In the Red: We're off on the Road to...

In this new feature I'll be writing short (well, relatively short) capsule reviews of what I've been wtaching on netflix. Todays films have two things in the common. One, they're both 2009 releases and the other is that they're both road trip films. From the charming adventures of Bing and Bob to the hopeless ambling of Fonda and Hopper, the road trip has long been a staple of the American cinema. Of these two new films only one really offers some new wrinkles into the genre while the other feels as spent and old as the road it travels. Ugh, its hackiness has worn off on me. So without further ado my look at Harold Ramis' Year One and Sam Mendes' Away We Go.
For a number of years Judd Apatow has ruled the comedy roost with nearly unmatched success. While even Apatow is subject to the periodic box office bomb, the films are at least compelling and funny (I'm thinking Funny People and Walk Hard in particular), but Year One is Apatow's first real out and out dud. The fim, which follows the exploits of slacker hunter/gathers Michael Cera and Jack Black is disjointed and poorly conceived. Sequences come and go with no rhyme and reason which COULD be excused if any of them were even remotely funny or creative. They aren't. Black and Cera's shtick works well against each other but at this point it has such a feel of been there done that. The rest of the cast barely overcomes the feeling of "earning a paycheck", even David Cross. Only Oliver Platt hits the glorious excess needed in a broad farce like this as a high priest for whom the phrase hedonist does not begin to describe. Even the unrated Blu-ray I watched didn't really yield any content that shocked or disturbed me. Ramis is just placing the camera and shooting giving none of the punch or keen eye for great comic moments thats shown up in earlier films. If I never think of this film again I won't be surprised. Save yourself the money and watch History of the World Part I.
The other film I saw was Sam Mendes Away We Go and it may be my favorite Mendes film. Its certainly his breeziest. I think this can be in part attributed to the airy, though not entirely weightless, script by real life couple Dave Eggers and Vendela Vida. The film follows a young couple played by Maya Rudolph (who is something of a revelation in the film with a strong anchoring performance) and John Krasinski. Rudolph's character is pregnant and the film is in a place where they discover there's no reason for them to stay put (as his parents, the reason they moved, are going to be absent for their birth). It's a film that very adroitly captures the feeling of wanderlust and uncertainty that a couple that has hit a certain level of socio-economic comfort can face. In the couples odyssesy they come across a variety of family unit types in the form of relatives, friends and colleagues. The script reveals each family to be more than the broad types a lesser film would try to pigeon-hole them into being. Each sequence provides a good pair for our young, fun couple to play off of and Eggers and Vendela's script deserves kudos for sketching so many rich characters in such a short amount of time. For a quirky, but not too quirky, character piece about the challenges of finding your place in the world its well worth the rental.

What do YOU mean "You People"?

Tropic Thunder presents a problem as thorny and twisty as the Vietnamese jungles it finds it's characters lost in. The problem being, whether one should settle on the film as an exceptional spoof and sublime mainstream comedy, or should one expect and demand more and wish that the filmmakers had pushed to make an out-and-out satire? Should we as viewers expect that a very good film push itself to be great? That a great film should be timeless? Perhaps one should, if the potential is there. If nothing else Tropic Thunder is bursting with potential and it gets about 85% of the way there. The film makes good use of its R rating to bombard the viewer with strings of creative obscenity and gloriously over the top gore all in the service of getting laughs. Its most certainly the best comedy on film that Ben Stiller has ever been responsible for. The plotting too is very solid, scripters include the aforementioned Stiller working with another writer/actor Justin Therouex (State, David Lynch and Charlie's Angels fans [any takers for all three?] will likely all recognize the name) along with Etan Cohen (not to be confused with either Ethan Coen or my friends Etan Greenbaum or Amir Cohen). They do a respectable job in defining and juggling a good dozen or so characters and give them all compelling arcs. The same can be said about the cleverly informed tone as set by the choices in soundtrack (Buffalo Springfield, Edwinn Starr etc) and the lush cinematography of Thin Red Line DP John Toll. I just wish the film had a little more on its mind then simply that the Hollywood mainstream is a money hungry machine and that most actors' processes and motivations are pretty ridiculous. I struggle here because these two ideas are in and of themselves ripe for being mined for comedy gold. Stiller and co succeed at this but given the resources at hand Stiller could have crafted something really sinister and biting as opposed to the cheery crowd-pleaser that the film turns into by act three.
The story resolves around a film shoot that goes very wrong. Fading action star Tugg Speedman (think early 90's Bruce Willis or Stallone or whoever) needs a hit and is hoping that the Vietnam drama "Tropic Thunder" is his ticket back to the big leagues. He's also threatened by the presence of superior method actor and nine time academy award winner, Australian bad-boy Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr running through the winners circle with a giant smile on his face). Lazarus is clearly inspired by the likes of Russel Crowe and Colin Farrel (with maybe a dash of Daniel Day-Lewis thrown in for good measure). The very white Lazarus courts controversy and the enmity of some of his co-stars by playing the squad's African American sergeant after receiving a radical skin darkening procedure. Any other actor coupled with any other script would torpedo the film wih this concept but given the way the material is presented coupled with the masterful deprecating performance of Downey (who absolutely steals the picture, as if there was any doubt) it works perfectly.
Keeping Lazarus in line and easing the tension for the audience in this scenario is rapper turned actor Alpa Chino (get it?), played by Brandon Jackson. Chino is part of a duo of younger characters in the squad who are there as the voice of reason, except when he's trying to hawk his various merchandise (though Chino has his own predictable albeit funny secret he's dealing with). The other young rational squad member is Kevin Sandusky as played by Apatow regular Jay Baruchel. Baruchel plays the straight man with aplomb and keeps things level before they spin out of control. He's the heart of the film and is really the glue of the unit and gets the actors on point. Lastly there is the franchise comic actor Jeff Portnoy, a drug-addled spoiled brat who having attained fame through a series of fart comedies where he played all the characters in heavy prosthetics (sound familiar?), is now desperate for legitimacy (and jonesing for heroin). Portnoy is played by Jack Black who's role in the film is much smaller than the advertising would have you believe. He certainly gets his moments but the film is much more about the other four men.
Responsible for wrangling this bunch is inexperienced Brit director Damian Cockburn (Steve Coogan) who, after a scene goes terribly, expensively wrong (in part due to increasingly likable Danny McBride) and under studio pressure (I won't spoil the surprise if you don't already know who plays the Weinstein-esque boss, Les Grossman) follows up on the suggestion of the film's technical adviser (Nick Nolte, who has finally realized that it's hilarious that he's Nick Nolte) to end the actors out into the real jungle and shoot the film guerilla style. The actors will bond, learn to toughen up and not depend on their agents and hangers-ons and their various vices and the movie will get the gritty, realistic feel it needs. It sounds too good to be true, which is why things go wrong fast when after getting dropped off in the jungle the actors are discovered by a gang of blood-thirsty drug manufacturers who think they're D.E.A. agents. With that, we're off to the races.
It's a testament to the screenwriters at how quickly all this information and character gets across as well as how fast we get to the meat of the story, the actors in the midst of actual danger in the real jungle. Once in the jungle the laughs flow endlessly as the clueless bunch slowly but surely becomes aware that they are in very real danger. The conflict that emerges between Speedman and Lazarus is great. Stiller's character, desperate for respect and legitimacy after a disastrous foray into award-bait films playing a retarded farm hand does a good job with his own material, though the midn wonders if Stiller took a crack at himself or let someone (like, say, Matthew McConaughey an already failed action lead) play the part. It's an ultimately fruitless exercise to wonder what could have been, it's just that Stiller does such a fine job conveying the tone and desires of modern Hollywood that it's a shame he doesn't go further. At the end of the day though Tropic Thunder succeeds, gloriously so, as a very, very funny movie.

There is no charge for awesome

This is shaping up to be a very strange summer. So far the only movie that has met my expectations was Iron Man. The stuff I was hoping to like (Indiana Jones-more on this later today)has disappointed and the stuff I wrote off (Speed Racer) has been a lot of fun. Well chock another write-off into the liked it a lot category with my viewing of Kung-Fu Panda.

I'm unbelievably pleased with this film from Dreamworks Animation, which is endlessly visually inventive, full of original and exciting action sequences and some very solid celebrity vocal work. For the most part Dreamworks has had a nasty run of mediocre to bad films where the pastiche of pop culture references plus hot celebrity turns into a mish-mash that makes a moderately decent baby sitter to anyone under the age of eight but hardly qualifies as genuine entertainment for anyone else watching it. I'm enormously pleased to report that the scatology and pop-culture reference returns are nowhere to be found in this film. The plot itself is the standard believe in yourself and your dreams and don't quit stock parable that populates dozens of children's films, however Kung-Fu Panda separates itself with a distinct voice and visual presentation from its first frames.
Oh and what frames they are. The film opens with an elaborate dream sequence where the young panda, Po (Jack Black) dreams of himself as the ultimate martial arts master, rendered in a stylized two-dimensional animation. The sequence is narrated by Black and immediately establishes his character as a sort of goofy but earnest and enthusiastic fan-boy. When the bunnies he save ask how they can repay him he responds in an attempted burst laconic cool that "There is no charge for awesomeness...or attractiveness." It was about here that the movie had me. Po is quickly woken from his dream though to face the reality of him being the tubby, clumsy son of a goose noodle vendor (James Hung). But Po is soon thrust into the spotlight of in front of his idols the Furious Five, under the tutelage of Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman as some sort of squirrel/lemur thing), one of whom is about to be named the Green Dragon Warrior, the hero of the valley these characters inhabit. When Po is picked, seemingly by accident, by the sage turtle Master Oogway (a canny, all to brief performance from Randall Duk Kim) everyone is shocked. The Five (made up of a variety of animals who fight in the style of their animal) resent and reject Po and Shifu is worried sick as Po is meant to defend the valley from the recently escaped villain Tai-Lung (Ian McShane), Shifu's previous and deadliest pupil. Will Shifu find a way to train the seemingly hopeless and blundering Po and will Po learn that he has the confidence and skill to be the new dragon warrior?
Obviously. While the story is never in doubt, it's execution zips along in scene after scene of animated splendor and rousing action taken in equal parts from the Shaw Brothers Kung-Fu films and the wushu ballet of films like Crouching Tiger and Come Drink With Me. Scenes like the escape of Tai-Lung are filled with gorgeous moments such as when the sky goes red with arrows and the evil snow leopard must leap to the underbelly of a platform or when Shifu learns to motivate his student and the subsequent chopstick battle that ensues. Even small moments like the reveal and departure of Master Oogway the animators find innovative ways to present what in a lesser film seem very pat and predictable. Does the film have the weight, heft or depth of a Pixar film? No. The Furious Five, while impressively animated and given lots of build-up aren't particularly well-established as characters despite the talented ensemble on hand to voice them. However, given the film's appropriate run-time the audience is better served with Master Shifu and Po, both characters written charmingly enough to give Hoffman and Black enough motivation to prevent them from falling into each actors typical routine. Kung-Fu Panda is a film of simple visual pleasures and a surprisingly fun way to pass the time until we're graced by the inevitable genius of Wall-E.

Don't Mess With the Link

Lists: The AC has a list of the ten best (or worst depending on your mileage) James Bond double entendres.
In honor of the surprisingly well-reviewed Kung Fu Panda (guess I'll be checking it out after all) Cinematical has a list of the least annoying Jack Black performances (you missed King Kong and Saving Silverman guys, but I am glad you remembered Jesus' Son).

Humorous: Collegehumor has a fun piece on what taking a class with Tim and Lex Murphy from the original Jurassic Park might be like today.
Steve Carell is very down for an Anchorman sequel. If it's set in the characters' future (which is to say the present) I'll be too.

Analysis & Appreciation: The AV Club did a nice sort of euology to the King Kong that was lost in the Universal Studios fire this last week. There's a video of the Kong encounter at the end. Reminds me I should go back to Universal one of these days.
The County Fair has an intriguing piece about the types of deaths in Disney animated films.

And finally here is something I think all my old New York theatre fan friends will enjoy. If this video did anything it reminded me that A) Nathan Lane doesn't always have to be over the top to be funny and B) It's been way too long since I've seen a show on Broadway, hmm maybe if I were to come visit in say...December?

Corporations and gentrification killed the video star

Be Kind Rewind is a perfect surprise, but what kind of surprise will depend largely on the expectation of it's audience. I don't normally recommend movies with qualifiers, but a decidedly inventive visual stylist like Michel Gondry practically demands some reservations about his films to interested viewers. For one, I think having a high tolerance for Jack Black will help enormously. I've always enjoyed the man but I can understand why some find him unbearable. Second, I would suggest you think of this as a fairy-tale sort of story. With that comes a need to enter the theater without your cynicism.
The story is silly but simple. When an accident at the Passaic, New Jersey power plant causes Jerry (Black) to become magnetized he accidentally erases all the VHS tapes (its what they used before DVDs kids) at his friend Mike's video store, the two are in a serious bind. When a local woman played by Mia Farrow drops by to rent Ghostbusters the two tell her it's out and then set about to film their own slap-dash version of the film. The film doesn't endeavour to be so dumb that Farrow or her nephew and his urban friends are fooled into thinking they're watching the REAL Ghostbusters but it does stretch credibility by having them insist on making more of these cheap, amusingly inventive films. As the two set about making more of these "sweded" films (among the ones we see are Rush Hour 2, Driving Miss Daisy, 2001, The Lion King and many others) forces begin to conspire against the creatively freeing enterprise. The store and neighborhood are in danger by encroaching gentrification and chain stores, plus the building itself is out of code. With owner Danny Glover (playing the grown-up in this sandbox) out of town pursuing alternate options, Jerry and Mke start getting the entire community involved in their films. Among the merry band of eccentrics is the adorable, charming and talented enough to bring the same energy as Def and Black, Melonie Diaz. Aside from the phenomenon of sweding, which should be taking youtube by storm any day now, it is Diaz that is the sensational discovery of the film.

Alas, things soon come to a head when word gets out to the studios that Jerry and Mike are infringing on their copyright shortly before the bulldozers come to destroy the condemned building. In a last ditch effort both the protagonists and the film come together to create something that doesn't fall under copyright law, a biography about local jazz legend Fats Waller in order to save the store. I wouldn't dream of spoiling the twists and turns of the making of this film because if I've intrigued you at this point it would be criminal to ruin it.
There are two worlds at war within the film. The first is the more mainstream "let's put on a show to save the local business/ranch etc." comedy and the second is the more artsy meditation on how art and pop-culture are consumed and subsequently become "owned" by the public consciousness. The audiences for both these films don't necessarily dovetail into each other. The indie-hipster crowd may find it too broad and Joe Sixpack may find it too weird. However, those that Gondry manages to hook with his premise will likely be enchanted. Gondry has a lot to say and he tries to say it all at once, sometimes garbling his message. He wants to look at community dynamics, who owns a movie, what constitutes "truth" and the joy found in making art. Gondry eventually become clear, surprisingly through the seemingly pointless sub-plot about Fats Waller, the end-result has an achingly surreal beauty.

Yes Margot, I was just talking about you

Imagine Bette Davis in All About Eve, the devastating cutting wit, the constant need to be the center of attention in every situation. Got it? Now drain Bette of her regal bearing, her empathy, her self-confidence and up the venom quotient 100%. You've got Nicole Kidman's Margot in Margot at the Wedding.

Noah Baumabch's (The Squid and the Whale, Kicking and Screaming) latest feature is his most aggressively edited to date. Chugging along at a brisk hour and a half run time, scenes cut from one to the next barely giving the audience recover from one blistering emotional assault to the next. Its a nice instance of style serving content as the movie feels like a Margot insult; quick but packing enormous bite. The story features Margot, a successful short story writer visiting her estranged sister (Jennifer Jason Leigh-solid as always) on the eve of her engagement to a good natured but immature loser (Jack Black unusually subdued). "This is the kind of guy we rejected in high school" says Margot of Black. Margot visits with all sorts of baggage, not the least f which being her son (Zane Paris) who at her best she barely respects all the while keeping him at arms length. Margot's not much of a mother. Margot is in fact not much of a good anything; wife, sister, neighbour, adulteress, friend, its all a mess. Incredibly self-possessed and incapable of decent social behavior for anything more than a second or two. Margot's mantra seems to be "Were you just talking about me?" She's impossible to like.

Which is of course why I love her. The film may not work for people unfamiliar with Baumbach's typically acidic tone and less than huggable characters. But if one is willing to get their hands dirty there's lots of laughs to be found in Margot. The movie has two impeccable strengths going for it. First is Baumabch's script, which though talky, never falls into the trap of having characters say exactly what they mean. Meaning has to be inferred more by action and what goes unsaid and Margot has plenty of compelling bits at both ends of the spectrum. The film's other asset is Kidman who lords over the proceedings with inescapable presence. Its her best work in years and in playing such a flawed, human character she sheds the calculating, unapproachable, ice-queen veneer she's been slowly creating for herself (something The Golden Compass will not help I'm afraid). While all the performances yield solid, naturalistic results (Black hardly ever dips into his comedic bag of tricks and its quite refreshing), Kidman is absolutely the main attraction. Probably my favorite female performance all year. Or at least that's what I would've said until last night.