Slave to clean up at the Oscars? Not necessarily, but all current momentum does have it as an early frontrunner, making it the one to beat at the moment. Gravity is currently perceived as its biggest competition but that’s little more than hogwash, as Gravity, no matter how well received, just doesn’t stand a chance at the top.

The closet thing we have as a lock for now is Cate Blanchett‘s stronghold on Best Actress. Although Judi Dench will give her a run for her money with her titular role in Philomena, Bullock is assured a nomination, and Streep is never someone to be scoffed at, this category is all but signed, sealed, and delivered for Blanchett.

Best Picture:

1. “12 Years a Slave” (No change)

2. “Gravity” +1
3. “Saving Mr. Banks” +1
4. “American Hustle” -2
5.  “The Wolf of Wall Street” +4
6. “Inside Llewyn Davis” (No change)
7. “Captain Phillips” -2
8. “Nebraska” +4
9. “Dallas Buyers Club” -2
10. “All is Lost” +1

Fringe:
11. “August: Osage County” -1
12. “Rush” +1
13. “Before Midnight” +1
14. “Blue is the Warmest Color” (New)
15. “Prisoners” (New)

Best Director:

1. Steve McQueen “12 Years a Slave” (No change)

2. Alfonso Cuaron “Gravity” (No change)
3. David O. Russell “American Hustle” (No change)
4. John Lee Hancock “Saving Mr. Banks” (No change)
5. The Coen Bros “Inside Llewyn Davis” (No change)

Fringe:
6. Martin Scorsese “The Wolf of Wall Street” +2
7. Paul Greengrass  “Captain Phillips” -1
8. JC Chandor “All is Lost” +1
9. Alexander Payne “Nebraska” +1
10. Jean-Marc Vallee “Dallas Buyers Club” (New)

Best Actor:

 http://cdn.thefader.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/12-years-a-slave-3.jpg

1. Chiwetel Ejifor “12 Years a Slave” +1

2. Robert Redford “All is Lost” +2
3. Matthew McConaughey “Dallas Buyers Club” -2
4. Tom Hanks  “Captain Phillips” -1
5. Bruce Dern “Nebraska” +3
 
Fringe:
6. Leonardo DiCaprio “The Wolf of Wall Street” (No change)
7. Forest Whitaker “Lee Daniel’s The Butler” -2
8. Christain Bale “American Hustle” -1
9. Joaquin Phoenix “Her” (No change)
10. Oscar Isaac “Inside Llewyn Davis” (No change)

Best Actress:

blue_jasmine_640.jpg

1. Cate Blanchett “Blue Jasmine” (No change)

2. Judi Dench “Philomena” (No change)
3. Sandra Bullock “Gravity” +1
4. Meryl Streep “August: Osage County” -1
5. Emma Thompson “Saving Mr. Banks” (No change)
 
Fringe:
6.Amy Adams “American Hustle” (No change)
7. Adèle Exarchopoulos “Blue is the Warmest Color” +2
8. Julie Delpy “Before Midnight” -1
9. Brie Larson “Short Term 12” -1
10. Berenice Bejo “The Past” (No change)

Best Supporting Actor:

1. Jared Leto “Dallas Buyers Club” (No change)

2. Michael Fassbender “12 Years a Slave” +1
2. Daniel Bruhl “Rush” -1
4. Tom Hanks “Saving Mr. Banks” (No change)
5. Barkhad Abdi “Captain Phillips” +3

Fringe:
6. Bradley Cooper “American Hustle” (No change)
7. Jake Gllyenhaal “Prisoners” (No change)
8. Jonah Hill “The Wolf of Wall Street” (New)
9. John Goodman “Inside Llewyn Davis” -4
10. James Gandolfini “Enough Said” (New)

Best Supporting Actress:

1. Lupita Nyong’o “12 Years a Slave” (No change)

2. Oprah Winfrey “Lee Daniel’s The Butler” (No change)
3. June Squibb “Nebraska” +4
4. Julia Roberts “August: Osage County” -1
5. Octavia Spencer “Fruitvale Station” -1

Fringe:
6. Lea Seydoux “Blue is the Warmest Color” (New)
7. Margo Martindale “August: Osage County” -1
8. Melissa Leo “Prisoners” (No change)
9. Jennifer Lawrence “American Hustle” (No change)
10. Carey Mulligan “Inside Llewyn Davis” (No change)

Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter

post

Weekly Review 31: SLEEPAWAY CAMP, FRIDAY THE 13TH, THE OMEN, BOYS DON'T CRY, THE GIRL NEXT DOOR

by Posted in Weekly Review Tagged , , , ,


As Halloween ticked closer, I continued my streak of horror movies, getting a little tied up with mental horror as a pit stop on the road to woodland slashers. Both The Girl Next Door and Boys Don’t Cry aren’t really horrors but they are in many, many ways the most horrifying of the bunch, as both involve woman stripped of their feminine freedom and, ultimately, their lives.Otherwise, I got a taste for the true Halloween horror with the likes of the aptly campy Sleepaway Camp, the always spooky The Omen, and a revisit of the one that started it all, Friday the 13th.

My theatrical screenings this week also had their high and lows with About Time and Man of Tai Chi far exceeding my expectations, 12 Years a Slave absolutely knocking it out of the park, and Last Vegas and Ender’s Game not quite offering the enjoyment that they should have. But enough of that, let’s weekly review.

SLEEPAWAY CAMP (1983)

SLEEPAWAY-CAMPS-poster-art.jpg

With the “camp” factor cranked up past 11, Sleepaway Camp thrives on elementary school-level acting, bubbling gross out gags, and a wacky knack for sending up the horror genre. As you may have ventured from the name, this schlocky horror follows the basic cabin in the woods premise: killer running a muck, teens splitting up to cover more ground, and the occasional breast or two, all for good measure. For all of its creative inadequacies though, Sleepaway Camp takes itself as seriously as a clown on April Fool’s day, making the stupidity of the film part and parcel of the experience. Also, it packs a twist ending that is sure to leave your mouth agape and your intellect stinging. Although clearly not for all, Sleepaway Camp is a fine little camp fest for horror enthusiasts.

C

THE OMEN (1976)

936full-the-omen-poster.jpg

You’ve got to hand it to Gregory Peck, he knows how to choose ’em. However out of his comfort zone he might be with The Omen, he leads the film with the golden bravado he’s so known for, conjuring up a chilling experience more in key with Rosemary’s Baby than Paranormal Activity. Peck plays an American ambassador who discovers that his son is the spawn of the devil and trots around the globe trying to piece together what the hell is going on. Directed by adventure legend Richard Donner, The Omen is gleefully self-serious with its material. When topped with orchestral chantings and child death stares, it’s a hell of a creeper.

B

THE GIRL NEXT DOOR (2007)

hP2ltmnJepuOD8wu92HO4mYbrK8.jpg

Not every headline story deserves a movie adaptation. Perhaps a result of our generational knack for gritty, the most inspiring stories often never receive the Hollywood treatment. Others are horrifying enough to burn their place in the public spotlight and make any movie adaptation little more than an exercise in masochism. This film is the later. Inspired by the true story of Sylvia Likens‘s brutal torture and murder at the hands of Gertrude Baniszewski, The Girl Next Door is a horrifying film to watch. No matter how important the cautionary tale of lost innocence and degraded humanity laced throughout this suburban hell, The Girl Next Door presents material you just would rather not have floating around in your subconscious. It’s far from poorly made and the acting, especially from Blanche Baker, is often notable but there’s little underneath this torture porn endurance test to substantiate a viewing.

C-

FRIDAY THE 13th (1980)

f-13.jpg

It might have been there first and inspired a trove of a dozen sequels but there’s little to nothing interesting about this cabin bound slasher 30-odd years on. It’s hard to knock Friday the 13th for sticking so closely to the formula – because in many ways it helped invent the formula – and yet, the “been there, done that” qualities of the film outweigh all other feeling involved. Easily the most interesting aspect of Friday the 13th is the lack of Jason – who doesn’t actually appear until the second film – but even without that hulking menace, the film feels flat and uninspired.

D

BOYS DON’T CRY (1999)

boys_don_t_cry_19992.jpg

Another addition to the list graphing the torment of a tortured girl, Boys Don’t Cry is so wildly effective because of the film’s balanced tone and willingness to step outside of the horror. Hilary Swank gives a knock out performance as Brandon, a natural born woman undergoing a sexual identity crisis and masquerading as a man. But Kimberly Peirce‘s film doesn’t show Swank’s Brandon as a transvestite or a lesbian or whatever she chooses to call herself. No, she’s (he’s) a person just like you or me. But regardless of how much Brandon just wants to be left to his own devices, society just can’t accept something they don’t understand. Anyone wo knows the true story knows that it doesn’t end well but Peirce actually builds a character that we can relate to and understanding before tearing them down, making it all the most difficult and poignant to behold.

B

How about you? Did you see anything worthy of mention?

Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter

post

Out in Theaters: 12 YEARS A SLAVE

by Posted in Out in Theaters Tagged , , , , , ,

“12 Years a Slave”
Directed by Steve McQueen
Starring Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender, Lupita Nyong’o, Brad Pitt, Benedict Cumberbatch, Paul Dano, Paul Giamatti, Quvenzhane Wallis, Sarah Paulson
Biography, Drama, History
132 Mins
R

twelve_years_a_slave_xlg.jpg

12 Years a Slave opens somewhere around a decade into Solomon Northup’s enslavement. He’s mushing blackberries to a paste, attempting to write a letter home using a whittled mulberry stick. Scribbling like a fugitive to the crackle of candlelight, this is the first time he’s put pen to paper in years, and must do so under the cover of night. For all the horrors he’s suffered and witnessed, the most impossible task is keeping his true identity, and intelligence, under wraps. For a learned slave is a troubling slave and a troubling slave is a marked man – a truth he’s seen manifested many times before.

12-Years-A-Slave_5.jpg

More than a decade gone for something as simple as not being allowed to produce his “free papers,” Solomon’s journey draws empathy from the audience like water from a well. More than just a story of the horrors of slavery, this is the story of a man who knew a better life – he abided the law, owned a house, had a family, and was a respected part of his Saratoga, New York community – and yet, down in the bowels of the hellish South, was stripped of his humanity like tattered clothes from his back.

Director Steve McQueen is a particular type of dark visionary. Employing patience and human degradation as a litmus test of how much we can emotionally bear, McQueen peels back all the curtains of our collective American history, revealing the inky black turmoil stirring in the human soul. But torture is no new game for McQueen.

In his first film, Hunger, McQueen explored a prison-bound hunger strike but his craft was not yet refined, too raw, cold, and indulgent to raise the welt he was hoping for. In Shame, he arm wrestled sex addiction out of romanticized glamor and into a pit of emptiness and human despair. Although fantastic acting and gruesome body horror prevailed, it continued the same dour tendencies that make his films so hard to sit through. In his third go around, he’s perfected his art, making a film that’s both impossible to watch and impossible to look away from.

12-Years-A-Slave_3.jpg
However difficult 12 Years a Slave may be to watch, it’s absolutely necessary watching. It’s long been positioned that it’s our American duty to process, or at least understand, slavery. As a means to sift the political hand of slavery from those participating in it, McQueen demands you to think long and hard about what you would do in a similar situation. Even the good men in this film, such as Benedict Cumberbatch‘s Ford are stained by the cultural pollution manifest in slavery. It may just be impossible to be a moral man in a land drained of morality, McQueen’s film says.

As Solomon adopts his new name and role as Platt, he holds onto hope – however tucked away in a dark corner it must remain; hope that someday he’ll be reunited with his family, hope that one day he’ll meet a white man who wants more for his than a closed mouth and fast working hands, hope for freedom. In a Kafkaesque metamorphosis, Solomon becomes Platt, his days transformed from living to surviving.

Despite the barbarity of Solomon’s unlawful enslavement, the mentality intact in the age is a scourge most difficult to stomach. Packaged in caravans like sardines, sold stripped nude, and man handled at every turn, there is little to distinguish slaves from live stock.

12-years-a-slave.jpg
Chiwetel Ejiofor leads a sensational cast that brings Solomon’s true story to the screen with deadly seriousness. As our guardian through this hellish descent, Ejiofor is stunning from start to finish. His decision to play Solomon as a stone gradually pared by the tide of slavery rather than a thistle bending at the first breeze will cement an Oscar nomination. His final heart-rending scene will secure the win. Michael Fassbender is similarly committed to his role as devilish plantation fiend Edwin Epps. Despite his character’s despicable traits, he’s an equally complex man, torn by his own sinful passion for Lupita Nyong’o‘s Patsey. Expect Oscar nominations, if not wins, all around.

Wowing cinematography from Sean Bobbitt (Shame, The Place Beyond the Pines) is haunting yet beautiful. Gorgeous waterfront properties impose their menacing statue – demonic in their association with America’s great shame. Captured under Bobbitt’s lens, the land itself takes on a stifling quality. No matter how scenic the willows peppering the plantation are, they always seem to weep – graves of the crushed souls haunting the confederate flag-totting South. 

12 Years a Slave will make you want to run the retributive justice of Django Unchained but the sad truth is, this is more fact than fiction. Even when freed, American blacks were paid the respect of subhumans. You want Solomon to strap dynamite to his prison, to rip it down to the studs and burn it but you know that it’s not that type of movie. No, it’s too gravely serious for that, for this is an epitaph to American slaves, penned centuries late.

A+

Playing locally at the Regal Meridian 16 and Guild 45th Landmark Theater

Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter

post

Jim Jarmusch Does Vampires in ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE Trailer

by Posted in Trailers Tagged , , , , , , ,


From indie director Jim Jarmusch (Broken Flowers, Ghost Dog) comes a vampire feature geared towards adults. While hardly the stuff of True Blood, Jarmusch’s Only Lovers Left Alive tells the tale of a musician vampire who reconnects with an old flame, also vampiric. Starring Tom Hiddleston (The Avengers) and Tilda Swinton (Moonrise Kingdom), Only Lovers Left Alive screened to favorable reviews at this year’s Cannes Film Festival.

The synopsis, per Wikipedia, is as follows:

After being around for centuries and now living in the modern age, vampire Adam (Tom Hiddleston) is a rockstar who cannot grow accustomed to the new modern world with all of its new technology. While he lives in Detroit, his wife Eve (Tilda Swinton) lives in Tangier, flourishing in the new world. But when she senses Adam’s depression with society, she gets on a plane and goes to see him. Shortly after Eve gets there, her little sister, Ava (Mia Wasikowska), shows up after 87 years and disrupts the couple’s idyll reunion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN6jVUW2XZM

Only Lovers Left Alive is directed by Jim Jarmusch and stars Tom Hindleston, Tilda Swinton, Mia Wasikowska, John Hurt, and Anton Yelchin. There is no official release date yet.

Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter

post

Out in Theaters: ABOUT TIME

by Posted in Out in Theaters Tagged , , , , ,

“About Time”
Directed by Richard Curtis
Starring Domhnall Gleeson, Bill Nighy, Rachel McAdams, Lydia Wilson, Lindsay Duncan, Richard Cordery, Tom Hollander, Margo Robbie
Comedy, Drama, Sci-Fi
123 Mins
R
about-time-poster.jpg
A truly good-natured movie is almost impossible to find nowadays. Every major studio release hot off the production line comes caked in ice-packed grit, each romance more a thing of cool-blooded calculation than the starry-eyed butterfly-tummied trances of acoustic guitar ballads. Even the biggest name in romance, the haughty Nicholas Sparks, tends towards conclusions of masturbatory tragedy. Someone has to either die or get laid out with a terminal case of cancer. It’s as if audiences can’t handle the sweet without the sour – all must end in woe or, at the very least, a shade of woe. Look at the great romantic saga of the past ten year; I’m referring of course to Twilight. Even if you strip away the Mormon patriarchal underpinning and grade-A beastly acting, this “great romance” involves a stoic vampire and an even steelier teen. There’s no beaded passion here – nothing beneath the carnal urges and “hot and bothered” eye-banging – just angsty stirrings in the nether regions mislabeled as “love.”

Examining a real relationship, or at least any that I’ve seen, under the context of this brand of ironclad romance, there’s very little overlap of note. And yet, the lukewarm romance soldiers on: the bastion of 21st century detachment and bone-deep aversion to commitment. This template of 21st century romance has become centered on a singular quest for detached self-satisfaction that it’s turned against everything that love stands for. And then comes About Time, an earnest well-meaning love story amongst a pack of wolves. It’s quite simply, a breath of fresh air.

about-time02.jpg
Released amongst a rash of hefty dramas and mindless actioners, this purely delightful romance wears its heart on its sleeve in bold, sincere patches. While many romantic competitors keep an emotional distance from the audience through the use of sarcasm and a predictable three act meet-up-break-up-make-up formula, About Time is unafraid to alter the formula, scraping foreseeable twists and turns for the emotional heft of real family dynamics and all the baggage that comes with that…oh and time travel.

Yes, time travel plays a significant part of the narrative as on the eve of his 21st birthday, Tim (Domhnall Gleeson) is let in on a little family secret by his Dad (Bill Nighy): the men in the family have a peculiar ability to ball their fists and leap through time. In fact, the ability to time travel goes back as far in the family tree as the rascally orange hair which runs rampant in this English family. It takes no great stretch of the imagination to fantasize about how we would use these life-altering powers, but in About Time any ideas of grandiose heroics are by and large shelved. Meek and ginger Tim wants to use his powers for one thing and one thing only: to snag a girlfriend.

about-time-image08.jpg
When it comes time to procure the finest vixen in the land, the “traveling” bits are entirely effects free. There are no bright neon lights or pin wheeled wormholes, a directorial decision of “less is more” that works wonders within the foundation of the story. Unlike many plots involving time travel, About Time doesn’t spend too much time establishing the guidelines for the time travel sandbox, but it does play by its own set of rules. But rather than getting convoluted in the details of time travel’s idiosyncrasies, the rules here are simple: your actions can change the events of the past so 1) You can only travel to points and places in time that you’ve already been to before (i.e. no peeking into the future and no going back and killing Hitler) 2) Don’t alter any event before the birth of your child (different sperm, different baby) 3) Realize that there’s some things that time travel can’t fix. Some things just need to be accepted or learned through the arduous journey that is life.

As much as nitpicky drones love their plot-hole-seeking pastime, any attempt to dissect and discredit the functionality of the time travel here is moot because, well, its pretty rock solid. However hokey a time-jumping premise sounds in the midst of a love story, it’s used to surprisingly compelling effect and is far more nuanced and well-mannered than you might otherwise expect. And even though it’s there, time travel really isn’t what About Time is about. Rather, it uses the fantasy to tap into emotional reality.

Rather than use his time-traveling talent for typical teenage debauchery, Tim saves his ability as a last ditch effort of sorts, only used to better the circumstances of those around him, to avoid the unpleasantries that tend to pop their head up when least expected, and most importantly, to revisit the best days of his life. About Time ponders the idea that we can live life to the fullest not because of magical abilities but, perhaps, in spite of them.

about-time07.jpg

As for the romance at the center of the film, Rachel McAdams flirts with a new kind of woman- a mousey brunette, steadfast in her bookwormery and emotional reservations. It’s perhaps the least showy role she’s done and for once, she is entirely tolerable if not completely adorable. Newcomer Gleeson is equally charming, although not nearly in the traditional sense we’ve come to expect from a romantic male lead.

Bumbling, awkward and entirely orange-haired, his Tim makes up for his lack of suave with the good decision-making skills rare in a rom-com male. But the story is larger than the affable romance at its core, it’s about family; how families come together, depend on each other, and, ultimately, how parents pass the torch to their offspring. Like a good-natured Butterfly Effect, the most emotionally pungent material is unearthed in Gleeson and Nighy’s father-son relationship, so much so that, it might earn a sniffle, maybe even a tear or two from those apt to be touched by emotional films.

Regardless of its breezy premise and total lack of a bad bone in its body, this is the sparse romantic drama that totally works. Brushing off the sleazy staples of modern day rom-coms – the hunky leads, reheated man-wrong-woman, woman-wrong-man clichés, and snarky, obnoxious best friends – Richard Curtis has found something far more earnest, good intentioned and true. With an archer’s marksmanship, he manages to land a bullseye in our emotional main vein on a number of occasions. However coated with a healthy layer of rose-colored glaze, About Time is bold enough to be a nice guy amongst an army of grit and cavalier cool. This time though, nice guys don’t finish last.

B

post

Out in Theaters: LAST VEGAS

by Posted in Out in Theaters Tagged , , , , , , , ,

“Last Vegas”
Directed by Jon Turteltaub
Starring Michael Douglas, Morgan Freeman, Robert De Niro, Kevin Kline, Mary Steenburgen, Jerry Ferrara, Romany Malco
Comedy
105 Mins
PG-13

last_vegas_ver2_xlg.jpg
A kind of Expendables for Viagra-popping retirees, Last Vegas throws Hollywood golden boys Michael Douglas, Morgan Freeman, Robert De Niro, and, to a lesser extent, Kevin Kline at the screen amongst a scourge of dilapidated “We’re old now” jokes. But instead of slipping in old catchphrases and nods to their former glory, the narrative hones in on a periodic nostalgia existing outside of the collective careers of these (re)tired bunch of 70-odds.

Arguably better than it has any right to be, Last Vegas dodges expectations of “phoning it in”with half-heartfelt performances from these behemoths of the silver screen. But try as hard as Douglas and crew do to make something with surface-level sincerity, cheese-ball direction from Jon Turteltaub preaches to the lowest common denominator of moviegoers as the ill-conceived script from Dan Fogelman begs for laughs like a dog for scraps. Like a spritz of water to your furry friend’s face or aged bowels spontaneously releasing themselves, it’s often embarrassing to behold.

last-vegas-kline-freeman-de-niro-douglas.jpg
Dressing death up as a catalyst for living while you can, we meet Douglas’s Billy – a man with the orange-tinted tan of an Oompa Loompa – at his business partner and close friend’s funeral where, in the heat of the moment, he proposes to his 30-something girlfriend – a woman far too young to be marrying him for anything other than the inevitable life insurance payout. However much you expect this generation-gap relationship to be a goldmine for gravedigger jokes, this comedy-rich quarry isn’t touched with a ten-foot pole. It’s as if the producers all glanced at their own wives and nixed all wily commentary on marrying young. Instead, the movie uses this marriage-to-be as a window into the psychology of an older man trying to escape into his more formidable years. What follows is not unlike a plausible synopsis for American Reunion: We’re Retired Now. 

Life long friends Archie (Freeman), Sam (Kline), and the ever-reluctant Paddy (De Niro) join Billy for one last stint in Vegas as a formal send off to the man about to seal his fate in his first marriage. It’s strange to think that these four performers have never shared the screen before as they actually have an ample amount of chemistry together, even though their relationships are built on a thin foundation of lazy writing.

Along the way to the alter, Paddy and Billy feud over past betrayals. A growing rift in their friendship, begat by Billy skipping out on Paddy’s wife’s funeral, promises to tear up the group before the “I do’s” have a chance to be spoken. They bicker like old crows until Diana (Mary Steenburgen) – a lounge singer who becomes the recipient of both of their affections – takes the stage and their hostility turns to competition.

Last_Vegas.jpg
As it turns out, their tug-of-war over the same woman is par for the course of their friendship, as both had eyes for the same sweetheart back in their youthful days, a malted milkshake lass named Sophie. Sophie is the same woman that Paddy eventually married, the same woman whose funeral Billy stood up. In a revamped version of Sophie’s choice, her decision to saddle up with Paddy has always left an unspoken dent in their friendship. Just as these more meaningful ideas of love and friendship begin to be explored, they’re quickly abandoned. Anything worthy of thoughtful consideration is ultimately left examined with the finesse of a kid with a magnifying glass toasting ants. In such, nothing genuine survives the scorching melodrama of Turteltaub’s touch. 

Much like a granny that confuses a nickel for something of actual worth, Turteltaub fails to understand Last Vegas‘s value. Rather than treat his audience to a pat on the head, he could have left us with something weighty, or at least a lump in our throats – something worthy of dealing with friendships that end in funerals. But his fundamental misunderstanding of the film’s purpose quickly becomes his own downfall. Crafting a story around the framework of coping with age has proved successful in the past – just take a look at the resounding success of last year’s admittedly grim Amour. The success of that film, like this one, depends on a sense of stakes and what higher stakes are there than dying slowly, alone and isolated?

Last_Vegas3.jpg
In Last Vegas though, these ideas are mentioned but never actually experience. Consequently, there are no solid ramifications for anything that takes place. It’s all just an act in front of a curtain. Every issue becomes a performance of reaction, a cookie-cutter replica of tropes of past aging journeys. As it goes, everything feels like a carbon copy of a copy of a copy – three layers removed from any real feeling.

But judging Last Vegas on the terms of a serious drama isn’t quite grading it on a fair rubric because it was never intended to be a serious drama. Through and through, this is a fluffy star-laden romp intended to steal laughs rather than tears. Never masquerading as something of deeper intent, Last Vegas is happy to churn along and snag a smile here and there. Still, giving it a pass for having low ambition is an equally miscalculated way to sum up the film.

Regardless of its intention, any film with staying power hopes to tap into something universal; a reaction typically gleamed from a true emotional response. But with Last Vegas, any real emotional response is second-tier to sigh-inducing knee-slappers.

last-vegas02.jpg
Following suit, Last Vegas is fast food entertainment for the elderly. Lacking anything of substance, this is an easily digestible stencil of a comedy that flushes right through your system, causing little more than a fading smile, all the while making you a little worse for the wear. The host of talent may look pretty being passed through the filter of a camera lens and crammed into a trailer’s two minute time frame but once Last Vegas has trudged through its entire arsenal of hardy hars, you’re unlikely to remember anything about the experience and would surely flush it out of your mind to make room for something better.

But Last Vegas‘s greatest crime comes with its relentless pursuit to pitch to a younger crowd, the most egregious of which involves mixing a wiener-shaking AWOL Nation gag amongst a torrent of ED jokes. Even though the film clearly skews towards the majorly slim 70-plus demographic, disingenuous attempts to win laughs from the younger crowd come across as misguided. The two generations irreparably clash, stripping the film down to its uninspired core and revealing the mess underneath. Like getting a pair of socks for Christmas, it’s not really a gift at all.

D+

post

Talking with Oliver Hirschbiegel of DIANA

by Posted in Interviews Tagged , , , ,

Oliver-Hirschbiegel-SSR.jpg

There’s probably not a person on Earth who couldn’t tell you who Princess Diana is, and yet public knowledge of her is only surface deep. Oliver Hirschbiegel (Downfall) aims to settle that score with his biopic Diana. Known for his unblinking film biographies of historical figures, famous (Princess Diana) and infamous (Hitler) alike, Hirschbiegel hopes to unearth the humanity in these people, digging deeper than the surface snapshot we so often focus on. Set to turn an icon into a person, he tucks into Princess Diana like she’s a girl next door who just so happens to live in a castle.

 

Together, Oliver and I spoke about how the universal love story of Diana transformed the princess’s humanitarian work, why Naomi Watts was the only choice to play Diana, how he didn’t even recognize Naveen Andrews as Lost‘s Sayid until filming was done, the Royal family and filming right at the gates of the castle.


——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-——-—-

In making a biopic of such a superstar and massive international icon, what did you think was the more important aspect: making the story as entertaining and engaging as possible or strictly adhering to the facts and nothing but the facts?

Oliver Hirschbiegel: Well while reading it, I really was surprised because what I read was a truly universal love story. That became the main goal, whenever in doubt. I knew these characters by heart and I knew the story that I wanted to tell. At the same time, I did research for about a year, getting into these characters and finding out about all these aspects of the story and making sure that, as much as I could, that I was truthful with what I was telling. Of course, and this is in regard to certain incident like her getting into the boot of her car and aspects like that, but when it comes to the very intimate scenes when you have two people in a flat or something like that, you can just go by what you know about the character and the descriptions. There were descriptions of encounters of Hasmat and Diana and how they dealt with each other. You try to hit the spirit of that relationship. You try to hit the spirit of the characters.

You say that this is this “universal love story.” Watching the film, you definitely get the scene that that aspect is the focal point. It’s not so much about Diana’s life but this one relationship at the end of her life and how much that affected her emotionally. Why did you choose this topic as the focal point?

OH: Well the thing that happens through her finding that love is …. At the beginning we see her isolated and lonely and sort of aimless. She’s separated from Charles and not officially divorced yet but she doesn’t really know what to do with her life. In real life, she had cut off most of her friends really. She lives rather aimlessly and then finds that man. Finally, after being deprived of love from that very first years of her childhood on, she finally finds that love and opens up and through finding love and getting love, she sort of reinvents herself, which is a very important part of her biography. To me, it’s the most interesting because she becomes a new Diana. It’s not only when it comes to the whole fashion icon thing because she reinvents herself on that level as well but, for me, that is less interesting. The more interesting thing is that she becomes a stateswoman in a way.

She’s not just the head of the charity, she’s not just supporting a charity, she becomes the motor of charity work on a rather political level. To put her clothes to auction for the AIDS charity, in those days that was a very bold move and a very smart thing, it was actually William’s idea originally, and was unheard of. Also, the land mines  campaign. They fought for more than 20 years, politicians and very powerful institutions like the Red Cross and the UN. They had all fought to ban land mines on an international level and they hadn’t gotten anywhere. She takes that on and changes the world within three days. That’s astonishing and very impressive. That had been forgotten really. If you go on YouTube and look for that documentary on her going to Angola, there’s only like 15,000 people who have seen that. We’re talking about the most famous woman in the world. But what is she famous for? She’s famous for being the princess and flying around the world and hanging out with Dodi on a yacht and dying in a tunnel. That really needed correction.

For you, what was the most challenging aspect of the story to bring to the screen?

OH: Well to get it right. In all my films, my guide is this truthfulness and authenticity. I don’t want to play games with the audience. Of course, I want to entertain, I don’t want to bore them, but I don’t want to play dirty tricks on them. I try to do all the research and try to get it as right as possible. At the end of the day, it’s a piece of art and it’s my vision but it’s really based on formal research.

Why did you think that Naomi Watts was the perfect Diana for this story?

OH: As an actress, she is simply the best in her category. I wouldn’t know anybody would who pull it off. That was the first name I ever put down: Naomi Watts. And she proved me right.

What is it about her that really captures the spirit of Diana?

OH: She, more than others, makes me forget that I’m watching her impersonating a character. She becomes the character. In any film she does, regardless of genre, she becomes that and makes me forget that. She’s amazing really. Physically, if you look at her, she doesn’t really look like Diana but yet she becomes Diana and makes me believe that I’m watching Diana.

Similarly, why did you cast Naveen Andrews, who is most known for his role in Lost as this action hero, as your romantic lead. Knowing what we do about him, it is an unexpected choice.

OH: I didn’t know that Naveen did Lost. I looked at Bollywood actors and never really got The English Patient out of my head. I remember that story of that Indian soldier, I think he was a Sikh, and Juliette Binoche in The English Patient, touched me so much. It was so authentic and real. I looked them up and found out that it was Naveen Andrews. It sort of rang a bell but I didn’t put one and one together. So I looked him up on IMDB on realized he is that Iranian guy on Lost…and I loved Lost and watched Lost. I just didn’t recognize him as the same guy. We Skyped for an hour and we connected. As a director, you’re talking to an actor and you just know immediately. I knew I had my man. When I put the two together in one room, I just knew the chemistry was right. He’s not Pakistani, he’s Indian but from the North of India, which is a similar area. I think he’s the perfect match for Hasmat.

In the process of making the film, was there any pushback from the Royal Family about the story that you were telling or were they onboard?

OH:: No, they’re never onboard really. They basically stay out of it. They don’t want to have anything to do with it and they never comment either. Regardless of which story you want to tell, you’ll never be allowed to shoot within the vicinity of the palaces but they suggested for us to shoot at Kensington Gardens when there was a problem at Hyde Park, because of the Olympics games, but they allowed us to use Kensington Gardens and the palace as a backdrop. They even allowed us to shot at the actual gate where all the flowers were put down. The only thing they asked us to do was not put flowers down there because, for obvious reasons, that would have been sort of terrible for the sons. We draw in the flowers with CGI.

So you haven’t heard anything from either of her sons in terms of a reaction? Do you know if they’ve seen the film?

OH: Well, I don’t know. They never comment really. You never hear anything. It’s their policy for hundreds and hundreds of years. They keep their mouth shut and never issue any statement. Maybe one day but I find it doubtful.

One of the most distressing elements of the film is how the paparazzi and journalists are constantly in her face, snapping photos at her most susceptible moments. How did you try and approach that from a dramatic standpoint to express just how much pressure she was constantly under and how that pressure changed the course of her life?

OH: Well I enhanced that elements quite a bit. It was not in the original script. I just wanted the paparazzi to become sort of their own character and be constantly there and a constant potential threat. It’s something Fellini did in La Dolce Vita and I’m sort of bowing my hat to Fellini with that. Her life was like that. Today, it’s more common that that happens but the paparazzi, sometimes hundreds of them, being around her was a first in those days. That had never been the case before. I tried to get that out with a maximum powerful effect.

What was the hardest part of doing this story for you emotionally?

OH: To stay objective, if you will. In this kind of story, of course you connect with the characters, and I have to admit, I quite like Diana. The more I found out about Diana, the more I liked both of these characters. As a storyteller, you want to be careful that you keep your distance. I think it rings through that I like these characters but I think that’s the most difficult thing. You’re emotional involvement doesn’t take over your artistic expression.

For more director interviews, visit https://www.silverscreenriot.com/editorials/interviews

post

Watch the First Trailer for Jason Reitman's LABOR DAY

by Posted in Trailers Tagged , , , , , , , ,

labor-day.jpg
Once thought to be a serious Oscar contender, Labor Day opened to lukewarm reviews out of the Toronto International Film Festival and has largely fallen off the radar as one to be strongly anticipated. Nonetheless anything from Jason Reitman, director of Juno, Up in the Air, Thank You For Smoking and Young Adult, is worth a watch, even if this will be one of his lesser efforts. Starring Josh Brolin and Kate Winslet as a pair of strangers forced together by chance, Labor Day is currently rocking a 65% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Depressed single mom Adele (Winslet) and her son Henry offer a wounded, fearsome man (Brolin), who turns out to be a con on the run, a ride home and a place to lie low. As the police turn over the town in search of the escaped convict, Adele and her son gradually learn his true story as their options become increasingly limited. As the Labor Day weekend runs to a close,  Tobey Maguire, Clark Gregg, JK Simmons, Brooke Smith and James Van Der Beek co-star.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z51qJA1qrU0

Labor Day is directed by Jason Reitman and stars Josh Brolin, Kate Winslet, Tobey Maguire, Clark Gregg, JK Simmons, Brooke Smith and James Van Der Beek. It will not open on Labor Day as it comes to theaters on Christmas Day.

post

Poster for Latino PARANORMAL ACTIVITY: THE MARKED ONES

by Posted in Movie Posters Tagged , , , , ,

paramormal-activity-marked-ones-poster.jpg
When Paranormal Activity 5 couldn’t keep up the annual Halloween-release trend of the last four films in the franchise, the official Latin spin-off, Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones, looked to fill in the gap. However, that next film in the wildly popular franchise also won’t make a Halloween season release as it’s not hitting theaters until the dumping grounds known as January. Is the series losing steam already or are they trying to shake up the formula and having more trouble with it than expected? With a new poster and an old trailer to go off, see if this looks like anything new or just more of the found footage same.

While the film is endorsed by the makers of the PA, it will be a big move in a new direction as the film will feature an all Latino cast with only little crossover to the mainstay material. It will however feature young Katie and Kristi, played by the same actresses from Paranormal Activity 3. While the details are relatively slim at this point, the film is said to focus on a Catholic investigation of some, you guessed it, paranormal activity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6DYsGTMkCU

While this won’t be the first one-off of the series, it is the first official one. In 2010, an unofficial Japanese sequel, known as Paranormal Activity: Tokyo Night, followed Haruka Yamano, who broke her legs in a car accident and has since started feeling the presence of ghosts. It’s later revealed  that the woman that Haruka mowed down and killed was Katie, of the original Paranormal Activity, killing her and thus transferring her ghostly follower onto himself. Obviously the film was marked as non-canon because Katie lives on after the events of the first film and continues to be most central character of the franchise.

Follow Silver Screen Riot on Facebook
Follow Silver Screen Riot on Twitter