Role Models

So a formulaic comedy about two guys who are opposite personality types working a job together and forced to spend time together getting in to trouble and somehow being paired up with cartoonish children as a punishment sounds like fun to you?

Go see Role Models.

In spite of being the most predictable storyline you can ever imagine, it actually is an extremely enjoyable hour and a half.

The characters start off as caricatures and end up becoming moderately endearing and way deeper and multifaceted than one could have ever expected at the beginning of the movie.
While the plot is nothing special, the dialogue and the jokes carry the viewer through what ends up being riotously funny at points and solidly amusing throughout. The creative team (and much of the secondary acting team) behind this have roots with the classic sketch comedy show The State (if you don't know The State, you probably were not a teenager or twentysomething in the early 90's). Subtle sarcasm and overt gags mix together well throughout the movie as the humor and dialogue rescue a film that wanted to fail from the cliched beginning.

The actors are the other strong point that makes you glad you spent your 10.25 (plus soda and pretzel-bite money). Paul Rudd is always amusing. Seann William Scott is still playing Stiffler, but somehow I'm not tired of it in this role. Both of the lead child actors nail the roles so well that you really believe they are real kids and start to empathize with them as they hit the obvious rough times in the beginning and near the end of the movie.

Overall, Role Models gets a B for rescuing this film from itself.

--John Berry, Online Editor--

Miracle at St. Anna

Spike Lee is back in business. Two in a row that are solid movies. He's back.

No more good one, bad one, good one, bad one.

Inside Man was a solid bank heist movie. Miracle at St. Anna proves Lee's technical and storytelling prowess by delving into his first war drama with the same panache as his classics like Clockers, Crooklyn and Malcolm X.

For the vast majority of the film, Miracle is a compelling piece of (loosely) historically based drama that keeps the audience drawn in and offers characters that are complex and fascinating. These kind of characters are rather common in war movies, but it is usually just a couple that are interesting. Miracle has a full contingent of multi-faceted characters backed up by 99% solid performances.

The only failing of this movie is the ending. Now, I will admit that I am often picky about endings for movies, and it's rare that a movie sneaks up on me and I don't see the ending coming. But Miracle at St. Anna has no need to take the ending that it does. The final scene of the movie does not even fit the overall tone of the entire film. It feels forced and contrived.

If Spike Lee had just called it quits before the final sequence, the movie would have closed with a less-than-happy ending and would have been outside the Hollywood norm, but it would have fit the pacing and the tone of the movie.

Other than that, it apparently had some historical inaccuracies, but a: I'm not a history scholar, so I really don't know about those claims, and b: it is a work of fiction based on true events. Are there any movies that are 100% historically accurate?

The best directors in the business are the only ones able to jump from genre to genre with even success and put out consistently good movies. Spike Lee proves once again that he deserves to be in those ranks.

Miracle of St. Anna earns a B+ overall, but would have been an A if it had a better ending.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

When your big Hollywood star power is coming from Kat Dennings and Michael Cera, you probably are not setting out to make a whole lot of money at the box office.

When your talent is centering around the same duo, you probably are setting out to make a good movie with plenty of hipster credibility.

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist is setting just this stage as it opens Friday the third. Dennings and Cera are both talented young actors who should get lots of prime roles in the months and years to come because they both set the groundwork of smaller roles in which they deliver infallible performances and land bigger and better roles along the way.

This is the first time we see Cera as a romantic lead in his career and he actually starts off the movie by showing why he hasn't landed such roles. He hearkens back to his old George Michael role from Arrested Development by delivering a whimpering, mildly pathetic kid who seems afraid of life. He does that role well, but we've seen it before.

As the story progresses, Cera steps outside of his typecasting and shows his talent with a complex character who is at times awkward and funny while turning to self-assured and serious at other parts.

Dennings hits the ground running as a funny, smart, tough girl who seems to be just gliding through her quiet private school existence. Like Cera's character, Norah proves to be equally complex as she weighs following in her father's footsteps to a sure-thing job versus going to college to make a life of her own.

The romantic part of the romantic comedy shows its face early and often, but starts with Nick pining for a love lost and Norah pining for a love nonexistent. Both characters are in love with an idealized notion. Nick with a girl that his ex never really was. Norah with a guy she's never met but is certainly not the guys she has known so far.

Supported by a lovable mix of miscreants and good-guys, the lead characters gallivant around Manhattan in search of a live show by an illusive band. Nick and Norah are clearly meant for each other, if only Nick could get over his ex and realize it.

Yeah, it sounds like a bit of a cliched idea for a story line, but endearing performances from the two leads, interesting secondary characters and dialogue that plays more natural and intelligent than most teen movies makes this film a lot more watchable than most of its peers.

Most teen movies play to a dumber crowd, but Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist seems to be presenting them as I remember kids being when I was young. The characters are not mature or experienced, but are clearly intelligent and have bigger goals than just getting high, drunk, laid or all three.

While the movie overall is a little more saccharin sweet than I usually prefer, the script is a very strong first offering from Lorene Scafaria (based on a novel that I didn't read, so I'm not sure about the source material). Peter Sollett, an indie director who is treading for his first time on less serious fare, also sets his mainstream Hollywood catalogue up right with a great job out of the gate.

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist gets a B+ and would make a great date movie since it's got a fair amount of both romance and comedy.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Vicky Christina Barcelona

The latest offering from Woody Allen is a prime example of lazy film making. (And my selection to review it is lazy as well since it was a request from all of my reader, she really demanded more than requested).

Vicky Christina Barcelona takes some of the more talented actors in the business today and a solid, unique storyline but somehow manages to make the whole thing boring and a chore to watch.

The movie begins with a narrator whose voice is just mildly annoying. As it carries on, listening to the narrator becomes arduous and starts to really grate. It seems that Allen decides that instead of giving us information through developed dialogue and plot, he just has the narrator do it for him.

Dialogue is consistently the strong point of any Woody Allen film, and this one should be no exception, but the character dialogue becomes secondary to the narrator beating the audience over the head with inane details as if the viewer were unable to understand what is happening on the screen.

The plot is interesting enough to keep you there through all of this. Christina (Scarlett Johanssen) runs off and falls in love with an artist (Javier Bardem) who has a sordid history with a wild ex-wife (Penelope Cruz) who just happens to pop back in to his life again. After this cliched plot line emerges, Allen actually takes it to a less predictable place (which will not be spoilered here) and rescues the story.

The performances are exactly what should be expected from Javier Bardem, Scarlett Johanssen, Rebecca Hall and Penelope Cruz. All good actors. All delivering excellent performances. The supporting cast also pull through to round out the film with overall near perfect acting. This might be attributed to Allen's directing or to the casting director, but each actor seems perfect for the character they are playing. One of the most effective is Chris Messina as Doug, Vicky (Hall)'s fiancee who is the most dull, annoying person ever, which gives a fantastic look at Vicky's complex situation as she yearns for stability but also wonders about her best friend Christina's vivacious love life.

The story is intriguing and would have made a solid movie if the narrator had just shut up ten minutes into the movie. Clocking in at just over 90 minutes, Allen could have spent a good amount more screen time on telling his narrative without the obnoxious voiceover.

Overall Vicky Christina Barcelona gets a C, but if they had put in the effort to show off those fantastic actors and decent dialogue it would have scored higher.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Choke

Chuck Palahniuk's modern classic is brought to life on the silver screen in the Fox Searchlight indie production of Choke.

For the most part, director and screenplay writer Clark Gregg stays true to the original text. A few little strays here and there throughout the first two thirds of the film get you by in this low-budget offering. The casting is strong on the majors, but a little weak on the minors. Sam Rockwell is fantastic as the charming-but-flawed Victor Mancini who trolls sex addiction support groups for willing partners in his own addictive behaviors. Anjelica Huston is his career troublemaker mother, Ida, who is dying in a hospital. Brad Henke is surprisingly well cast as Victor's always-losing best friend Denny who is carrying his own share of sexual deviance.

Knowing it's not fair to compare a movie to the book that it is based on, it has to be said that there was a LOT of material that was glossed over in the movie that should probably been expounded upon or left out entirely because they feel like they are just kind of thrown in for fun. Denny's rock collection, Victor's Jesus comparisons, Ida's social experiments in the flashbacks to Victor's childhood and even the mundane existence at Colonial Dunsboro are all major parts of the book that felt rushed in the movie.

Gregg clearly has a reverance for the book that shows through, but he seems to assume a familiarity with these side themes in the story that a viewer who has not read the book will probably not understand. Even the choking in resaurants part of the story gets less attention than it deserves, especially since the story is called Choke.

If you have not read the book, the movie will be enjoyable. If you are able to separate the source material from the end product (like watching the new Star Wars movies without thinking of the original Holy Trilogy), the movie will be enjoyable. If you cannot separate movies from the books they were based on, you will probably be disappointed, especially in the ending. Similarly, if you watch this trying to compare it to Fight Club (also a Palahniuk novel of sheer genius), you will also be let down.

This movie has a less serious tone than either Fight Club or the writings of Palahniuk in general, but seems to hit its mark as a twisted, dark comedy that tries to showcase acting and characters more than dialogue and story. In that regard, it holds the feel of the book because the insane and insanely interesting characters are the strongest part of the novel, where the story is just kind of the background of the book.

The book version is an A+, but the Choke film really only deserves a B+ for glossing over too much of the book when the film would have been served better to leave out parts of the book entirely to give more attention to others.
--John Berry, Online Editor--

Burn After Reading

The Coens drop their latest this weekend with a star-studded display called Burn After Reading.

It's the story of infidelity and stupidity in the the D.C. intelligence community. While in the scale of genius that is the history of the Coen brothers, this movie is not on the same level as some of their usual fare, it is a fun ride and and a witty satire of the spy movie genre.

Cinematic geniuses tend to aim higher and higher with each successive offering, but following up No Country For Old Men with something better would have been next to impossible. So the Coen brothers did the smart thing and made no attempt to top it and went in an entirely different direction.

A weak movie from Joel and Ethan Coen is still better than usual Hollywood standards. Burn has moments of sheer genius that are hallmarks of the Coens. Unfortunately, this one has fewer than most of the duo's previous endeavors.

Many of the jokes fall a little flat, but that is offset by the brilliant storyline and the always stellar performances of Clooney, McDormand, Pitt, Swinton, Jenkins and the great and mighty Malkovich. There are even a couple of grand minor roles including David Rasche (yes, Sledge Hammer is still around) and J.K. Simmons (one of the most underrated actors of modern cinema).

The real strong point is the story. Unique is the key to every Coen movie so far, and this plotline is no exception. It's hard to describe the story without giving too many details away, so just know that there are interesting twists and turns all along the way that make for an enjoyable ride that doesn't fail to disappoint in the end.

Burn After Reading might be on the lower end of the Coen movie scale, but it still gets a B+ in the real world.

--John Berry, Online Editor--

Reaching into the DVD collection.

Just decided to watch something this afternoon that I have loved for a while. Partly because I am a creature of habit and watch lots of movies multiple times. Partly because I have watched some mediocre science fiction movies lately and wanted to watch a really good one again.

The director is the great Danny Boyle and the movie is his sci-fi offering to the world: Sunshine.

With the sun dying out, a crew of scientists are on their way to our source of light and heat in this part of the universe in order to jump-start it with a massive nuclear explosion.

Sounds like a typical sci-fi plot, but with Danny Boyle at the helm, it is anything but typical. He is known for experimenting with various genres and coming out with fantastic results. Sunshine fits his m.o. perfectly. A seemingly normal plot that he takes to a whole new level of filmmaking, as he did with 28 Days Later, Trainspotting, Shallow Grave and pretty much everything else he's had his hands on.

With a solid cast including Cillian Murphy and Rose Byrne, the drama is gripping the whole way through the film. The story is truly an original take on the sci-fi genre as well. Penned by Alex Garland, with whom Boyle has worked several times, it is a story that is simultaneously an homage to psychological sci-fi and a departure from it.

This modern classic gets an A (as if there was any doubt from my glowing praise).
--John Berry, online editor--