Beasts of the Southern Wild (2012) Review

-->

Beasts of the Southern Wild

Occasionally, a nearby theater will have an opening for a week or two and decide to show an indie festival favorite that had been gaining buzz for the past few months. Last semester, after feverishly searching for a couple weeks, I was able to find a nearby showing of the highly acclaimed action film “The Raid,” and it didn’t disappoint. Now, as Oscar season looms on the horizon, this will become more common, and the past week offered showings of the Cannes Film Festival favorite “Beasts of the Southern Wild.”

There isn’t much of a conventional plot running through the film; it’s mostly meandering around (though not necessarily in a detrimental way) as the camera follows Hushpuppy and her father as they live in The Bathtub. The Bathtub is an island off the coast of Louisiana where a community of people living on the fringes of society has taken up residence. It’s not a glamorous place to live, but the people have a bond together and are proud to call the place their home. So when a hurricane floods the area and the government comes in to remove them, they refuse help because they have grown so accustomed to taking care of themselves.

There are certainly parallels to Katrina at play here, but “Beasts” doesn’t want to cater to current event emotional manipulation and instead remains steadfast and focused on the tough relationship between father and daughter. It’s certainly an odd relationship, partly fueled by the loss of Hushpuppy’s mother, and the heart of the film is about watching these two find mutual ground together and grow closer, without resorting to a trite, clichéd handling of the material. As non-actors plucked out of obscurity to create a more palpable air of reality, Quvenzhane Wallis and Dwight Henry give performances as natural and nuanced as the best actors working today in the industry.

Wallis is the reason the film has been gaining significant traction since the festival showings, and it’s easy to see why. For a girl who was only five-years-old during filming and even contributed to the writing of her character, she’s a pint-sized wonder that powers through the film with incredible conviction and will. Hushpuppy is just as capable of taking care of herself as the adults surrounding her; and just like most other children her age, she has a certain degree of imagination too.

While it isn’t a pertinent portion of the plot, “Beasts” also has elements of magic realism that balances out the gritty setting of the Bathtub. Throughout the film, Hushpuppy is referencing tales of a creature called the aurochs. According to her tale, the titular beasts of the film were frozen under the ice caps, and that the storm that ravaged the Bathtub is linked to thawing them out of this. This is where I can see some viewers feeling a sense of  disconnect, as this element of the plot could feel disingenuous and out-of-place. However, the aurochs are a metaphorical element of the story that gives its themes more significance and the film a unique quality that makes it stand out from the usual crop of stripped-down indie dramas that it is clearly related to.

Even though “Beasts” is certainly a very good film and is worthy of the attention it has been getting, I’m not sure I completely fell in love with it as much as others did/will. The lack of a straightforward plot was not an issue, as I’ve seen many other films in a similar vein, although I would have liked more connective tissue to carry it from scene to scene. A more prominent through-line would have helped the make the structure more fluid and some scenes have more impact.

Ultimately, this doesn’t drag the film down too much, but it kept it from transforming from an impressive, very good film to a truly great one. Even with those caveats, the surprising performances and unconventional chemistry between Wallis and Henry injects the film with the life it needs to stand out among the crowd. “Beasts of the Southern Wild” is a piece of filmmaking where the rough edges haven’t quite been sanded off, but the shots of imagination and verisimilitude that break through the surface give it a singular identity and life all its own.

3.5/4

ParaNorman (2012) Review

-->

ParaNorman

Animated movies aimed towards children but don’t talk down to children are a rarity. Typically, animated children’s movies are filled with broad slapstick and silly circumstances because it’s often assumed that children will only hold their attention for colorful chaos. Sometimes though, a movie such as “ParaNorman” comes along that not only doesn’t treat child like dim bulbs, but also trusts that they can deal with more mature subject matter.

Norman is a bit of an odd child. Not only does he have a strong affinity for horror movies, books, etc. (particularly zombies), but he also has the ability to talk to dead people. Unfortunately, no one else can, so he is often berated by his father (who thinks he needs to “move on” from his grandmother’s death) and the school bullies on a daily basis. Soon his powers will have to be used for greater purposes though, as the resident witch spirit has come back to enact revenge on the town who murdered her 300 years before.

Fans of the 2009 animated venture “Coraline” (and by extension “The Nightmare Before Christmas”) should feel right at home with the creepy, horror-lite vibe of “ParaNorman.” It’s certainly not a coincidence that both were developed by animation house Laika, who are quickly carving out their place in the animation field amidst Pixar and Dreamworks. A large portion of the appeal of “ParaNorman” stems from its unabashed love for the horror genre, whether it’s from the funny opening movie-within-the movie and cute little references sprinkled throughout. Norman’s use of the “Halloween” theme as his cell ringtone put a big smile on my face.

The film is also unafraid of going to some macabre and dark places. This is still very much a PG-rated affair, but it doesn’t shy away from the moments that will undoubtedly freak out some of the little ones in the theater (although the ones in mine seemed pretty thick-skinned). The stop-motion animation technique was a perfect choice for creating the world of “ParaNorman,” allowing for the type of angular and bizarre designs that flesh out the eerie settings and monsters to good effect. There’s a tactile feel to the stop-motion animation that couldn’t have been achieved with the industry standard computer animation.

While there is certainly a focus on the creepy and the freaky in “ParaNorman,” there is also plenty of humor to balance things out. Truth be told, the jokes could have been stronger. Although it generally gets stronger and wittier as the plot continues along, the first half has multiple obvious jokes (“How’s it hanging,” says Norman to a ghost that is stuck on a tree). However, I do give the film a huge amount of credit for allowing the kid characters to talk like kids actually do. There’s no mild cursing a la “The Goonies,” but the humor (mostly later on) is remarkably more subversive than the trailers would indicate without using it as a crutch to lean on.

By the time the plot really gets rolling and Norman uncovers the truths behind certain characters, “ParaNorman” becomes unexpectedly moving. The zombies descending on the town become more than just lumbering monsters, and a late scene between Norman and the witch is at turns both intense and touching, revealing a level of dimension that gives the film staying power beyond the jokes and endearing characters. If you’re a fan of animation (and who isn’t really?), there is a great chance you will enjoy “ParaNorman,” and if you’re a horror fan then you will like it even more.

3.5/4

Premium Rush (2012) Review

-->

Premium Rush

Not every movie has to be complex or thought-provoking to work. Some of the best pleasures of cinema are the movies that have a simple premise, with maybe a few extra details thrown in to flesh out the concept. Action movies such as “Crank” accomplish this perfectly well, and horror movies like “Halloween” can get away with sticking to their focused guns. “Premium Rush” is another movie in the same line as those; set up a plot with multiple characters and motives, and then unleash the bread-and-butter bike chases that audiences paid to see.

“Premium Rush” also sidesteps one of the issues with many “simple” movies with its creative story structure. Right from the start we’re thrown into the action with our hero, Wiley, speeding down the New York City streets on his brakeless bike to deliver a package. Once he returns to the bike messenger office, his boss hands him an envelope that soon has him being hunted down by a crooked cop. The movie throws you directly into the action, and then assuredly slides in flashbacks every now and then to flesh out the characters and plot beyond it’s deceptively straightforward basis.

This back-and-forth arrangement means there is never a dull moment as we are entertained by the action while waiting for the next piece of the plot to fall into place at anytime. To make this work, a film such as this needs a charismatic cast to carry it through the nonstop movement, and everybody ably fills their positions. As our snarky lead, Joseph Gordon-Levitt brings charm and determination to a character that we should probably hate in real life (seriously, cyclists are irritating, dangerous people, especially in a place like N.Y.C.)

While I’m sure many people would see this movie for his presence, the clear standout player here is Michael Shannon, as the corrupt cop, Bobby Monday. Shannon is typically known for his reserved acting style in very serious dramas, but “Premium Rush” gives him the chance to take off the reigns and have fun. Monday is a character that constantly digs himself into a deeper hole and is full of awkward tics, and Shannon’s willingness to go all out yields unexpectedly riotous results. He’s hams it up in the best kind of way, relentlessly barreling through the film like the coyote chasing Gordon-Levitt’s Road Runner.

And when it brings itself back to the bike chases, “Premium Rush” doesn’t pause for a minute. Even when characters are learning new information and talking to each other, they remain planted in their seat riding down the crowded streets. The stunt work (even when it’s an obvious stuntman doing it) is clever and lively, and director David Koepp finds creative places to throw the camera into the flow without relying on cheap visual effects and flashiness. The extent of his tricks is a digital map that shows Wiley’s path and a “Sherlock Holmes” style effect where time slows down so Wiley can figure out how to dodge traffic.

Koepp’s approach is straightforward and streamlined, which is a perfect compliment for how the movie goes about its business. Whether “Premium Rush” sticks with you once you leave the theater or its energetic thrills fizzle from your mind moments later, that’s ultimately not the point. It’s an adrenaline shot of a movie that achieves what most of the “Fast and the Furious” movies miss out on: a sense of good, clean fun buoyed by likable actors and a mischievous sense of humor.

3/4

Resident Evil: Retribution (2012) Review

-->

Resident Evil: Retribution

At this point, is anyone really expecting something worthwhile out of the “Resident Evil” movie franchise? The first one may have been a passable horror/action B-movie, but since then the series has descended into excess and overall idiocy. This fifth movie doesn’t change the status quo; the same “Matrix” influenced action is in full effect and the actors are just as flat as ever. However, I would be lying in saying that I didn’t get some enjoyment out of “Retribution,” which is more than I can say for “Apocalypse” (#2) and “Afterlife” (#4).

Picking up right where “Afterlife” left off, Alice and the other survivors are attacked at sea and overwhelmed by Umbrella’s forces. Alice then wakes up in a holding cell, where she learns that the Red Queen computer has taken over Umbrella. Because of this, previous Umbrella head honcho Wesker enlists Alice’s help in stopping the renegade A.I. It turns out Alice is being held in a massive underground testing facility, so Wesker sends a team of soldiers to extract Alice while wading through the hordes of monsters still hanging around the facility.

That may sound like a plot synopsis, but in the context of the movie itself, “Retribution” has only the illusion of a plot. I owe a few apologies to any action movie I’ve ever called plot less in the past, because this movie takes the same tact as “Afterlife” and literally has only a barebones skeleton of a plot. There’s a semblance of a beginning, and arguably a middle, but there’s no ending. Remember the beginnings of “The Matrix Revolution” and “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End” where Neo and Sparrow have to be rescued from some holding place? “Retribution” is those 20-minute segments stretched to feature length and padded out with exposition and relentless action.

On those grounds, it may be objectively the worst movie of the series. I hesitate to go there though because unlike some of the previous entries, the action is actually really fun to watch in spots. Unlike “Apocalypse,” where the action was incomprehensible, and “Afterlife,” where the abuse of slow motion killed much of the enjoyment, “Retribution” is able to come up with a few over-the-top sequences that stand out. Even though director Paul W.S. Anderson is still not above throwing in tired bullet-time bits here and there, he appears to have a slightly better grasp on creating diverse and fast-paced scenes of carnage for this go-around.

It’s also very clear that Anderson loves his wife, Milla Jovovich, very much, as Alice is still the only character that gets any reasonable amount of attention, more so than the characters that are actually from the videogames. Alice remains a forgettable heroine without a personality back her up, and Milla is as reliably stoic as ever, despite how beautiful she is. She’s also one of the few actors, along with Kevin Durand (Barry Burton) and Johann Urb (Leon Kennedy,) that don’t embarrass themselves. Shawn Roberts (Wesker) continues his forced, cringe-worthy sneering from the last movie, and Sienna Guillory (Jill Valentine) is flat-out awful. On top of her inability to be a convincing antagonist, Anderson saddles her with the worst of his already terrible writing, leaving a character that is only bearable when she doesn’t open her mouth.

The best way to describe “Retribution” is as a 90-minute lead up for the inevitable sixth movie. This is rather irritating, as the movie finally comes to a scene where the pieces are in place for an all-out monster war…and then the credits roll. In the end, the movie is just one big tease that fails to establish the stakes and scope that it promises, and then ends once it hits at something worth watching. Because of this, the film is not as enjoyable as the first film or even the mediocre third one, “Extinction.” However, thanks to its decent action scenes, I would probably watch “Retribution” before the other two installments, as much of a backhanded compliment as that is.

1.5/4

The Expendables 2 (2012) Review

-->

The Expendables 2

The first “Expendables” movie was perhaps not quite the triumph that everyone had hoped it would be back in 2010. It had some memorable moments and a great final action scene, but for the most part it left me wanting more. This is not the case with “The Expendables 2,” as the majority of the issues I had with the first one have been fixed and the film is just plain fun overall.

Seeing the first “Expendables” film isn’t necessary to enjoy this improved sequel, although there are some connections. Essentially we learn that our heroes, even though they succeeded in their own way (which basically means taking out every last villain in sight), didn’t carry out the previous mission like their employer, C.I.A. agent Church (Bruce Willis), wanted them to. In order to make up for this misunderstanding, Church wants Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone) and his crew to locate missing nuclear launch codes and return them without fault. What should have been a simple in-and-out job becomes personal when the codes are stolen by arms dealer Jean Vilain (Jean-Claude Van Damme), forcing the Expendables to track him down before he can use them on hidden Russian missiles.

Just about every actor from the first movie, sans Mickey Rourke, returns for this go-around, and some of them get expanded roles while at the same time making way for new players. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Willis, previously only two-minute cameos, finally get in on the action and the shot of Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis standing side-by-side taking out nameless henchman in unison should give 80s action fans the kind of nostalgic wish fulfillment missing from the first movie. Jet Li unfortunately bows out early (not without an incredible display of martial arts skills beforehand though), making time for newcomers Liam Hemsworth, Chuck Norris, and Van Damme to get their due. Even when some actors don’t get much attention (more Terry Crews would’ve been nice, while Randy Couture is practically pointless at this point), everyone gets their moments to shine.

The humor and banter between our heroes gets a nice boost, as they spout off cheesy one-liners and joke about each other even in battle. The dialogue doesn’t work most of the time; a lot of it is flat out bad and painful to listen to, but every now and then someone throws out a line that will get a big laugh (including, yes, a Chuck Norris joke for good measure). This doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things, since the core audience is surely watching this movie for the big action moments rather than the talking, but it is disappointing that the tough-guy talk (a staple of 80s action movies) could have been much better than it turns out to be. Arnold and Bruce exchanging each others’ famous quotes is fun; Hemsworth giving a laughably overdone story of his experience in Afghanistan is less so.

Thankfully, the film manages to strike the right tone of goofy outlandishness, and many of the players like Statham, Van Damme, and Schwarzenegger manage to slide by on their charisma. Van Damme in particular looks like he’s having a ball as the head villain Vilain (get it?) as he chews through the ridiculous dialogue with his thick accent and helicopter kicking Stallone in their mano-a-mano. The films use of Chuck Norris, who is not actually remembered as a good action star, is refreshingly self-aware and plays off of his recent inexplicable Internet fame. Director Simon West also plans out the action sequences with over-the-top glee as bullets fly and heads explode, thankfully with less obvious computer-made gore, starting out with a great opening set piece and then dolling out smaller fun moments before the explosive climax.

Those who wanted to see “The Expendables 2” and have already made up your minds about the movie will most likely not be swayed by my review. Despite any faults, the film gives the audience what it wants and satisfies on that level. Those who were disappointed by the first movie and were cautious about seeing this one though should know that the sequel is a marked improvement and gives action fans the all-out brawl they were expecting before.

3/4

The Dark Knight Rises (2012) Review

The Dark Knight Rises

With death threats towards negative critics and the tragic shooting in Colorado, I would be lying if I didn’t say my anticipation for “The Dark Knight Rises” had all but dissipated. The excitement had dialed down, and eventually I thought, “I’ll just see it when I see it.” Finally I came around to it on my beach vacation in a small theater without the massive crowd that would otherwise annoy me, so I could just relax and watch without distraction. As I walked out of the theater, an overwhelming sense of finality swept over me, as I realized that regardless of any minor speed bumps along the way, Christopher Nolan brought his interpretation of Batman full circle to an incredibly satisfying close.

In the eight years since the events of “The Dark Knight,” Harvey Dent has become immortalized as a hero of Gotham, allowing the Harvey Dent Act to be created and basically wipe most of the organized criminals off of the streets. During this time, Bruce Wayne feels that he has accomplished what he set out to do (find someone to “replace” Batman), and has retired the cowl while becoming a bit of a recluse himself. When the League of Shadows, lead by the mastermind Bane, returns to wreck vengeance on Wayne and Gotham for the death of their master Ras Al’Ghul, this forces Wayne to suit up again and put an end to them. But he has more to deal with on his hands than just Bane, as the police (Commissioner Gordon notwithstanding) have branded Batman an outlaw, and the duplicitous Selina Kyle (a.k.a. Catwoman) is working on twisting both sides for her own benefit.

Ever since “Batman Begins,” director Christopher Nolan (along with co-writers Jonathon Nolan and David S. Goyer) has been developing the idea of Batman as a symbol, something that can go beyond simple crime fighting as a man and inspire others to do good also. This opportunity arrived with Harvey Dent in “The Dark Knight,” which seems to have worked even if the Joker temporarily mucked things up by turning him evil. While “Rises” is much more influenced by “Begins” than “Dark Knight,” the efforts of Gordon and Batman to hide Dent’s malicious doings come back to haunt them.

While the film spends a lot of time with it’s ensemble cast, the focus is definitely on Bruce Wayne’s arc as he works himself back into shape towards the path of Batman’s redemption. This is a franchise best performance from Christian Bale on display, as he painfully navigates through the emotional and physical torments the character goes through, and “Rises” isn’t afraid to put its hero through the ringer at his lowest possible point. What sets the film apart from its intimidating predecessor is in the structure of its plot, building towards a final 40 minutes of action and catharsis rather than employ nonstop tension like the Joker’s exploits caused.

Even though I’ve name-checked the Joker about a couple times now, “Rises” makes absolutely no mention of the tricky Clown Prince of Crime. There’s no telling how this final chapter would have played out had Heath Ledger not passed away, but Tom Hardy is more than capable of taking over the villainous duties. Sporting an eccentric accent and the immense muscle mass left over from “Warrior,” Hardy creates an engaging adversary through both smart intellect and sheer brute force. Bane is also the first villain since Ras that can go toe-to-toe with Batman, and the times they match blows are easily the best fisticuffs in the whole series. Nolan has significantly stepped up his game in the action department since the awkwardly constructed set pieces of “Batman Begins,” and every punch and kick comes through with bone-crunching intensity while the mostly practical effects sell the spectacle of the vehicular action. The Bat-Pod makes a great return, but it’s The Bat, which is essentially Nolan’s version of the Batwing, that steals the show as it rumbles through Gotham in the extended action climax.

As the stakes escalate and Bane holds the entire city hostage, Batman cannot handle everything all by himself and reluctantly must turn to Selina for some help. Selina is a true enigma, armed with only razor-edged high heels and sharp intuition, she’s only out for herself as she straddles the line between being on the wrong side of the law and becoming a heroine. It’s a tricky double act to pull off, and Anne Hathaway uncannily switches between faux vulnerability and being in total control as fast as a finger snap. She exudes the sex appeal inherent in the character without hamming it up like Michelle Pfieffer’s incarnation, and consistently steals her scenes even against heavyweights like Bale. If there is a fault, it’s that with so much going on in the plot, the relationship between her and Bruce doesn’t get the attention time to breathe, especially once his character arc has to take over the story.

In the midst of all the chaos of costumed heroes and menaces is John Blake, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, a cop working under Gordon’s wing who is more useful and integral to the story than you might think. The script takes some shortcuts with Blake’s street-smart abilities (his deduction of Batman’s identity is frustratingly thin and implausible), but he eventually proves his worth. While I would love to delve into how Blake figures into the plot some more, and how it is one of the better aspects of the film, it is also a huge part of the ending that I wouldn’t want to spoil for first-timers.

This has been a long review for me because there’s just so much stuff to talk about in just this one film. That means there’s a ton of material to like and some that may not have been entirely necessary (such as Matthew Modine’s character), but once all is said and done, Christopher Nolan has brought his version of Batman to the close it has been set up for since “Batman Begins.” The legend has indeed ended with “The Dark Knight Rises,” but it will live on in some way shape or form.

3.5/4

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) Review

The Amazing Spider-Man

The summer of 2012 has proved to be an extremely divisive time for movie fans. “Brave” has had a similarly mixed reaction to that of the first “Cars” movie, “Prometheus” has people debating fervently whether it is ambitiously successful or complete bunk, and now “The Amazing Spider-Man” has split the line between two groups: camp Raimi and camp Webb. Sam Raimi fans hold his original movies close to their hearts (with good reason, barring the mediocre but not terrible “Spider-Man 3”), while many others believe that director Marc Webb has successfully restarted the franchise on more proper footing. As I walked into the theater, I contemplated over which side I would land on, unsure about whether this new film would end up as a successful reworking or tired remake.

While it retreads similar ground in the origin story that the 2002 original movie did, the movie takes on a slightly different tact by throwing in the element of Peter Parker’s parents and by spending more time with the characters leading up to the point of Uncle Ben’s death (at this point, if you didn’t know that, the joke’s on you). Rather than the Green Goblin/Norman Osborn, we have Dr. Curt Conners, a scientist at Oscorp (Osborn is still very much a figurehead in the background) who is working on a formula for regenerating body tissue, especially in the hopes of getting back his lost arm. While Peter is being bitten by a radioactive spider and then exploring his newfound superpowers, Conners must test the formula on a human in order for it to be used on the ailing Osborn. In a desperate move, he tests it on himself, and the lizard D.N.A. in the formula enhances his body to the point where it takes over and turns Connors into a monster.

There are many more character connections, plot threads, etc. that can be discussed, but that would take up more space than needed. Along the way, Peter catches the attention of Gwen Stacy, who is enamored with his good-hearted nature after standing up to a school bully. With Webb’s previous film being “(500) Days of Summer,” it should come as no surprise that the relationship and chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone is exceptionally done. Their sharp and playful banter provides the spark of life that raises them above the pairing of Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Garfield does an incredible job of juggling Peter’s impossibly awkward and nice demeanor with the inner torment he holds because of his parents abandoning him. He sometimes lashes out at others, and the majority of the film is about him learning to use his Spider-Man powers for the good of others rather than just his personal vendettas. The theme of Peter figuring out his “identity” and his character arc that runs through the plot provides the compelling backbone for the film that distinguishes it from the original.

Dr. Connors is also searching for something, but it brings him down a more dangerous path. Connors/The Lizard follows in the tradition of the “Spider-Man 2” interpretation of Doc Ock as a sympathetic villain, as his endgame plan is not entirely malicious. In fact, once he figures out how to grow back his missing arm, Connors wants to share his miraculous discovery with others in the world that suffer from defects. Of course, we still want Spider-Man to win out in the end because Connors’ good intentions are twisted and warped, but it fleshes out the character with more intriguing layers underneath his scaly exterior.

Although Webb’s approach to the action doesn’t have the zany energy that Raimi brought to the table, he has an eye for creative angles and spider-like choreography to keep viewers on their toes. There’s still room for improvement though, as a funny but incomprehensibly shot fight in a subway train proves. It also helps that while he takes on an overall darker tone to the material, a sense of humor is maintained throughout thanks to Spider-Man’s quips and the ever-reliable Denis Leary as Gwen’s police captain father.

When taken as a whole, “The Amazing Spider-Man” never reaches the heights that “Spider-Man 2” did. It’s not as smoothly constructed, with multiple points where the editing begins/ends scenes at awkward times, and has sections around the middle that tend to drag. Add to that James Horner’s uneven score, which doesn’t establish a theme worthy of a hero like Spider-Man, as well as being painfully bad in one scene that comes off like a cheap horror movie. However, the elements are certainly there for a superior sequel (comic fans know what’s coming with Gwen and Osborn involved), and I would argue that it establishes a stronger franchise footing than the 2002 movie. With Spider-Man fans split down the middle on their preferred version, this new iteration will have to pull out the big guns with the next installment to win everyone over.

3.5/4