post

Out in Theaters: PRISONERS

“Prisoners”
Directed by Denis Villeneuve
Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Hugh Jackman, Terrence Howard, Viola Davis, Paul Dano, Maria Bello, Melissa Leo, Dylan Minnette
Crime, Drama, Thriller
153 Mins
R

In Prisoners, Denis Villeneuve tactfully dangles each of his characters off the precipice of horror. They’re always about to cross an ethical line in the sand, nearing a brutal action beat, close to making a devastating choice… and then it quick-fades to black. Each cathartic movement is truncated in a manner as frustrating and poignant as Jake Gyllenhaal‘s overly pronounced blinks. In a film this precisely designed, everything has multiple layers of meaning, so it’s no happy accident that this closing-of-the-door trend spans the entire film. Considering the dark material at play, it seems clear that this stylish tactic – aided by gorgeously glum cinematography from Roger Deakins – amounts to a statement about the solitude of choice and the all-enveloping difficulty of isolation within a mind that has become irrevocably haunted. But the true strength within the film is not in revealing a stanant answer to the questions posed throughout the film but in inviting us to participate in our own private study of guilt under duress.

Hugh Jackman‘s Keller Dover has lost his daughter. Taken after Thanksgiving supper, her whereabouts are as much a question mark as the identity of the culprit. On the alignment chart, Dover is chaotic neutral – a raging, by-all-means-type who stomps over whatever moral boundary stands in the way of his getting his daughter back. Jackman harnesses unbridled rage in a manner that he’s never quite been able to touch upon before. This is the darkness we’ve always expected of the man behind the Wolverine and his performance here is surely one of his finest. But Dover is not the only character at play (or even the central one strictly speaking) nor is he the only one intent on finding his lost child.

Circling him is Gyllenhaal’s Detective Loki, a by-the-books lawman with a keen eye for detail, a nagging sense of duty, and a strong foothold in legality. He’s a man doing his best in an impossible situation, limited by the law, and driven by a need for closure. Lawfully good to a T, Loki tries to examine the equation from all angles but just can’t seem to get a read on why the pieces aren’t properly fitting into the puzzle. Having just played a member of the police force in the truly excellent End of Watch, Gyllenhaal invites comparison between the roles but thankfully, there is little commonality to be found between the two. This is a wholly new character and yet another fine performance.

As audience members, our loyalties are split between these two men. As a psychological treatise, we naturally tend to align ourselves with the character we spend the most time with. In spending equal amounts of time with both men, our fealty is in our own hands. Without allegiance to one or the other, we’re able to remove any biases that could arise if the film were framed in an alternative perspective. In this more detached regard, we see the strengths and flaws in both characters.

Each have their gaping holes, fueled by their past – alcoholism and reckless youth for Dover and Loki respectively – and see themselves as lone wolves up against the pack. If only they could have recognized their counterpart in the other, they might have been able to work together in pursuing this same endgame. But both are blinded by their own sense of self-efficacy – the idea that they alone are the hero in this twisted tale.

But for how much each character mistakes him or herself as the sole player with agency – the last vestige of hope in a hopeless situation – no decision is made in a vacuum and each character’s choice alters the course of the others. At various intersections, different approaches come to a head and each character firmly stands on their own ground, allied to their principles and personal ideology of necessity.

For Dover, that “at-all-costs” mentality comes to fruition quickly. When police let primary suspect Alex Jones – played by an absolutely spellbinding Paul Dano – free, Dover takes the situation into his own hands by capturing the dullard boy and torturing him to squeeze any information out of him that may have been overlooked by police. At this juncture, we face our first moral quandary.

Simulating many of the same tactics the American government uses on foreign and domestic terrorists, the scenes are torture to watch. Paralleling this hotly contested US policy, those strapped to a wall, beaten senseless, and faced with psychological degradation may be withholding key bits of information that could lead to lives saved but at what cost? Where is the threshold between being a savior and becoming a devil? Villeneuve scores again here in not spoon-feeding an answer to the audience but asking them to make this judgment for themselves.

On the outside of the equation are Franklin and Nancy Birch – played by a trepidatious Terrence Howard and an uneasy Viola Davis – both of whom align themselves with true neutrality. They have also lost a daughter in the same turkey-day event but remain helpless outsiders. They see the solution as out of their reach and believe that only in allowing larger forces to play out, will they get their daughter back. Always on the outskirts of unfolding events, observers of the horror and yet placated enough to avoid either side of the conflict, they are the eyes of the audience.

As Davis’ character says at one point, “We’re not going to help kill ’em, but we won’t stop ’em either.” At many points, this is how we, the audience, feel. Hers is the altruism of a grieving soul, not willing to lambast her own moral fences but equally unwilling to stand in the way of Jackman’s moral slide. Here, questions arise about the proximity of action and inaction. To what degree is standing aside and letting something happen the same as participating? Another line drawn in the sand, another counterpoint to the structure of law, and another measure of threshold. It’s these types of probing questions that elevate the film beyond a mere detective procedural into a clinical study of deeper psychology. Again, Villeneuve asks: at what point do we become corrupted?

Perhaps one of the strangest and affecting aspects of the film is the simulated call-and-response created between the film’s content and the audience’s reaction. In my screening, scenes of brutality were met with laughter, gasps, and cheers – a vast spectrum of human response that helps to gauge the complexity of issues such as these. To feel outrage not only towards the film but your fellow moviegoers signals something viscerally and sub-textually rich that is rarely found in a movie so potentially wide-reaching.

In chartering such a delicately mapped progression of plot and character beats as well as stimulating such a wide range of reactions, major points should also be delegated to screenwriter Aaron Guzikowski for staying true to the characters and subsequently not allowing them to backpedal out of sticky situations. Guzikowski does not inorganically alter their courses once they’ve begun the dreary descent down their respective rabbit holes and it makes the end result seem that much more well-earned and poignant.

At the center of Guzikowski’s maze of lies is true chaotic evil, and figuring out who is pulling the strings is half the fun. Unlike other detective stories, the puzzle-like aspects of the film aren’t its only strong suits making it more than a one-and-done experience. It’s capped off by a stirring grim narrative about waging war on God that is haunting in its calculated cruelty. We haven’t seen dialogue this unrelentingly dark since Stellan Skarsgård‘s diatribe in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.

While often uncompromisingly bleak, Prisoners ends up as more of a pulpy, often riveting, character study than what we may originally have suspected. The film is just caked in grit, a feel that the rain-soaked atmosphere helps to amplify, and yet gives equal attention to that within the performances and narrative. Even though it is in many ways reminiscent of a David Fincher film in both tone and feel, it’s hardly imitation. Instead, Villeneuve crafts his own signature touch rich in moody artistic, using the idea of deadlocked forces to tell a story about the blinding solitude inherent in the human condition As each character on the screen is captive to their own physical or psychological prison, we are captive to the deep digging questions steaming out of the gutters of the film. Questions that we can only answer for ourselves in the vastness of solitude.

A-

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

post

Out in Theaters: POPULAIRE

“Populaire”
Directed by Régis Roinsard
Starring Déborah François, Romain Duris, Bérénice Bejo and Shaun Benson
Foreign, Comedy
111 Mins
R

Filmed in the whimsy stylings of French New Wave, Populaire jars the bay window open and lets the breezy charm waft in and take the helm. Tackling the inconspicuous topic of typing competitions in 1959, director Régis Roinsard turns what should have been bland and academic into an exciting match of athleticism, fueled by a cheery performance from Déborah François.

Living in a small French village, young Rose Pamphyle (François) dreams of a fanciful life filled with big wigs, hot locales and travel, travel, travel. Her father though, has other plans for Rose and has promised her hand to the son of the local mechanic. In the dead of night, Rose lives out a silent fantasy of a grander life, sneaking away to the one typewriter her father keeps at his store and hacking away at it. 

When Rose applies for a highly competitive position as secretary to insurance man Louis Echard (Romain Duris), it is clear that she is under-qualified but lands the job after revealing her gift for speedy typing…with two fingers. Unknowingly igniting a fire in Louis, Rose’s gift for typing stops her would-be employer in his tracks. Rose’s unadulterated, cherry-blossom cuteness, which is perfectly articulated when she’s typing so fast and furiously that her bra strap slips out, her hair comes undone and she haphazardly looks up at Louis and exasperatedly puffs the loose hair out of her eyes, lands her the much-envied position as Louis’ secretary but it’s not long before it’s evident that she’s not quite cut out for the job.

Her caution-to-the-wind attitude and total lack of professionalism wind up getting in the way of her job and so, intent that he can make her a world champion, Louis comprises with Rose that if she wants to keep her position and not be sent packing, she must train daily to become a master typist.

 As Rose prepares for the Regional Championship, there are all sorts of exercises she must engage in from transcribing famous novels to learning to type blind to running alongside Louis as he jeers her on to go faster. The satirical montage is no rarity in the film world but here you don’t feel the need to turn to your neighbor and scoff. Without debasing the charmed ambiance, Roinsard shows that he knows how to turn the norm to his advantage. He’s able to skate over familiarity by carpeting everything with whimsy, transforming every potentially stale beat into an opportunity for cheery rapture. With this infectious nature, the film lives and breathes goodwill.

And even though this is an air of familiarity to the third act romantic woes, it’s executed with a self-aware, satirical edge. While it hardly reinvents the wheel, it is a pleasing, nostalgic effort that is impossible to walk away from without a smile. Even the Scroogiest of people will be delighted by the airy attitude of Rosinsard’s picture.

Breezy to a fault, Roinsard avoids making any biting political statements about the era of “modern women” except to give us a glimpse of faux-liberation stuffed behind an assistant’s desk.

Yes, the film is satirical but the satire is played more for laughs than for earnest investigation. Now is this really the film to cut open the stigma on the worldwide women’s liberation movement?

Absolutely not. If anything, attempting to cram some critique on the era or philosophical judgment of the era into the film would have jumbled its easy-going angle and tipped it towards the insincere. Instead, Roinsard knows exactly what he’s making and based on audience’s overwhelming loving adoption of The Artist, this is sure to go down just as easily.

From the get go, the score is bubbly and inviting, setting the stage for the purely pleasant experience about to unwind. Similarly, the costume and set design are colorfully decadent and cheery, bringing to life this sugarcoated vision of the world. Even the globetrotting manages to maintain a sprightly sense of optimism. As to the artificiality of the history lesson, it clearly takes a filtered stance on snarky but friendly competition as global relations.

Depth was never the goal here and Roinsard scores major points for sticking to his flowery guns. Like similarly woozy Jean-Pierre Jeunet films, it’s just a wonder something so fleet-footed, impractically sunny, and self-confident can still be so intoxicating and winning.

B+

post

Out in Theaters: INSIDIOUS: CHAPTER 2

Insidious: Chapter 2″
Directed by James Wan
Starring Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Barbara Hershey, Leigh Whannell, Angus Sampson, Steve Coulter
Horror, Thriller
105 Mins
PG-13

Back in grade school, we learn about the five paragraph essay. It starts with an intriguing hook to invite readers into the text. Following from the content of the opening segment, we’re supposed to know what to expect for the remainder of the work. We then have three body paragraphs basically giving some meat to the text before we wrap it all up with a conclusion that summarizes events while making some overarching statement tying together the various strands of the piece. Be it a subjective opinion or an objective truth, a paper has to say something or else, what’s the point? A similar blueprint can be expected for film. Surely there are cases that call for deviation but when you fail to understand the most basic structure of story, there is no hope for transcendence nor is there any respite from piss poor narrative decisions. This is the case with Insidious: Chapter 2 – a half-witted, inconsistent mess of a horror sequel.

While the first installation (to what is sure to be at least a three chapter affair) started as a somber and moody horror-thriller and deteriorated piece-by-piece, this followup starts its engines in the rubble of that fallout. Deserting any modicum of first act set-up, things start going bump in the night right from the get-go. No respite is granted for those of us who want our psychology tinkered with. This is a full-blown pounding sesh. Doors slam themselves, baby monitors creak splintered whispers, pianos warble themselves out of key and there’s no scarcity of screaming, gasping, and jaw-dangling from those onscreen. Us in the audience however are cold from disinterest and disengagement.

As such, the first forty-five minutes of the film are purely awful – a hodgepodge of horror movie staples that wore themselves thin back in the 80s but somehow continue as if every horror audience has amnesia. Absent of a mere moment of breathlessness, this first act is also staggeringly unoriginal. Even in a market dominated by micro-budget horrors piggybacking on each other’s ideas, the recycled-ness feels built right into its DNA. There is not a dose of originality sewn into the framework, making the experience first-and-foremost an exercise in patience through repetition and wristwatch-checking.

Worst of all is the cold open which finds the audience throttled back thirty-odd years to the genesis of the body-haunting at the forefront of the series. A preteen Josh Lambert meets a young Elise (Lindsay Seim) and what follows is seven minutes of unadulterated crud withSeim’s flat-lined delivery and over-the-top gesturing coming across as a collection to make up a well-earned Razzie reel.

But Seim is not the only one dropping the ball as performances pretty much across the board are broadly laughable, save for a rakish Patrick Wilson who channels a bit of Jack Nicholson‘s Jack Torrence to amusing effect. Rose Byrne adopts the same mouth-agape, wide-eyed approach to terrified acting she harnessed in the first installment and its just as ineffective this time around. Between these two leads exists a slack-lined, tread-worn slump of charisma so it’s no wonder that they rarely share the screen together. I’d buy their romance in a Levi ad and that’s pretty much it.

Odd couple, Leigh Whannell and Angus Sampson make desperate plays for comic relief but their ill-timed jokes just add to the sloppy pileup. They may muster a laugh or two but those chuckles  only serves as admissible evidence of the tonal inconsistency ablaze throughout the film. In keeping with tradition, Lin Shaye feels out of place in any horror film and her cheery grandma facade just isn’t in keeping with the spooky feel Wan aims for. With so many miscalculations, it’s no wonder that he misses with such frequency here.

Everything exists either in shadow or bright spotlight with the cinematography from John R. Leonetti doing a dangerously sloppy job at making anything feel the least bit real. Having just served as DP on The Conjuring, which is a superior film in every way imaginable, the inconsistencies in quality are nothing less than confusing and easily damnable. In fact, Wan should be ashamed of the back-peddling he’s displayed here as this is a far cry from the game-changing part he played in The Conjuring.

Scathing review aside, there are moments where the film finds its footing and manages to put the chill back into the air. Wilson certainly gives it his all and is easily the most fun part of the ride. There are moments in the middle where the narrative pulls itself from the mire and seems like it actually may turn into a satisfying spookfest. In the end though, it is all for naught and adds up to nothing but a “to be continued…”Wan may have learned from the greatest mistakes of the first installment but it’s just a shame that he had to make a whole new set of mistakes.

Doused with easy scare tactics and devoid of a story all of it’s own, Insidious 2 borders on beingoffensively lame at times. But perhaps its gravest crime is its unwillingness to stand alone outside the pack. As a chapter in the mildewed pages of a novel, it reads fine. But this is no novel. Nor is it Lord of the Rings. Sequel or not, movies are charged with standing by themselves and Wan is smugly overconfident in assuming audiences will be hungry for more after such a scarcely entertaining film.

As a solitary feature, without what comes before it and will come next, Insidious 2 is wildly incomplete, capped off with more holes than a back country freeway sign in Alabama. When it comes down to it, Insidious: Chapter 2 has a terrible beginning and a terrible end, making it in a sense, a shit-sandwich.

D+

post

Out in Theaters: SHORT TERM 12

“Short Term 12”
Directed by Destin Cretton
Starring Brie Larson, John Gallagher Jr., Kaitlyn Dever, Stephanie Beatriz, Rami Malek, Alex Calloway, Kevin Hernandez, Lydia Du Veaux, Keith Stanfield 
Drama
96 Mins
R

 

The truth is often more horrifying than fiction and although Short Term 12 isn’t based on a true story, it unearths a harsh reality of displaced youth, offset from the spotlight but boiling under the surface of society. Replicating the many broken homes in modern American families, director/writer Destin Cretton has sole custody of this project. Thankfully, he takes this responsibility seriously and delivers a masterclass in realism complimented with standout performances from Brie Larson, John Gallagher Jr., and Keith Stanfield.

 
Thanks to a charged-up level of emotional maturity, the film tackles difficult issues with careful footing – immediately establishing a reverent tone, dipped with charm and laced with smiles. The psychological trauma uncovered within the character’s brick-walled hearts is likewise handled with tender precision. Each reaction the film garnishes is no accident. Every bit has its place, a building block towards a grand scheme that ultimately delivers a big pay-off for those willing to engage in the bumps along the road.
 
Short Term 12 takes its name from the facility where the film unfolds. A solace for unwanted foster children, abuse victims, and abandoned kids, this is a place with its own set of rules, even if those rules do often stand on shaky grounds. While the employees may come down on cussing and fighting, one rule they let slide is the mandate that youth are only to stay for one year, with some of the residents having shacked up for up to three. Keith Stanfield’s Marcus is one of those lingerers but he’s about to turn 18 and will be forced to face the world outside the emotional security of Short Term 12.

 

His journey is perpendicular to newcomer Jayden (Kaitlyn Dever) who fights tooth and nail to be anywhere but here. While Jayden battles to leave and Marcus tries to work through the backlog of his own demons (with a powerful rap offering a raw view into the tattered loss of his youth), we realize just how short term the stay is here.

It may be limbo but it’s not without it’s guardian angel.Larson’s Grace is that angel. She’s a twentysomething running the ins-and-outs of the joint with the infinite patience of Mother Theresa and a thorny soul buried with secrets. Her heart is invested in the pocket of each and every tenant shuffling through the facility, entombing herself in their trauma, becoming a fiber of their tragedy. Grace puts her physical and emotional well being at the bottom of the totem pole and it’s in part because of this that she is so great at dealing with this gang of lost boys…and girls. But her constant need to play the savior hints at something troubled lingering within her – an undead memory that haunts her every breath.

 

Grace sustains a borderline manipulative relationship with co-worker and underling, Mason (John Gallagher Jr.) who is both her devoted lover and emotional rock. On the flip side, Grace is as hot and cold as the object of a Katy Perry song. Theirs is a shaky boat of love with Grace always maintaining the upper hand, unwilling to let Mason ascend her tower of secrets. Their physical and emotional relationship have obviously parallels to their work positioning with Grace always on top, the solitary king of the castle flanked by skyhigh stone walls.

But to paint Grace as a domineering presence is to misrepresent her. In showing the turbulent nature of this part of her life, Cretton aims to illuminate how broken she is. Her throttling affections are a window into her soul. A key to the realization that doesn’t see herself as even deserving of love. Cretton plants little psychological clues like these throughout the film, prompting our curiosity for what scars these characters are hiding and how, if at all possible, they can be undone. The joy in the film is not the end of the journey but the road to it as Cretton handles his character’s soft-shelled insecurities both gently and honestly instead of putting it in autopilot and expecting the subject to bungle down tear-road.

One of the great rewards of watching the film is seeing how the jigsaw pieces composing Larson and other characters fit together. Unlike lesser films that utilize baggage as a means of emotional manipulation, every reveal, every turn, every batting off or acceptance of affection feels earned. It’s a difficult journey but one that lends credence to the cast’s standup acting ability andCretton‘s talent to skirt past manipulation into a much more rewarding realm of genuineness.

 

What remains the most fascinating portion of the film is Cretton’s willingness to go someplace dark and stir around in the pot. In doing so, a motif that rises to the top is the idea that people reveal themselves through their art. Grace draws, Marcus raps, Jayden writes stories. In these moments of expression, their deepest sense of self shines through perhaps showing more than they ever could in mere conversation. In creation, there is the capacity to destroy, to move beyond. Almost Nietzschian in effect, creation and destruction are symbiotic here. Two faces of one Janus, two sides of the same coin.

Another, more difficult, thing to take away is Cretton’s interpretation of self-inflicted pain. Many wounded souls hurt themselves not to inflict pain but to make the pain go away. This cathartic nature of destruction helps mask the real trauma stirring within them. The only way to move beyond this cycle of abuse though seems to be in a form of acceptance – a self-imposed yard sale of everything nasty hidden away. And so it is in Short Term 12. Only when we show the darkest parts of ourselves are we able to start moving towards the light.

A-

post

Out in Theaters: RIDDICK

“Riddick”
Directed by David Twohy
Starring Vin Diesel, Jordi Mollà, Matt Nable, Katee Sackhoff, Dave Bautista, Bokeem Woodbine, Raoul Trujilo
Action, Sci-Fi, Thriller
119 Mins
R

Vin Diesel possesses some uncanny voodoo that allows him to be a bad actor who people excuse for bad acting. His smarmy tough guys are marked by a well-measured dose of self-awareness, sometimes so third-wall breaking that they almost plays as cutesy – like a shaven-headed, muscle-bound Ferris Bueller. He tries to make us laugh with him, not at him, and for the most part, it works. Even in Riddick, which is no doubt a bad movie, his oily glances and meat-and-potatoes asides work to entangle us in this world, trying to lift the pulped story from the screenwriters trash bin where it belongs. But even Diesel’s ‘hardy hars’ can’t salvage a plot that’s so disjointed and thrown together it feels more like a violent mosaic than an actual movie.

Complying to the traditional three arc tango just was not the right play here, as this metaphorical pigsty of a film is essentially three movies crammed into the same two hour runmtime.The first act is Riddick – battleworn loner stranded on hostile alien planet. Here, straggling baby dragons, working up an immunity to enlarged scorpion’s venom and montaging his way towards a space station in hopes of rescue at least give the character some semblance of purpose.

While I’ll admit to having missed the first two installments in the Riddick franchise, this first act gave me a sense of the shell-hardened ruffian on screen in addition to the sun-baked world on which he’s stranded, with all its creeper crawlers scurrying to-and-fro. There was a sense of stakes behind this action – a survival of the fittest joust between man and beast. But the sense of meaning that this opening scenario presented was quickly dissolved entirely from the film into a mindless boggle of soldier’s hoorahs, asinine body counts and ugly sexism.

The second act is an us-vs-them skirmish between Riddick and a band of mercs who’ve just touched down on the unnamed planet’s surface to hunt down Riddick and collection on his insurmountable bounty. While it serves to develop a new set of characters, it is pretty much entirely absent of the titular antihero. He lingers in the shadow, proving his worth as a cold-blooded murderer while we meet a crew of meat heads with little to no appeal.

 Katee Sackhoff‘s Dahl is the most interesting of the crew but having a strong female lead in this sci-fi actioner seems more like cannon fodder than progress. You’ll see what I mean shortly. The only other character worthy of mention is Johns (Matt Nable). He’s the father of one Little Johns (apparently a character in an earlier film) and the only part of the crew who’s mind isn’t eternally gutter bound. An inkling of a common thread is woven between Johns and Riddick but it’s not nearly as meaningful as the film supposes it is. “You’re son was spineless,” Riddick says to Johns, “like father like son.” As you may guess, the growing consternation between the two leads to a macho-a-thon between the buff dudes, each trying to one-up the other’s slo-mo feats of alien-slaying.

Finally we get to the third act, which amazingly enough, is the only portion featured in the trailers that you may have seen. That’s right, the sequence of a captured Riddick comes in the final act of the film. But again, it feels like an entirely different movie at that point so why bother trying to sell the movie as an entire package? Hell, just pick out your favorite act and make a trailer for that because that’s what the marketing crew seemed to do.

David Twohy, director of Pitch Black and Chronicles of Riddick, returns to direct a screenplay from Oliver Butcher and Stephen Cornwell (Unknown) so stuffed with sexual repugnance that it’s astonishing. Sackhoff plays the one female character with a name and her sexual preference for other women is so often degraded that the lack of comfort created feels like a sitting down and listening to one of grandma’s racist stories (but she’s old so we let it slide there.) Constant threats to rape a lesbian are unsettling – not to mention unnecessary. And aside from creating that rapey-vibe that is so popular in the movies these days, it’s just pure bizarre. Surely, the threat to go “balls deep” in her was played for a laugh but, geez, it was quite a dropping of the proverbial ball. I’m no arbiter of political correctness but the line in the sand is certainly crossed here mostly because we feel little more than uncomfortable watching it. We want to turn to the woman next to us in the theater and point out that we’re not laughing. “Excuse me ma’am, just wanted to point out that I’m not chuckling at all the gang rape jokes.”

While it’s hard enough to recover from a fumble of that degree, the story deadends so abruptly and severely that your head is left spinning. It’s hard to think of a movie in recent history with such a nonsensical, truncated conclusion. Literally everything leading up to it suggested one thing and then, just for the hell of it, the tracks shift and we’re left with a wildly different conclusion than we could have ever imagined. Earned twist this is not, as there is not one shred of evidence suggesting anything that could be confused for coherency is at play in the final five minutes.

You have to stick the ending. It’s the lynch-pin of the entire film. Unknowingly, Twohy must have mistaken “stick” for “skewer” as his conclusion is as half-baked as a no-bake cookie. That’s right, it’s so half-baked that it ain’t even baked at all. Running full speed into a brick wall, Riddick exits on the least graceful of notes. Aiming for resolution, the film seems to say, “We ran out of movie. Fin.”

On a technical side, Riddick achieves some minor level of potency. The scorched cinematography from David Eggby (Mad Max) actually looks pretty good considering the limited budget, particularly in the expansive sprawl of the first act. Original music from Graeme Revell thumps and pounds along, giving a backbone to the piece but disappearing entirely from our minds the minute the credit roll stops. But the real star of the film is Riddick’s weapon of choice – the bone saw. And by bone saw, I mean a bone that’s been crafted into a jagged-edge switchblade. So at least there’s that.

With reckless abandon, Twohy throws too much at the screen, desperately hoping for it all to stick. Fortunately for him, some of it does. There’s enough absurdity to cull some chuckles, a handful of interesting action beats, and a pet tiger-dog that is surely the audience’s favorite character. But so much is constantly sliding down off the wall that we’re left with a big pile of goop that doesn’t add up to much. Without a doubt, Riddick is B-movie territory but it’s handled with direct-to-video finesse.

D+

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

post

Out in Theaters: GETAWAY

“Getaway”
Directed by Courtney Solomon
Starring Ethan Hawke, Selena Gomez, Jon Voight, Rebecca Budig

Action, Crime
90 Mins 
PG-13

“Get in, get out” Getaway‘s tagline reads – an obvious parallel to the ideology that went on back in the writer’s room in this fart-and-hairspray fireball of a movie. Repping ADHD filmmaking at its most nauseous and nonchalant, Courtney Solomon (Dungeons and Dragons) directs Getaway like an 11-year old waving around a smart phone, clicking the camera on and off with no intent and no semblance of artistry. Each sequence leapfrogs between an unmeasured amount of angles, demonstrating Solomon’s lack of faith in his framing and making the experience of watching it akin to a scatter-shot montage lingering on for 90 minutes. It’s a grueling slog intent on leaving a wake of smashed-up vehicles – I counted 23 un-inventively totaled police cars, countless wrecked civilian automobiles and five exploding motorcycles – but not much else.

 
Even star Ethan Hawke‘s devilish charm couldn’t savage this Titanic of a sinking ship. Getting his leg snagged, Hawke is pulled down to the festering depths where the terminally “playful” mind of Solomon vacuously dreams of smashing and whooshing and banging and boom booms.

 
 

I’ve become an increasingly avid fan of Hawke’s – and found his work in this year’s Before Midnight to be the finest performance of 2013 to date – but he is saddled with some dialogue that’s so clunky that I feel I have to begrudge him simply for not outright refusing to say them at all. A late stage, “I know where she is!” (spoken to himself and no-one else) is the type of wrong-kind-of-laugh-inducing ringer that invites a level 5 face-palming. It’s just embarrassing for everyone involved and it’s nothing short of sad to see such a talented actor stoop to such lows.

I guess this brings us to what would be referred to here as the “plot”. Since about 95% of the film takes place inside a moving Shelby GT500, you can imagine that the plot lacking in both quantity and quality. Hawke is Brent Magna – a retired racecar driver, disgraced from the tracks for his recklessness and a tendency to destroy cars. On Christmas Day in Bulgaria (because where else would a disgraced racer want to spend the holidays?) his wife is nabbed by some faceless baddies and Magna is told that he’s got to drive a car into a bunch of stuff or they’ll kill her. Without a bat of an eye, Magna’s in the car, skidding his car into the midst of crowded parks, missing the mobs of holiday-cheerers by inches and thinking none the less of it.

The screenplay undercutting this vapid turd reads like a cheap, pointless and, worst of all, unasked for mashup of Saw and Fast and Furious. It involves a metric fuck-ton of driving, a heft of smashing, a dastardly villain who we only get to know by his (non-intimidating) voice, and a pinch of walking for good measure. Just kidding. We never once see Hawke move his legs, unless he’s a-shiftin’ with those racey feet of his. Like a road trip to hell with all the relatives we like least, we’re trapped inside the car for what quickly starts to seem like an eternity. The worst part of it all, Selena Gomez somehow snuck herself along for the ride.

 
 

But at least one consolation comes from this ten-car pileup of a film –  Gomez’s acting career can officially be swept under the rug once and for all. A young hacker known only as “The Kid”, Gomez is plainly more of a hack than a hacker. Name me one real life hacker whose idea of hacking means jamming their sausage fingers at an iPad with buttons like “Override” on the main screen and I’ll withdrawal my complaint. Perhaps hacking in the 21st century really is that easy but I seriously doubt it.

On the “hack” side of the equation though, there is overwhelming evidence that Gomez couldn’t act her way out of a bologna sandwich. There is not a single second (not the teensiest, tiniest crumb of time) where we believe that Gomez is capable of a tenth of the technological feats her character is supposedly carrying out. I could more easily believe that my friend’s dog Lucy could carve an ice swan than this curmudgeon do anything technical beyond tweeting a rave pic. Perhaps even more offensive are her completely unwarranted personality swings. Shifting on a dime scene-to-scene without any connection to past progress, Gomez can’t seem to keep her character straight. Never has it been so evident that a movie is not made front-to-back as Gomez seems incapable of keeping her arc linear without retreating into territory she’s already supposed to have moved beyond. 

 
 
 

Another character who gets the old writers block treatment is Jon Voight‘s strangely brewed criminal mastermind. With a nonspecific accent about as intimidating as a stale cupcake, and just about as flavorless, Voight’s grin is the only believable thing he’s selling here. Why? Because he’s laughing his way to the bank. His performance calls for so little that he may as well have been sitting in a sound booth and munching on bon-bons. That is the gist of his performance: sitting around, munching on bon-bons and grinning at the idiots handing him money to do it.

Like 70s exploitation without the sly, sarcastic sense of fun, Getaway leaves its trail of half-baked destruction but buries any sense of charmed wit along the way. Instead, this thriller on life support has its excitement pumped in at the rate of dial-up

internet. With only one long-shot in the entirety of the film worth mentioning at all, the result is so watered down that there’s hardly any taste left in it at all. Unfortunate proof that Solomon is a powder keg of a director, Getaway is little more than a generic waste of time and money. It may strike a chord for Shelby enthusiasts with a love-hate (but mostly hate) relationship with Bulgaria, but everyone else: do yourself a favor and steer clear.

D-

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

 

post

Out in Theaters: CLOSED CIRCUIT

“Closed Circuit”
Directed by John Crowley
Starring Eric Bana, Rebecca Hall, Julia Stiles, Jim Broadbent, Riz Ahmed, Ciarán Hinds, Anne-Marie Duff, Kenneth Cranham

Crime, Drama, Mystery
96 Mins
R

 

Closed Circuit is a faux-intellectual “thriller” cloaked in paranoia and government conspiracies that we’ve seen done in a more exciting manner many times before. It churns along turgidly, hoping to capitalize on anti-government sentiment but merely stirs up our desire to check our watches. Although there is a somewhat significant message buried in the narrative discourse, the fact that it’s only about one level deep does little to excite the imagination, much less inspire any sort of conversation exiting the film.

 
Calling it lazy seems a little disingenuous – as director John Crowley hardly seems to actively spur his audience’s sense of entertainment. Instead, he seems to have just forgotten about it. He seems to have wanted to create a conversational piece of work but it just didn’t pan out. The more suiting description of the film is that it is uninspired. Like a reheated plate of leftovers, we’ve seen these dishes served up before and they were better the first time around.
The narrative center of Closed Circuit follows Martin Rose (Eric Bana), a recluse lawyer working on a massively high profile case. In the aftermath of a London car bombing that claimed the lives of hundreds, Rose has been pulled on as the defense lawyer after his predecessor mysteriously committed suicide. Rose is teamed up with Claudia Simmons-Howe(Rebecca Hall) an ex-lover to put together the defense of an unassuming man stamped by the government as a criminal “mastermind”. Because of the high national security profile of the case, Simmons-Howe and Rose are strictly told not to discuss the secret details of the case with one another. But when Rose starts to suspect that the government is somehow involved in the whole kit-and-kaboodle, he realizes that their lives may be in danger.

In the mix of the scramble to figure out who is who and where trust can be placed, the film flexes a whole lot of beer-belly-tautness. Flabby scenes make for drooping excitement and it isn’t long before we don’t really even care whose life is in danger. All the babbling adds up to narrative fat that should have been trimmed and tidied before it scurried past the cutting room floor. Even with a run-time a touch over an hour and a half, a vacuum of suspense makes it feel like a much longer haul. Feet dragging its way to the finishing line, Closed Circuit doesn’t do enough to keep tensions high, and in doing so, jettisons any audience anxious for excitement.

While Bana was the sole reason I even made an effort to go see this film, as his diverse track record usually winds up more on the “hit” side of the dartboard for me, his effort here is hardly staggering. His portrayal of Rose isn’t a cop out but his character’s arc is just divinely uninteresting. Hardly moving far on the spectrum of character, he’s a man who we have to deal with more than one that we actively cheer for. Between casting concerned glances and trying not to act too concerned, he’s concerned with being concerned. Did I mention his concern? While the ultimate failure of this film can hardly be laid at Bana’s feet, I hope that he was the victim of the editing process and is as disappointed as I am in the final product.

 
 

Hall similarly is hardly of interest. Her character is a strong-female type with an upstanding moral code – a rote miscalculation of the empowered woman. She’s a bit of a question mark, albeit the familiar tropes thinly painted on her. We wind up not knowing much more about her than we did when she first appears on screen. Again, an arc is missing – another bit of paramount import thrown to the wind.

Even more frigid than these stoic cutouts is the chemistry between just about every actor sharing the screen. Hall and Bana just don’t seem to be clicking off each other, suggesting that any sort of prior relationship was as steamy as pistachio gelato. Even when they argue, the passion is absent. Dead eyes bounce off one another in scene after scene. Similarly the supporting characters rounding out the cast do little to amp up a sense of fullness.

Julia Stiles enters and exits without making a single impression, Ciarán Hinds tries to round out his unflattering role but his effort proves futile and Jim Broadbent is a shade of intimidation, although perhaps the most interesting performer onscreen just because he has a glint of something lurking behind his eyes other than concern.

Humming along like ants under a microscope, it becomes clear that the characters don’t really matter at all. They are just as much set pieces as the sound studios this was filmed in – scaffolding upon which to build a thinly veiled political message. But this deus-ex-machina doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. Even though concerns over surveillance and government corruption are timely positioned with outcry over NSA oversteps, Crowley fails to illuminate the subject in an intriguing light. Accordingly, he’s proved why so many people avoid politics, because not even a movie about the subject could avoid the inevitable yawns.

So Crowley’s greatest crime is that he’s crafted a bore-fest. Political angles wrought with finger pointing are undone by naive filmmaking that supposes politicking can alone triumph over genuine thrills. It’s a cold experience, unlikely to shake up anything but a big “meh” and a feeling that more than a mere hour and a half was wasted.

D+

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

post

Out in Theaters: ‘YOU’RE NEXT’

With last years Cabin in the Woods, screenwriter Joss Whedon and director Drew Goddard subverted the epoch of cabin-based teen slasher films, amalgamating the tropes of the genre in a style that was at once mocking and pedestalizing horror. In a way, they reminded us why the genre still mattered and what exactly about it was so much fun. In similar fashion, You’re Next employs gleeful violence and sardonic storytelling to solidify the paramount import of the horror’s existence. In viscous-smattered effect, it is bloody, simple, unadulterated fun at the movies worthy of strong consideration for any horror buff.

Read More

post

Out in Theaters: AIN'T THEM BODIES SAINTS

“Ain’t Them Bodies Saints”
Directed By David Lowery
Starring Casey Affleck, Rooney Mara, Ben Foster, Keith Carradine, Nate Parker, Rami Malek
Drama
105 Mins 
R

 

Less is more may be a common adage but it’s not one that applies to Ain’t Them Bodies Saint. From the simple old-timey title sequence, this is a film that aims at quiet contemplation but mostly just falls flat. While there are a lot of ideas hinted at throughout, little is ultimately brought to light and we’re left with a soft-gummed mass that asks little of and offers little to its audience.

 
Although director David Lowery is clearly trying to diverge from the modern path of filmmaking – electing to create something more singular, visually striking, and ultimately old-fashioned – his filmfalters. By framing it exclusively in an antiquated schema, Lowery has limited the reach of the film and deprived it of the emotive power he assumes it has.
We meet Ruth and Bob in the midst of a barren wheat field. Ruth is running away from the middle-of-nowhere shanty and her middle-of-nowhere life that she shares with her lover Bob. Catching up with her, Bob convinces her that their place in the world is destined to improve. They just need each other. She reluctantly but lovingly returns home with him but not before revealing that she is unintentionally pregnant with his child.
The scene quickly changes pace and we’re in the midst of a getaway with the cops hot on the tail of this duo. Holed up in their shanty, blasting off rounds at cops, Ruth puts a bullet in an officer. When the two surrender, however, it’s Bob who claims responsibility. Sentenced to 25 years in jail, Bob and Ruth part ways indefinitely but when Bob escapes, Ruth has to choose which path her and her four-year-old daughter will embark upon. Will she return to Bob and live life on the lamb or will she abandon the man who took the proverbial bullet for her? As she grapples with these questions, Bob makes his way towards her, chased by the ghost of his past in the form of three vigilantes hunting him for more than just money.

While starsCasey Affleck and Rooney Mara are certainly on point here, it’s the moustachioed Ben Foster (3:10 to Yuma) that offers up the most solid performance of the group. Playing with subtlety and subtext, Foster isn’t your typical police officer but it’s hard to put your finger on why he works as well as he does. He’s lawful good to the T but there is an uncommon complexity to his undeserved adoration of Mara’s Ruth that makes him more intriguing than the morally grey characters surrounding him.

Deep within said moral greyness, Rooney Mara (The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo) continues to give worthwhile performances and here plays with guilt and forgiveness. Burying her guilt rather than confronting it, she is an emotionally stranded character who has built castle-high walls around herself. But through her guarded facade is a woman lost. Even though we only see the initial inklings of her letting her guard down, Mara works the nuance and milks her rather slim character for all she’s worth.

Casey Affleck (Gone Baby Gone), on the other hand, is fine but I’m still not won over by him. He’s scraggly and pitiable but he lacks the oomph of a leading man, making it all the more difficult to root for such a flatly written character. As the vultures of his past circle closer, there is neither a big reveal nor any character revelation to up the stakes.

Ultimately, mystery can only go so far. When your faceless villains aren’t given any motives, they become bland sketches rather than shadowy demons. They don’t add anything to the picture because they are lifeless and instead just showcase the more hollow aspects of the film. The mystery runs itself dry and we’re left disappointed and unfulfilled.

While director of photography Bradford Young nabs some stunningly desolate imagery, winning him the Cinematography Award at Sundance, the camera work is mostly as wooden as the plot points. Perhaps I’ll never quite understand why this particular brand of dusty film, accented with brown and grey filters, always feels the need to be so restrained and inward peering but this egotistic meditation just serves to hold it back.

Although there are some intriguing themes taking place, none are aptly fleshed out. Even a committed cast can’t make magic out of nothing, especially with a script that’s this bare-bones and sulky. Posing as a film deeper than it is, Ain’t Them Bodies Saints is a rare case where the title is more provocative than the work.

C

post

Out in Theaters: THE MORTAL INSTRUMENTS: CITY OF BONES

“The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones”
Directed by Harald Zwart

Starring Lily Collins Jamie Campbell Bower, Kevin Zegers, Jemima West, Robert Sheehan, Robert Maillet, Lena Headey, Jared Harris, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Aidan Turner
Action, Adventure, Drama
130 Mins
PG-13

 

Going to see The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones is like getting a filing from a dentist whose supply of Novocaine has run dry. It’s a painful eternity of an experience that hacks and saws at our entertainment-guzzling sensibilities, defying each and every lesson culled from filmmaking 101 and spewing formula like a film-school-dropout on Ipecac. The “talent” both in front of and behind the camera is so raw-dogged and askew that it almost seeks to redefine “so bad, it’s good”. Needless to say, it misses that mark by a long shot and winds up in its own realm entirely, almost unknowingly. The result is strangely akin to watching a child play in a turd-peppered litter box, mistaking it for the sandbox he knows and loves, helpless to clue the poor thing in on its brown-handed error. 

 
You may find yourself laughing aloud at the twisted excuse for a story as it fumbles over and over but it feels like laughing at a cat chasing after a laser pointer. You feel the cat’s pain and its confusion as it bounds around searching for direction, tragically confuzzled when it comes up empty-handed time and time again, but when all is said and done, you’re thinking to yourself, “What a dumb cat.” In this regard, director Harald Zwart is much like a dumb cat.

Even by teen franchise standards, Zwart’s hyperventilated storytelling is embarrassingly crude and majorly derivative. He’s proven himself to be a more slack jawed character director than Bill Condon with less story assurance than Rupert Sanders. Anytime I’m sitting in a theater daydreaming about  Twilight, a loss has occurred on an epic level.  

At the helm of the cluttered wreckage is Lily Collins as Clary, a plain-Jane teen who discovers that the blood of Shadow Hunters run in her veins when her mom is abruptly kidnapped. Shadow Hunters are age-old crossbreeds between humans and angels, invisible to the normal human eye, sent to Earth as guardians. They are tasked with ridding the world of demons that physically manifest themselves as fiery monsters and tentacle dogs. Also, vampires, because fuck you.

Naturally, werewolves are also in the mix and they’re aligned with the good guys, maintaining a shaky and largely undefined alliance with the Shadow Hunters. But the relational web is so whitewashed and barren that it’s hard to get a read on exactly who is who and what is what and why exactly you’re supposed to care about anyone and anything. Also, a vampire bites a lead character. But don’t worry, none of that will actually matter in terms of the story nor will it ever be addressed again.

The rhyme and reason underlying any one of the scenes seems to be up to your own willingness to accept stupidity at face value. Honestly, I’d be shocked and amazed if anyone who hadn’t read the popular books upon which the movie is based could offer a reasonable plot point to plot point analysis after getting through this genuine nightmare. It is a near impossibility because nothing is ever allowed to breathe; it just charges along completely blind to the wreckage that it calls narrative.

For his part, Zwart can’t even handle the most commonplace of arcs. He chugs along letting the plot holes blow bigger and bigger. Had I been as apparently drunken as the people OKing this 2-hour-(plus!!) brain rape, it probably wouldn’t have been so bad. As it is, I’m already eager to slam it with the title of “Worst Movie of the Year.”

Although Collins (Mirror Mirror, Abduction) is a far cry from good, she does manage to escape more unscathed than her co-stars, who are wholly terrible. The broodingly gaunt Jamie Campbell Bower as Jace mistakes duckface for acting as Kevin Zegers‘s moody Alec is a simple shade of angst, fearfully meek in personifying homosexuality within a family-friendly environment. But none compare to the appallingly untalented Godfrey Gao, a minor character whose limited presence sucks the air right out of the scene. Casting folly notwithstanding, Gao serves as his own executioner. In his debut picture, he’s just acted his way out of a career.

Perhaps this unkempt company isn’t quite to blame though considering the script doesn’t seem to allow for any semblance of good acting, as most of the scripted lines are expository reports rather than genuine colloquial speech. With her debut screenwriting credit, Jessica Postigo has chalked up character motivation as flimsy as toothpicks, bending with the shift of the wind, which share the one-time-use disposable trait. Each and every action and reaction is about as thought through as the choice to sneeze or not. But still the thing sputters along, weaving a miscalculated web of romance, all of which by film’s end wind up being creepy, incestuous or homophobic.

While not shoehorning in love triangles until the skin-tight leather seams are about to burst, Zwart tries to usher in a level of self-awareness that escapes him and his performers. While trying to buddy up to the fan base and poke fun at the film, Zwart is having his cake and eating it too. But this cake is actually a grave, and he’s digging it deeper by the second. Even though it boasts an impressive amount of “laugh at us, not with us” lines, nothing is nearly as satisfying as the long awaited breath of relief when this invasive clunker has finally run its course.

Spoiler Alert: They’re siblings.

Within the genre norms of trying to razzle-dazzle preteens and generally younger audiences, the film somehow manages to miss yet again. It’s impossible to reconcile the film’s darker, near grotesque creature designs with the flowery teen-sheen of the character relations but they’re all sharing the screen in their misfitted glory. As Zwart turgidly shovels plot points and familiar character beats into a witch’s brew of genre cliches, the only spell he ends up casting is a sleeping spell. Sadly those do not exist in the real world, so parents – be sure to bring along a double dose of Ambien. 

To return to the initial analogy, Zwart’s teenaged musings can really only be compared to the unwelcome discomfort we experience sitting in a dentist’s chair, jaw braced and teeth probed. Mortal Instruments is a grin-and-bear-it slog so relentless in its awful tendencies that the result is a special kind of agitating. As if untrained interns were solely responsible for the shaggy writing and Julienne-chopped editing, the film tries to substitute genuine craft with a stale pump of out-of-date laughing gas and a slopjob of visual flair that doesn’t even hold up to post-2000 standards. In a word, it’s absolutely dreadful…the brand of active, egregious dreadful that I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy.

F