Review: A Most Wanted Man

by. Trevor Kirkendall
★★

The one thing I couldn’t help but think about the entire time I watched “A Most Wanted Man” was that this would be one of the last times we’d see Philip Seymour Hoffman. I try not to play favorites when it comes to movies and my reviews, but it’s very difficult for me to do that when it involves Hoffman. I always thought he was one of the most talented actors working in Hollywood. Had he not succumbed to his addictions, perhaps we could have had the “greatest of all time” conversation later in his life. At minimum, we could have had the “Mount Rushmore of Acting” conversation with Hoffman’s name included. Alas, “A Most Wanted Man” will be one of the last times we go to the movies to see something new from Hoffman.

In “A Most Wanted Man” Hoffman plays Günther Bachmann, a spy operating out of Hamburg, Germany. Title cards inform us that Germans are on top of intelligence in the years following 9/11 in hopes that the errors made prior to the attacks don’t happen again. Bachmann and his group pick up on some intel that a Chechen Muslim named Issa (Grigoriy Dobrygin) has entered Germany and they want to know why.

Issa seeks the help of a lawyer named Annabel Richter (Rachel McAdams) who is sympathetic to foreigners looking to leave their home countries (terrorist or not). Issa is trying to get some money out of an account his father has at a bank run by Tommy Brue (Willem Dafoe). Bachmann and his team watch from afar trying to put the pieces together and figure out exactly what Issa has come to Germany to do. Of course, whenever terrorists are involved, the Americans want to have stand over everyone’s shoulders, thus Bachmann has to play nice with a diplomat, Martha Sullivan (Robin Wright), from the American Embassy in Berlin.

“A Most Wanted Man” shares many of the same characteristics with other films in the spy thriller genre. It’s very quiet, the sets are dimly lit, and the script is full of much more plot instead of story. These parts all can work well together as evident in other great spy films such as “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy,” based on a novel by John le Carré as is “A Most Wanted Man.” Unfortunately what we have here is a film that’s a whole lot of spy and not enough thriller.

Most spy movies are very patiently paced to give the audience a chance to unlock the enigma at the same speed as our protagonists. Sometimes, they may seem like they’re running long, but most of the time the film’s climax makes the pace worthwhile. With “A Most Wanted Man,” I feel that the amount of content building in the plot is very light by comparison to other spy films. The screenplay, by Andrew Bovell, gets bogged down by consistently repeating many of the same plot points we’ve already heard. This is a classic case where the film could have easily been trimmed by around 20 minutes or so and would have been much more effective.

It appears, they leave this excess filler in the film to allow for character development; unfortunately, the focus is on the wrong people. I wanted to know more about Bachmann and his backstory. What little comes up is usually in conversations between he and Sullivan, yet it’s never explored to any depth. Instead, the focus is directed toward Annabel and Issa, which ends up doing little in terms of the story.

Director Anton Corbijn has already shown his proficiency within the spy thriller genre with the excellent 2010 film “The American.” But, with “A Most Wanted Man,” Corbijn seems to have lost sight about what works and what doesn’t when it comes to this very specific genre. Hoffman’s immaculate ability to lose himself in a character is enough to salvage an error filled screenplay, but a director still needs to do his part. In a film that’s all-plot-and-little-story, Corbijn needs to shift his focus off the characters and into the plot. This is something he’s done before with “The American” but fails to achieve here.

That being said, Hoffman is once again outstanding in his performance. That is no surprise. What is new is that this is it for him (other than the next two films in “The Hunger Games” series). Yet while outstanding, this is far from his best work. 

On another positive note, the film is pieced together with razor sharp proficiency thanks to industry veteran Claire Simpson who has already one won Oscar (“Platoon”) and cut another film from a le Carré novel (“The Constant Gardner”).

“A Most Wanted Man” is where we say goodbye to one of the legends of acting. It’s just too bad it’s not a better film. Fans of spy thrillers should enjoy it though, even if the pace is much more patient than a typical film in the genre. Other than Hoffman, I’m not sure why there would be much of a reason to go out of your way to see this one.

Review: Lucy

by. Joe Moss
★★★

An existentialist trip with a twist, Luc Besson's "Lucy" easily reminds me why I love his movies. This movie may not be for everyone--like many Besson films--but if you are able to sit through 90 minutes of a scientific/theological discourse on humanity, evolution, the big-bang, the time-space continuum, and Einstein's Theory of Relativity all rolled into one, then you are in the right place. And, when you leave...MIND BLOWN!!

Lucy (Scarlett Johansson) finds herself involved with the wrong guy at the wrong time. He convinces her to take a "briefcase full of papers" to Mr. Jang (Min-Suk Choi) in a posh hotel in an unknown location in South Korea. An easy $500 turns into a nightmare afternoon of kidnap, implantation, and drug overdosing. Lucy is forced to be a mule for a new drug that will blow the minds of kids in Europe. But things get REALLY interesting when the drug implanted in her abdomen begin to leak into her bloodstream.

Simultaneously, as Lucy is getting the high of her life, at a science symposium concerning brain research and theory, Professor Norman (Morgan Freeman) is waxing philosophical on the advances and intrigue of the human brain. He is providing a well balanced theoretical discussion on what the human brain has done evolutionarily, while indicating the shortcomings of our existence compared to other species. The room is abuzz with resounding questions and philosophy fathoming how humanity would handle use of more than 10-15% of their cerebral cortex. Professor Norman feels that the key to truly understanding humanity and the

intricate workings of the mind lie in our ability to surpass 20% --the mark set by dolphins' cerebral usage.

The film is a metaphor for the progression though human life, and what we are supposed to do WITH said life. Why are we here? What is our niche on the planet...the universe....time? We see an innocent babe (Lucy....a beautiful homage to the first complete human-like Australopithicus skeleton uncovered in Ethiopia's Afar Triangle by Donald Johanson and Tom Gray) who is thrust into the evil world and has to learn to adapt and survive. She has been provided with the ultimate knowledge and has unlocked the mysteries of universe with the consumption of the apple (the drug) and is ostensibly thrust from the Garden of Eden to face the horrors of what life has become. Does she wallow in self pity, or does she right the wrongs committed and try and fix what humanity has become. No spoilers, but I will say that by using 100% of the cerebral cortex, Lucy transcends life as we know it and truly BECOMES...omnipotent (maybe not the right word...maybe more universally introspective) in her struggle against the devil (Mr. Jang).

This film never lost my interest. While the plot development is simple, and the characters are few, Luc Besson does an amazing job posing questions that make the audience interact with the film as it plays. There are plenty of the typical humorous moments mixed into to allow the comic relief, but immediately following he makes you THINK. I found myself questioning many things that I felt I have known for years to be true. While I understand that much of what he presents is pure conjecture and maybe even utter BS, it was a fun journey. He is able to provide hidden symbolism throughout the film that now...only hours after I have seen the film...I am beginning to understand. I have had to allow this film to digest in my mind before writing this review. There was not quick write here.

Luc Besson gathered his team of old for this project. He had Thierry Arbogast as the cinematographer (beautiful) and Eric Serra created the hauntingly melodic soundtrack. This trio made this feel like a Luc Besson film of old--innovative plot, great sound and great cinematography. AND the film was produced by Marc Shmuger who was responsible for one of mine and Trevor's top film of last year, The Spectacular Now.

As much as I loved this film, I can see that many may be put off by the subject matter. And I did not give it 4 stars simply because some of the action sequences did feel very Matrix-like in their progression and implementation (Thanks Wachowskis for affording me that adjective). But I hope that many of you will see this film and be reminded of The Fifth Element meets The Big Blue as was I.

Review: Sex Tape

by Trevor Kirkendall

★

“Sex Tape.” You can probably already gather what this film will entail just based on the name. Perhaps I have a minor spoiler or two toward the end of this review. But let’s be honest: you already know how this film begins and ends and everything else in between just from watching the trailer. But my star rating says it all: “Sex Tape” is just bad.

The movie stars Cameron Diaz and Jason Segel as Annie and Jay, a couple of married sex addicts who aren’t too pleased with the way their life has gone since they aren’t able to engage in sexual congress as much as they would like. Their married lives have gotten in the way of their ability to fornicate whenever the mood strikes them. They both have jobs. Annie writes for a mommy-centric blog that’s about to be bought out by some kind of family company. It’s never fully explained what the company does. All we know is Rob Lowe runs the company. Jay works for a radio station I suppose (again, it’s never really fully explained). He gets a ton of free iPads and gives all his old ones out to friends, family, and the mailman with musical playlists he’s super proud about.

Annie bemoans on her blog about losing the spark of sex and wonders how to get it back. Well, it’s not a spark that’s been lost. It’s called being married with children and being busy. So right off the bat, they lost me. Are we to understand that this good-looking couple with careers and kids aren’t happy because they can’t find the time to fit in a little intercourse? The marriage doesn’t appear to be falling apart, they just want to have some fun like the used to before kids came along. Right up front, act one fails to convincingly draw the audience into their personal issues.

After Annie thinks she sold her blog to Rob Lowe’s company, she and Jay decide to celebrate. They drop the kids off with Annie’s mom (Nancy Lenehan) and get ready for a night of sexual adventures. Unfortunately, they’re out of practice so things don’t really go too well for them. They start drinking and decide they should tape themselves with the iPad. After three drunken hours of wild fun, Annie asks Jay to erase the video from the iPad. Jay doesn’t, and the video ends up getting synched up with all the other iPads he handed out to friends, family, and the mailman. A text from an unknown number congratulating them on the video has them very concerned about who else has the video. They set out on a nightlong adventure to retrieve the iPad’s from their friends before more people see it. They enlist the help of their friends Robby and Tess (Rob Corddry and Ellie Kemper) to help them out, even though they really enjoyed the video.

A premise this simple and asinine makes for a very predictable film. I could tell you how it turns out, but you already know. And how is this film not funnier? You would think a movie starring Jason Segel about a missing sex tape filled with sex jokes would be funny. It’s not. The screenplay from Kate Angelo, Segel, and Nicholas Stoller is filled with every cliché in the screenwriting book (or perhaps, the how-not-to-write-a-screenplay book).

This seems to be a bit of a one-off for director Jake Kasdan. His work on previous films suck as “Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story” and “Bad Teacher” has not been exceptional, but merely acceptable. He completely misfires with “Sex Tape.” There’s an overall theme that his film tries to portray, but it’s never really tied together with the rest of the plotline. There’s that ‘ah-ha’ moment up toward the end with some nice dialogue that talks about what we all learned, but it doesn’t tie in with the set up we were given at the beginning.

The whole idea is that this couple needs to complete their adventure before being sexually attracted to one another again. But I never bought that idea. They are in love. They are attracted to each other. They just get wrapped up in this little thing known as life. Things that were once important to you aren’t as important as you grow older. So the film should be about growing up. Instead it’s about trying to find a certain spark again, which I don’t believe these characters ever lost.

Maybe you’re sitting there thinking I’m being too critical about a movie called “Sex Tape,” but I don’t think I’m out of line. Too often we find movies today that aren’t well developed. They’re rushed through story departments just because they have a high concept and an A-list star attached. And when you rush a script through like that, you end up missing some of the basic pillars of story structure. And apparently you lose out on good jokes too. How is this movie not funnier? Better jokes would have made this film at least a little tolerable. But at only 94 minutes in length, the pain and misery doesn’t last long.

Review: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

by Trevor Kirkendall

★★★★

“Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” takes place about 10 years after the events of the first film. You’ll remember from the first film that James Franco’s lab assistant inhaled some of the drug they were using on the apes – the drug that ultimately gave the apes super-intelligence – and started coughing up blood. This is the beginning of the end for the human race. When the film opens, we learn that this virus has killed off a large chunk of the human population. The small pockets of survivors are scattered about and most blame the outbreak on apes, even naming the sickness after them.

Caesar (Andy Serkis) lives with his family and all the rest of the apes in the redwood forest north of San Francisco. They’ve created a peaceful habitat for themselves and don’t miss any human interaction. But one day, they run into a group of humans lead by Malcolm (Jason Clarke). Malcolm – along with his lady friend Ellie (Kerri Russell) and son Alexander (Kodi Smit-McPhee) – is looking to reroute the power from a dam in the forest to get the lights back on in San Francisco. They’re part of small group of survivors lead by Dreyfus (Gary Oldman) who just want to reconnect with the outside world and see how many other survivors there are.

Most of the apes, especially Caesar’s right hand Koba (Toby Kebbell), don’t trust the humans. Koba believes that the humans will try to attack them now that they know they’re living in the woods. Based on the scaring covering most of Koba’s body, he has a reason not to trust them. But Caesar has seen the good side of the humans and believes that if they get their dam working, they’ll leave the apes in peace.

“Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” is everything you’d want in a summer movie mixed with everything you’d want in the prestige award-contending films that open at year’s end. Director Matt Reeves (“Cloverfied”) has taken an exceptionally written screenplay (by Mark Bomback and Rick Jaffa & Amanda Silver) and turned it into one of the year's finest films by focusing on what makes movies great: story and characters.

This easily could have been as flat and two dimensional as just about every other summer film we typically come across. But a focus on character and story turns what would have been a mildly entertaining popcorn flick into something much greater. I’m reminded of the films many people consider to be the greatest sequels ever made (“Aliens,” “The Empire Strikes Back,” “The Dark Knight”). A new place will need to be made for “Dawn.”

The script is about as polished as anything you’ll see this year. And I’m not just talking about the summer movies either. The script is void of contrived plot devices, clichéd moments and stale character developments. The setting is a post-apocalyptic world, which we’ve seen numerous times before, but seems so original here. Reeves has been given so much to work with that he’s able to focus on all the different human/ape emotions and empathy with such ease. One of the best parts is the duality of human and ape built into the story. Each camp has its own protagonist and antagonist. And each camp is so similar in terms of empathy and rooting interest that it makes the outcome of the film difficult to anticipate.

How anyone can say what Andy Serkis does isn’t acting isn’t paying close enough attention. He is one of the most talented performers in film and very few probably know what he looks like in real life. From his work in the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy to “King Kong,” the man is a master of conveying emotions in every facet of his performance. Reprising his role as Caesar might be the best we’ve ever seen him. He channels Brando’s Don Corleone with shades of Eastwood’s Man With No Name in his performance. Every emotion in Caesar’s face – and especially in his eyes – is all Serkis. A computer animator can only bring so much emotion to the character being created. The genuine emotion in someone’s eyes cannot be artificially duplicated. That’s what Serkis does so well. He breathes life into his characters by completely embodying them. The level of detail to the apes in the post-production animation is virtually flawless that you forget you’re watching something completely fabricated. Combine that with the masterful motion capture performance by Serkis and you forget what you’re watching isn’t real.

It'll be difficult for the major studios to produce a better film than “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” this year. Reeves has delivered an unforgettable adventure thanks to stunning visual effects and a solid screenplay. Combine it with some of the best acting from an ensemble we’ve seen this year, “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” transcends the genre to become a masterwork of what all sequels should aspire to be in Hollywood.

Review: Tammy

by Trevor Kirkendall

★★

There's no denying that Melissa McCarthy's star power is enormously high at the point in her career. With her breakout role in "Bridesmaids" followed by commercially successful films such as "Identify Thief" and "The Heat," there's no question that audiences love seeing her even though she's never really developed her characters. "Tammy" marks her big screen writing debut, a screenplay she wrote with her husband - and the film's director - Ben Falcone. The problem here is that "Tammy" shows Melissa McCarthy doing what Melissa McCarthy has done before. She has yet to step out of her comfort zone and try a different character.

McCarthy stars as the title character Tammy. I’m not sure if her character is supposed to be stupid or if that’s just the way McCarthy is playing it. Either way, she doesn’t come across as very bright. She loses her job at a fast food restaurant and then learns that her husband Greg (Nat Faxon) has been carrying on with the neighbor Missi (Toni Collette). Tammy leaves and goes to her mom Deb’s (Allison Janney) home. There, she announces she getting out of town and needs to borrow her grandma’s car to do so.

Tammy’s grandmother is Pearl (Susan Sarandon), a profane woman with a very big drinking problem. Tammy isn’t thrilled about this, but Pearl has money so she goes along with it. They decide to go to Niagara Falls.  They must not know their geography too well because they end up in Louisville after starting out somewhere in Illinois. They end up at a bar where they meet Earl (Gary Cole), an old alcoholic farmer who falls all over Pearl, and his son Bobby (Mark Duplass) who Tammy likes. A lot of friction between Pearl and Tammy continues to build, mostly thanks to how she treats Tammy after she’s been drinking. There’s a lot of bad history between these two that is boiling beneath the surface and needs to be resolved.

The problem with “Tammy” is it never really tells you much about that history. A few think come to light, but are quickly cast aside in favor of more McCarthy slapstick humor. I never really understood whom I was supposed to be rooting for. Pearl isn’t all that unlikable until the plot demands her to be. She and Tammy seem to get along fine; they’re just an odd couple. Nothing ever really feels at risk. A definitive conflict is never fully developed.

The only reason for this film’s existence is for McCarthy to get onto movie theater screens and do her thing for the second summer in a row. I’m not saying she’s not funny, nor am I saying the movie isn’t either. The film itself lacks a compelling and fully developed story. McCarthy fans will find connection because she is a funny actress. But the best moments in this film don’t come from her at all. The scenes featuring Kathy Bates (with Sandra Oh playing her girlfriend) are the best in the movie.

Other good moments come between McCarthy and Mark Duplass. Duplass’s Bobby is probably the most developed of all the characters in this film. That doesn’t really surprise me since Duplass is already an accomplished actor/writer/director in his own right. I liked the interaction between him and McCarthy. This provides some rooting interest for Tammy. These are also the scenes where McCarthy leaves her shtick behind and shows a small amount of the acting range she’s capable of achieving.

But honestly, who is going to see “Tammy” looking for McCarthy’s dramatic acting ability? It’s one funny McCarthy moment after the next. The shaky plotline I cannot forgive though. “Bridesmaids” and “The Heat” worked well for her because the story was solid and the film was well written. I think they might also work because McCarthy was the supporting role in those films. We’ll see if audience flock to see “Tammy” like they did with her other films. It might be people don’t think of McCarthy as a leading role. Time will tell on that hypothesis.

For now, “Tammy” is a film for fans of Melissa McCarthy’s unique brand of comedy. Those looking for the next big R-rated summer comedy should probably look elsewhere. Nothing here but the same-old-same-old from a funny actress.