Directed by: George A. Romero
Starring: Simon Baker, John Leguizamo, Dennis Hopper, Asia Argento, Eugene Clark, Robert Joy
Rated: R for pervasive strong violence and gore, language, brief sexuality and some drug use.
Parental Notes: This is a zombie movie. It is packed with unspeakably disgusting images and is suitable only for very mature teenagers.
George Romero is the undisputed creator of the zombie genre. His film "Night of the Living Dead" was a masterpiece of horror -- with a dash of social commentary and a focus at least as much on the human interaction as on the zombies, it was an heart-stopping horror film with a bit of intelligence. Now, after giving us "Dawn of the Dead" and "Day of the Dead," Romero has released his fourth movie in the Dead series: "Land of the Dead." Although it does have plenty of social commentary it lacks the character development necessary to lift it above standard Hollywood horror movies.
The story revolves around a handful of people living in an unnamed city several years after the zombie plague has spread around the world. It has been thoroughly barricaded against zombies. Kaufman (Dennis Hopper) runs everything in the city from his penthouse high in Fiddler's Green, the skyscraper where the wealthy live in luxury away from the poor in the rest of the city. The town is supplied by mercenaries, led by the calm and heroic Riley (Simon Baker). His team uses an armored tank-like vehicle called Dead Reckoning to go on supply runs. They blast into the small towns around the city, distract the zombies with fireworks, and steal whatever food and other supplies they can find.
It's a stable, if often grossly unfair, society. All that changes, of course -- stable societies aren't all that entertaining. Two things happen to send this society crashing down: Riley's second in command, Cholo (John Leguizamo), tries to get accepted into Fiddler's Green and is refused and the zombies organize under the leadership of a zombie called "Big Daddy" in the credits (Eugene Clark). The zombies in "Land of the Dead" are evolving, developing the ability to communicate on a very basic level and even to cook up elementary plans of attack. This is not a good omen for the folk of Fiddler's Green.
There's plenty of social commentary, of course; this would hardly be a Romero film without it. Cholo goes on a rampage when Kaufman won't let him move into Fiddler's Green; he steals Dead Reckoning and threatens to bomb the city. Big Daddy is a sympathetic character -- his rage when Riley's team kill some of the zombies in his town is very human, and it leads to his desire for revenge. But it's difficult to tell exactly what Romero is trying to say. Are the zombies meant to represent terrorists? Or is Cholo meant to represent them? Clearly, there's an indictment of rich people who live in splendor and ignore the problems of the world -- the zombie rampage through the skyscraper dwells with relish upon the gory end of those insensitive wealthy folk. But the film resonates with issues around the Iraq war without quite making a coherent point.
Don't be deceived by all the social commentary, though. This is definitely a horror flick. Romero has to resort to some creativity on the part of the zombies to provide a semi-new spin on the zombie-feasting-on-human flesh motif, and the results are at times bleakly comical. The camera lingers on the destruction of bodies, whether human or zombie. Vast quantities of fake blood and body parts litter the screen and there are long shots of zombies enjoying their dinner. It's not terribly frightening, but it is gross. Sensitive viewers should definitely know better than to go to a zombie flick.
What makes "Land of the Dead" fail for this reviewer, however, is the utter lack of character development. It's hard to be frightened for characters you don't much care about. Riley is a cookie-cutter hero with nothing to set him apart from B-movie good guys everywhere. Cholo is a standard Leguizamo loose canon. Kaufman is Dennis Hopper in bad-guy mode. They're all characters we've seen a hundred times before. They aren't interesting or even all that sympathetic because they are the same old stereotype.
"Land of the Dead" is not terrible. It provides plenty of zombie action and gore, as well as a few laughs and material for a philosophical/analytical argument with pals afterwards. But it isn't great in the way that "Night of the Living Dead" was great. In the end, like so many films, it is competently mediocre: you know what you are going into when you enter the theater, and on that level it will not disappoint.
Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Cillian Murphy, Liam Neeson, Katie Holmes, Tom Wilkinson, Rutger Hauer, Michael Caine, Ken Watanabe
Rated: PG-13 for intense action violence, disturbing images and some thematic elements.
Parental Notes: This film is a pretty heavy PG-13, right on the edge of R. There is quite a bit of violence here and some intensely scary moments as well. This is not a film for kids who are easily spooked by bats or boogiemen. That said, preteens who aren’t still kind of scared of the dark will probably enjoy it.
The Batman franchise has been rebooted. Just as the spate of Batman movies that began with Tim Burton’s "Batman" in 1989 had nothing to do with the 1966 or 1943 films, "Batman Begins" is unrelated to any of its predecessors. While it may look like a prequel, since it traces the part of Bruce Wayne’s life which sets him on the path of the caped crusader, it is not. This film stands on its own. It also sets itself apart from the other Batman films by making Bruce Wayne into a believable character.
The outlines of the story are incredibly cartoonish but the film itself is as gritty and nigh-realistic as one would expect from the director of "Memento" and "Insomnia." Christopher Nolan eases us into the familiar world of the caped crusader by introducing us to Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) and helping us get to known the man before he starts dressing up like a bat. Wayne is clearly someone with, as he puts it, "issues." Between a childhood phobia of bats and the trauma of watching his parents killed right in front of him, he has plenty to deal with; but as a friend points out to him in a flashback, he grew up spoiled and doesn’t know a thing about desperation or about what causes people to become criminals.
Stung, Wayne abandoned his former life and stows away on a freighter, turning to the life of crime that lead him to a prison camp in Asia (where the film opens) and later to training with Ra’s Al Ghul (Ken Watanabe), the leader of the League of Shadows. Ra’s promised him a chance to enforce justice but turned out to be far more sinister than Wayne can handle. He returned to Gotham determined to save the city from itself and become a force for justice in a place where nearly everyone with any power is corrupt.
Gotham’s problems are myriad: a corrupt police force, a far-from-civic-minded Wayne Corporation under the leadership of the nasty Richard Earle (Rutger Hauer), a busy crime syndicate lead by Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson), and Dr. Jonathan Crane (Cillian Murphy) a psychiatrist who helps out the local crime lords by declaring thugs criminally insane so they can stay at Arkham Asylum rather than do time in prison. Crane has his own agenda as well, which involves unleashing a panic-inducing gas on the city.
Fortunately, Bruce Wayne has some allies to help him out, both new and old. There’s wise old family butler Alfred (Michael Caine), childhood friend and Assistant District Attorney Rachel Dawes (Katie Holmes), Lieutenant James Gordon (Gary Oldman) -- the only incorruptible cop in town, and Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), a semi-forgotten innovator at Wayne Corp who creates the various gadgets Wayne needs to be the ultimate Batman. The actors in each of these parts are phenomenal -- Bale turns Wayne into a man who derives incredible strength from his mental problems, and the supporting actors blend into their characters effectively.
But the greatest strength of the film is that it avoids the plague of so many superhero movies: the groaners. Even good superhero movies have them. "Spider-Man" had the lame MaryJane subplot. The early Batman films had the cartoony one-liners. Even "The X-Men" had a couple here and there. "Batman Begins" did not make this reviewer groan even once in its two and a half hours, and that is saying something. The one-liners are understated and delivered with the kind of glee that any one of us in the audience would use. The romance subplot is so lightly handled that it is almost invisible. It's wonderful.
Can a Batman movie be realistic? No. Nobody today would fight crime by dressing up in armor and cruising around the city on a parasail remade as a cape, especially not a multi-millionaire. But Nolan draws us into the world of Bruce Wayne, who is no ordinary person of today. Wayne, we see, is right on the edge of madness, and it is only his steadfast refusal to be an executioner that keeps me from announcing that he is a sociopath. It’s a brilliant route to take, and it makes the lunacy that is the Batman legend work.
Directed by: Doug Liman
Starring: Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, Vince Vaughn
Rated: PG-13 for sequences of violence, intense action, sexual content and brief strong language.
Parental Notes: This is a fairly typical action movie; mature preteens and teenagers will probably have a blast watching it.
Summer is well-known as being the ideal season for big action films that are long on explosions and celebrities and short on character development and realism. “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” is sure to please those looking for that kind of brainless entertainment, but it also has the advantage of a top-notch director and very engaging chemistry between its stars. Doug Liman demonstrated his ability to take over-the-top stories and make them incredibly engaging with “The Bourne Identity” and “The Bourne Supremacy,” and “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” is definitely in the same vein. The difference is that this movie is basically an action-comedy where the others were thrillers.
The story is straightforward and summed up well in the previews: Jane (Angelina Jolie) and John (Brad Pitt) are highly-paid and well-respected international assassins. They both work hard to seem normal, and getting married and living in suburbia is a useful cover. The catch is, they each think the other is just a regular person and have no idea of their spouse’s real identity. In fact, once the cat is out of the bag and they’ve been assigned to kill each other, they find themselves discovering that they have a lot in common -- and in between the shootouts and the hand-to-hand combat, falling back in love. Cheesy? Yes. But in Liman’s hands, it’s also a bit of a satire and a whole lot of fun.
The action sequences require audience members to check their disbelief at the door, but they’re a blast to watch. The big fight between the Smiths which has made up so much of the previews is a delight, full of craftiness, charming one-liners, and eventually quite a bit of sizzle. Who cares if real people would have shattered every bone in their bodies? This is a movie, so our protagonists are a bit scruffy but still beautiful. The central car chase, in which the Smiths use a minivan to flee several SUVs full of enemies, is a hoot. Liman makes excellent use of the minivan’s two sliding rear doors and even gets in a couple of jabs at the suburban soccer mom stereotype while he’s at it. And of course, there’s a huge final shootout which takes place in several stages and was clearly heavily inspired by the work of John Woo. These battles are completely unrealistic but wonderfully staged.
Another plus is the fantastic chemistry between Pitt and Jolie. They riff off each other, flow with the timing of each scene, and bicker perfectly. The scenes in the marriage counselor’s office (of course the Smiths are seeing one) are flawless. “When did you get married?” the therapist asks. “Five years ago,” says John; “six,” corrects Jane, frostily. “Five or six years ago,” John summarizes. Their relationship is handled with a light touch, and it’s unsurprising to learn that the screenplay was written for a masters’ degree. It was clearly crafted with affection.
The one sour note in “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” is something that is all too common these days: the female star of the picture is completely bizarre-looking. Sure, this is a fantasy, but Jolie frequently looks completely unreal (although, thankfully, fewer than in the “Tomb Raider” flicks). How is someone that thin supposed to be as strong as Jane Smith? I have read that Jolie did as many of her own stunts as they’d allow her, so she must be no slouch in the fitness department, but her biceps are about as big around as an underweight high-schooler’s. Her makeup artist apparently felt it necessary to apply lipstick over the border of her already-puffy lips to make them look even bigger. Pitt looks like a typical gym-rat suburban husband; Jolie looks like an ad for an eating-disorder rehab clinic. Thankfully, she does get to spend most of the film in normal looking clothes rather than skintight cat suits. I suppose we feminist filmgoers should be grateful for small favors.
Still, that is one complaint amid many praises. “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” is a solid summer action flick, a lot of fun to watch, and surprisingly well-written for a blockbuster.
| “Man With the Screaming Brain” opens at the Camera 7 Pruneyard Friday, June 17 and will run for one week. Check www.cameracinemas.com for show times. If you miss that, you might be able to catch it at summer film festivals. Or you can wait for the edited-for-TV version that will air on the Sci-Fi Channel on September 25. |
Directed by: Bruce Campbell
Starring: Bruce Campbell, Antoinette Bryon, Vladimir Kolev, Ted Raimi, Stacy Keach, Tamara Gorski
Rated: Not Rated, but could be PG-13 for language, mild sexual content, and gross pseudo-science.
Parental Notes: There are some mildly disgusting scenes in here, including open-brain surgery, but most preteens will probably be all right. Fans of Bruce Campbell’s other works shouldn’t miss this film.
B movies have a certain sort of charm. The second-rate special effects, hammed-up acting, and by-the-numbers plots are dreadful on the surface but there is often an underlying love of entertainment and adventure that appeals to a certain segment of the movie-going populace. Bruce Campbell is a veteran actor of the B movie scene (“Evil Dead,” “Bubba Ho-Tep,” “Escape From L.A.” etc.), but “Man With the Screaming Brain” is his first full-length project as a director. Of course, in true B-movie style, he also stars in the film. And he co-wrote it. Oh, and he produced it, too. Between this and the two books he has under his belt (his memoir “If Chins Could Kill” and a new novel, “Make Love! The Bruce Campbell Way”), Campbell has a lot of hats -- but he wears them all with the same cocksure skill.
The story centers around two stereotypical Americans, wealthy drug tsar William Cole (Campbell) and his beautiful but dissatisfied wife Jackie (Antoinette Bryon). The Coles have come to Bravoda, Bulgaria so that William can look into investing in the town’s half-finished subway system. The couple’s marriage is on the rocks, and ex-KGB-agent-turned-taxi-driver Yegor (Vladimir Kolev) only eggs them on when they hire his cab: Jackie finds his resourcefulness and scruffiness alluring while William finds his dislike of capitalism repulsive.
No grade-B horror movie would be complete without a mad scientist, and “Man With the Screaming Brain” provides one in the form of Dr. Ivan Ivanovich Ivanov (Stacy Keach) and his assistant Pavel (Ted Raimi). They’ve been working on an anti-inhibitor drug, one which would let any transplant of any kind be accepted by any patient. Dr. Ivanov hopes William will invest in his work, and he gets the perfect opportunity to show off when Yegor and William meet with an accident. That accident comes in the form of the beautiful Tatoya (Tamara Gorski), a gypsy who used to be involved with Yegor and has now set her sights on William.
By the climax of the film, William has a sizeable chunk of Yegor’s brain in his head, Jackie has been transplanted into the body of a robot, and all three of them want to kill Tatoya. A fairly even mix of horror movie clichés and physical comedy, this is classic B movie madness.
Bruce Campbell is a B movie mainstay, from his work in the “Evil Dead” films to this March’s SciFi Channel movie “Alien Apocalypse.” He’s a working man’s actor, just doing his job regardless of the quality of the film. It’s hard to praise a man’s acting when the material isn’t exactly demanding, but Campbell is a true entertainer and that shines through regardless of the quality of the script. The rest of the cast are suitably goofy as well, from Raimi hamming it up as an American-culture-loving Bulgarian to the scenery-chewing Gorski. Fans of Ted Raimi will want to stick around for the credits, which scroll to the tune of a rap he wrote and performed in character.
Is “Man With the Screaming Brain” a good movie? Only in one respect: it is a heck of a lot of fun to watch. The actors throw themselves into their roles with gusto and are unafraid of looking silly in front of the camera. It may not be great cinema, but it’s awfully entertaining.
Directed by: Ron Howard
Starring: Russell Crowe, Renee Zellweger, Paul Giamatti, Craig Bierko
Rated: PG-13 for intense boxing violence and some language.
Parental Notes: This film is probably fine for preteens and teens, but youngsters may find the boxing scenes too intense for comfort.
Jim Braddock was a successful boxer in the 20s who lost everything during the Great Depression. But he was given one last fight and unexpectedly defeated the other man. That started a winning streak that took him to a fight for the heavyweight championship of the world against renowned fighter Max Baer, who had killed one man in the ring and apparently caused another fatal injuries. Braddock was dubbed the Cinderella man for his meteoric rise from the depths of poverty, and Ron Howard has turned his already fairy-tale story into a modern melodrama. This movie is about as corny as they come, but it’s saved by strong performances.
Russell Crowe’s Braddock is a devoted family man, an honorable fighter, and a classic hero. When, in the depths of their poverty, his eldest son steals a salami, Braddock lectures him that there are others worse off than them and insists, “we don’t steal. Ever.” It’s interesting to see such a powerful actor playing a simple, good man. Braddock has the power of Crowe’s Maximus and the level-headed leadership ability of his Captain Aubrey, but he’s also loving and nice, almost to the point of being unbelievable. He’s gentle and sweet to his wife, Mae (Renee Zellweger), a hero to his kids, and a friend to his manager Joe Gould (Paul Giamatti). That Crowe manages to make him seem human and real at the same time is a testament to his acting ability. Braddock even has gentle responses to Max Bear (Craig Bierko), who has been turned into a villain so nasty that I expected him to start sneering and twirling his mustache Snidely Whiplash style.
Baer’s transformation is indicative of the problems “Cinderella Man” has. In real life, Baer was a bit of a womanizer, and a bit of a clown, and did indeed kill two men. But he felt terrible about those deaths, and even lost several bouts because he was holding back, afraid he’d hurt someone else. In the film, however, he keeps floozies on call in his hotel room, makes snide remarks to and about Braddock, suggests that maybe Mae will sleep with him after he kills the Braddock in the ring, and hits below the belt during their bout in an attempt to throw Braddock off his game. He’s reminiscent of the villain from Rocky IV in his utter unreality.
Why turn a reasonable human being into a melodrama baddie caricature? Sure, films need their bad guys, but the power of Braddock’s story comes from the fighter’s rags-to-riches tale, not the character of his opponents. Even with Baer as he was in history, Braddock was hailed as a hero and dubbed the Cinderella man. Making Baer into such a caricature is a disservice to the story, to the man, and to the audience. I think we would have been rooting for Braddock to win even if Baer had been a reasonable person and a great fighter. Apparently Howard doesn’t trust his audience enough to feel what he thinks we should.
Fortunately Crowe and Giamatti turn in excellent performances and make their characters come across as real in spite of the simplistic writing. Giamatti is an established character actor, and this is another slam-dunk for him after “Sideways,” which brought him to the public’s attention. Joe Gould isn’t perfect, but he’s a good man in trying times, and Giamatti makes us see how difficult the Depression was for those who could keep up the appearance of wealth. Zellweger, for her part, plays the loving and loyal wife with sincerity and pulls off the one scene when Mae goes against her husband, sending the children away to live with her sister until she and Braddock can afford to feed them, with heartfelt passion.
On the whole, “Cinderella Man” is a good film, and it’s easy to see why it’s already being hailed as an Oscar contender. Like “Titanic” before it, it’s got melodrama, good performances, and the look of a gorgeous period piece. The at times overwrought script keeps it from being a truly amazing film, but it’s still a good time at the movies if you like underdog stories. The fights aren’t shot terribly well, with too many crowd shots and incoherent close-ups, but they’re much better-filmed than the fights in a lot of action movies. Braddock’s rise is a great American story, and it’s inspiring to see a man get a second chance and run with it.