Eye Candy #487 - "Cropsey"

Cropsey: This interesting little documentary explores the connection/relationship between the urban legend of Staten Island-based boogeyman “Cropsey” (the origins of the name have been lost to history), and the real disappearance of children from Staten Island during the 1970’s and 80’s, focusing on the person who may or may not be the killer, Andre Rand.   The problem with Rand is that there is no physical evidence to connect him to any of the at least 4 disappearances. but the will of the surrounding community to make him the perp has pushed for his conviction, including some members quite blatantly lying on the stand just because “he looks like that kind of guy“, career drunks and druggies pointing Rand out on the stand years after the fact, that sort of thing.   So the lynch mob mentality is in full effect.  The film also examines the Willowbrook State School, an institution for mentally handicapped children that operated from the 1930’s to the 1980’s where Rand was also a patient, that was infamous for overcrowding, deplorable inhumane conditions, and patient abuse.  The Willowbrook School has fallen partly into ruin and may have served as the site for some of the abductions and is showcased extensively in the film.  Eerie part-mystery, part-hunt for a serial killer (only one body was ever recovered of the missing children), this film managed to sustain my interest from start to finish.  Woodchuck sez, “Check it out.” 

Eye Candy #486 - "Get Him to the Greek"

Get Him to the Greek:  Here is a film that can’t decide what it wants to be, whether it be a wildly raunchy comedy (songs about genitals abound) or a feel-good  rumination on what makes us truly happy.  Russell Brand reprises his role as English rock star Aldous Snow (from “Forgetting Sarah Marshall”, though at times he seems to be similar in name only), brought back to do a anniversary concert at the Greek Theater in Los Angeles.  Jonah Hill plays a record company peon, Aaron, who is tasked with getting the debauched Snow from London to Los Angeles for the concert.  Hijinks, unsurprisingly, ensue, involving drinking, drugs, clubbing, groupies, more drugs, threesomes, and a very funny Sean Combs as Aaron’s boss (he arguably has some of the funniest scenes in the film).  Rose Byrne, Elizabeth Moss, Colm Meaney, and a host of celebrities playing themselves are here in support.  The film is uneven, swinging from raucous comedy bits (particularly a brawl at a Vegas strip club) to bits of jarring humanity (when Aldous encounters his failures as a father, lover, and son).  But it doesn’t commit to either, so it doesn’t do either well.  Sure, there were parts I laughed in, but I found Aaron’s scenes talking about what Snow should do with his life, as you watch Aaron cave in to Snow’s peer pressure the entire picture (including being a drug mule) and you can’t help wonder that if the creators of the film wanted to drive that point home, they wouldn’t have the voice of point be the character who deviates vigorously from it for over 90 minutes.   Has some good moments, but isn’t a great picture. Woodchuck sez, “Worth a look, but be warned - it is raunchy.”

Eye Candy #485 - "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1"

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1:  Having read the book, I knew what to expect going in.  Like the novel, the film drops you right into the thick of things as Harry and his friends and allies are on the run from Voldemort and his cronies, and the body count continues to climb.  This part of the story focuses almost exclusively on Harry, Hermione, and Ron, many of the supporting characters relegated to glorified seconds-long cameos.  It’s also a much darker film, with the Death Eaters taking over the Ministry of Magic, turning it into a quasi-fascist, racist organization, while Harry continues his pursuits of the artifacts that will lead to the destruction of Voldemort, possibly at the expense of his friendship with Ron and Hermione.  So we’re not talking light children’s fare here (also, we get some weird implied nudity and a big scary snake).  All that being said, it is a well-crafted movie, this the third Potter flick from director Peter Yates.  The acting is good, with Emma Watson as a standout.  And apparently every British character actor under the sun is going to be crammed in the last two parts, with Rhys Ifans, Bill Nighy, Peter Mullan, and David O’Hara here this go-round.  But dramatically, it can’t help but be a letdown - it’s a movie without a climax or a conclusion.  Granted, there is a lot of ground to cover in the last book, but that doesn’t mean you can’t craft a dramatic arc.  And neophytes to the series beware - the film doesn't offer any opportunities for you to catch up.  It’s a good film, but not a great one, aimed squarely at veteran fans of the HP juggernaut.  Woodchuck sez, “Worth a look.”

Eye Candy #484 - "Until the Light Takes Us"

Until the Light Takes Us:  Filmed in the early 2000’s, but not released until 2009, this documentary charts the early years and peak of Norwegian black metal as a genre and its surrounding controversy, as well as several of its “luminaries”.  The film focuses on Gylve “Fenriz” Nagell of Darkthrone and Varg “Count Grishnakh” Vikernes of Burzum and Mayhem.  Vikernes is most notable for serving time in prison for murdering his bandmate Oysten “Euronymous” Aarseth in 1993, as well as a spate of church burnings around the same time.   Aarseth himself was rumored to have made a stew out of the brains another bandmate who committed suicide.   Obviously, this is not your father’s rock-and-roll.  The problems of the film are several - 1.) for a music documentary, there is very little Norwegian black metal in it.  There are snippets here and there, but most of the music is the incidental (and very annoying) electronic score; 2.) it lacks energy.  It plods along for 93 minutes, the least energetic movie about heavy metal you have ever seen; and 3.) the people it showcases aren’t all that remarkable, as musicians or functioning members of society.    There is some uncomfortable hero worship going on, particularly when one of the objects of veneration, Varg, is vocal anti semite aligned with the White power movement (it stems from the fact that he violently reacts to Judeo-Christianity co-opting paganism for its own ends, which it did), not to mention a convicted murdered who stabbed his victim 23 times.  Sure, Varg is well-spoken, but that doesn’t change the fact that he is bat crap crazy.  And it delves only briefly with the evolution of the genre, from misplaced nationalism and the loss of cultural identity on the “mean streets” of Oslo (yes, I‘m being facetious), and their eventual slide into full-on cult/kitsch status.  This could have been better.   Woodchuck sez, “Needs more music.”

Eye Candy #483 - "Jonah Hex"

Jonah Hex:  It’s an interesting contrast to see how well Warner Bros. took one of its little-known comic book properties (“Red”), expanded it somewhat,  and made an entertaining film out of it, and then how they took this comic property (with a longer history) and totally screwed the pooch.  This is a loud, gimmicky mish-mash of ideas, only the barest handful of which are related to the original property.  It’s “Crank” with spurs, which shouldn’t come as a surprise considering this was written by Messrs. Neveldine and Taylor, who gave us both “Crank” films.  The film leads off with gatling guns strapped to the sides of horses, for Pete‘s sake.  If the western and steampunk genres had a torrid tequila-fueled night together, “Jonah Hex” would more than likely be their ridiculous spawn.  Jonah Hex (Josh Brolin) is a former Confederate soldier and current bounty hunter, notable for the horrible scarring on his face (the origin of which is changed in the film) and his ability to talk to the dead (something he’s never done in the comic book).  He is “drafted” into service by the military in post-civil war America to hunt down the man responsible for his scarification, Quentin Turnbull (portrayed by John Malkovich), who got his hands on a chemical “super weapon” designed by Eli “Cotton Gin” Whitney that he aims to use to overthrow the government.  Megan Fox co-stars (barely) as prostitute Lilah, Hex‘ ‘love interest‘.  I’m trying to figure out how so many “name” actors got in this picture: Malkovich, Brolin, Michael Fassbender, Aidan Quinn, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Michael Shannon, Lance Reddick, Wes Bentley.  Didn’t any of you read the script?  This is a talent pool deserving of a better film.  This is also about as far removed from director Jimmy Hayward’s previous directing effort, “Horton Hears a Who”, as can be (its lack of success is also in contrast to “Horton”).  Loud, dumb, and goofy.  I also could have done without the fairly monotonous score by heavy metal group Mastodon.  Woodchuck sez, “At least it’s short.”

Eye Candy #482 - "Solomon Kane"

Solomon Kane:  This modestly-budgeted picture is based on the Robert E. Howard character of the same name, the Puritan adventurer fighting evil and the supernatural across Europe and Africa.  This film plays as more of a prequel, showing the journey of Kane (played by James Purefoy of “Rome“ fame) from English privateer on the run from Death itself to religious warrior, and ends at roughly where Howard’s stories begin.   Purefoy is good (Kane is a bit wooden emotionally in the stories, so it’s appropriate here; he‘s even more aloof in the stories) and he does add shades to the character that you don’t get from the various Kane stories.  Jason Flemying, Pete Postelthwaite, Max von Sydow, Rachel Hurd-Wood and Alice Krige co-star.  It’s fine for a middle-of-the-road action film with fantasy elements, but the plot is extremely derivative (one of the subplots has been used in every Robin Hood film made in the last 30 years - wayward son helps reclaim usurped family home).  The special effects are fine.  Not bad, but also not remarkable in any way.  Supposed to be the first of a trilogy.  No North American release for this one yet.  Woodchuck sez, “Worth a look.”

Eye Candy #481 - "Centurion"

Centurion:  The latest offering from director Neil Marshall (“Dog Soldiers”, “The Descent”), this film is about the Roman Ninth Legion and their mysterious “disappearance” in 2nd century Britain while fighting against the Picts (some say “disappearance”, others say annihilation).  Very much in the same vein as “King Arthur” from several years back, with shades of “Gladiator” thrown in as well, this is basically a violent, gory chase picture, as the survivors of the Ninth Legion attempt to save their general and flee to safety behind Hadrian‘s Wall, all while avoiding the Pict soldiers that are chasing after them.  Lots of familiar faces here - Michael Fassbender in the lead, Dominic West, Liam Cunningham (a Marshall alum), David Morrissey, Noel Clarke, to name a few.  It’s a good cast. And when I say ‘gory’, I mean it - beheadings, throats slit, axes to the forehead, spears to the chest, death by tree, arrows to the face, all manner of pleasantness.   Blood positively explodes out of people.   Not high art, fairly mindless, but entertaining for what it is.  Woodchuck sez, “Worth a look.”

Eye Candy #480 - "Toy Story 3"

Toy Story 3:  The really great thing about a Pixar movie is that they continue to improve on so many different levels, you never have to worry about quality. You know you’re always getting a great picture, which is as close to a sure thing that you can get at the theater.  The third “Toy Story” film follows the inexorable aging of Andy and his impending departure for college.  Not wanting to be relegated to the garbage dump, the toys connive their way into being donated to a children’s daycare center.  But life at the daycare center is not all it’s cracked up to be, as a clique of older toys prevents any toys from leaving, led by the strawberry-scented Lotso Hugs Bear (think Care Bear here).  The animation here is just fantastic, leaps and bounds ahead of the previous two installments, with an absurd level of detail (for example, Buzz‘ Spanish dance is, simply, just great).  Some great new voice talents this time around, including Kristen Schaal, Ned Beatty, Jeff  Garlin, and Timothy Dalton (!).  But the real standout is Michael Keaton as Ken of “Barbie &“ fame who is a hoot (between this and “The Good Guys“, Keaton is on a roll).  And while the first two films dealt with “growing up”, this is the first film to deal with leaving childhood behind in a definitive way (such as Andy going off to college).  This is a very, very entertaining film, can find no fault here. Woodchuck sez, “Absolutely check this out.”

Eye Candy #479 - "Gor"

Gor:  A prime example of the low-budget macho male escapist fantasy action films that populated the 1980’s after the success of the superior “Conan the Barbarian”, replete with scantily clad women and swords.  “Ator the Fighting Eagle” and ”The Sword and the Sorcerer” are also solid examples of the sub-genre.  Don’t get me wrong - I love some of these movies, like “Krull” and “Beastmaster”, but it’s not unfair to say that most of them were pretty terrible.  This one is based on the Gor novels of John Norman, focusing on the (mis)adventures of Tarl Cabot, a contemporary American who finds himself transported to Gor (a la John Carter), where he runs afoul of Sarm (played by Oliver Reed in a really ridiculous helmet and over-acting his rear off).  Ending up with some of the local inhabitants, they bring Cabot along though he appears to be almost completely inept and anything he accomplishes is in spite of himself, rather than because of himself.  Paul L. (Bluto) Smith co-stars, as does Playboy Playmate Rebecca Ferratti, playing the part of the sexually-objectified woman sidekick.  Third-billed Jack Palance appears in all of 5 minutes of the film as a set-up for its sequel.  Overdubbing, bad acting, and positively sedentary action scenes abound.  Nothing redeeming here, whatsoever.  Woodchuck sez, “Avoid!”

Eye Candy #478 - "Fritz the Cat"

Fritz the Cat:  It is debatable whether or not a movie like “Fritz the Cat” would receive a theatrical release if it was made in this day and age.  It’s graphically sexually, sexist, full of stereotypes (some of them racist; Black people are portrayed as crows, for example).  There is just way too much there to offend in these, our easily offended times.  Based on the comic strip by Robert Crumb, “Fritz the Cat” is one of the first full-length films by director and animator Ralph Bakshi (who gave us the superior “Lord of the Rings“ animated film several years later).  Fritz is an aimless young cat in New York and America of the 1960’s, looking for sexual and personal fulfillment and encountering all sorts of folks along the way, including militants, “pigs” (cops portrayed as pigs), sexual promiscuous young women, with a focus on the political left.   Some would argue that this film has aged well.  I would not be one of those people - it feels and plays like very dated material.  Not nearly as risqué today as it was 30 years ago and animation has clearly advanced since then.  Woodchuck sez, “Good as a curio, and that’s about it.”

Eye Candy #477 - "Night of the Lepus"

Night of the Lepus:   The premise of this film, when spoken aloud, just can’t help but sound ridiculous - giant, man-eating rabbits rampage across the American southwest.  In the vein of “Them!” and “Phase IV”, this is a science fiction horror romp that, if nothing else, commits itself to its story and plays it as straight as possible.  Sure, the effects of normal sized rabbits rampaging in slow motion across miniature sets, smeared with ketchup on their faces as a stand-in for the blood of humans that they just ate is undeniably silly,  but that doesn’t mean it’s still not fun.  I’ve certainly seen worse movies with higher budgets and “better” special effects.  I mean, how the hell else are they going to get us to care about giant, man-eating rabbits? Deforest “Bones” Kelley, Stuart Whitman, Rory Calhoun, and Janet Leigh star as scientists and ranchers out to stop a rabbit plague that they exacerbate through science.  Not high art, but I enjoyed it.  Woodchuck sez, “Me likey.”

Eye Candy #476 - "The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia"

The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia:  Johnny Knoxville produced this latest chapter in the continuing saga of Jesco White, “mountain dancer” and general ne’er-do-well from Boone County, West Virginia.  This film showcases more of Jesco’s fantastic hillbilly relatives (he is one of at least 13 children) and their spawn.  Some are dead.  Some are incarcerated.    Sadly some of the relatives featured in the “Dancing Outlaw” have shuffled off this mortal coil (for example, Jesco’s brother Dorsey shot himself on accident…in the head; his wife Norma Jean passed away in 2008).   We get to watch his family snort coke together, smoke out together, get out of prison, it’s like “Ozzie and Harriet”, if Ozzie and Harriet smoked crack with David and Ricky.  Those family members featured are violent, crude, just generation after generation of failures congregating in Boone County, West Virginia (to be fair, not all members of the clan have been showcased;  the hope is that some of them are normal).  They all seem to have spent more time at the tattoo parlor than the dentist.  We do get to meet Poney, Jesco’s brother that moved to Minnesota and whose family wants nothing to do with Boone County.  Watching this film is like watching an 88 minute car wreck.  And while some of the bits are funny, it’s not as funny as the original and most of the Whites are devoid of the charm that Jesco has (and he still thinks he‘s Elvis sometimes, so that‘s nice).   As Jesco says, “Some families jes’ cain’t get it together.“  Woodchuck sez, “Worth a look.”

Eye Candy #475 - "Giallo"

Giallo:  The problem with serial killer thrillers at this point in the game is that they’ve been done to death (pardon the pun).  So if you’re going to add to the genre, you need a hook that separates you from the ever-expanding herd, whether it be plot-related, visually, anything.  Otherwise, your film ends up seeming like a retread of “Silence of the Lambs” (arguably the greatest example of the genre).  Emanuelle Seigner’s supermodel sister is kidnapped by a taxi cab-driving serial torturer/rapist, and the only person in the whole country of Italy willing to help her is Enzo Avolfi (Adrien Brody), a police inspector who is himself a victim of serial killer violence (and seems like a New York cop transported to Italy).  The killer is called “Yellow” (hence the title).  Dario Argento (of horror movie fame), directs.   Detached and aloof, the film makes it hard to carry about anyone involved, from the victims to Avolfi to the killer.   The killer is  more comical and odd than scary.  Hannibal Lector he is not.  There is some gore (a particularly  graphic finger severing).  The sum of the parts here is ho-hum.  Adrian Brody sued to have the movie blocked from release because he says the filmmakers hadn’t paid him.  I think he should have sued because it just wasn’t very good.  Woodchuck sez, “Skip it.”

Eye Candy #474 - "Superman Returns"

Superman Returns: I’m a fan of director Bryan Singer. “The Usual Suspects” and “X-2” are two of my favorite films and I enjoy the TV show “House”, which he executive produces. Sadly, I will not be adding “Superman Returns” to that list. Why, you ask? Because this film tries to be too many things at one time and then fails at doing any of them well. This is not the best Superman film of all time, not even the second best (and frankly, it’s hard to be worse than Superman 3 and 4).  Superman (Brandon Routh) has returned from a five-year absence, having left into space to see if anything of Krypton remained. In his absence, Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) married someone else and had a kid, Jimmy Olsen grew up, and Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) got out of prison for the umpteenth time and is determined to run the world his way. He also discovers Superman’s sanctum sanctorum, the Fortress of Solitude (though they don’t call it that specifically, but you know what I mean).  But soon Clark Kent is back at the Daily Planet and Superman is back saving the world, and Lex is stepping up to oppose him being using kryptonite to raise an island from the ocean floor and destroy superman at the same time. Yes, it plays at just as jumbled as it sounds.  The problem with a Superman movie is this – you have to make people root for the hero. It’s why Reeve was so successful, you wanted him to beat General Zod. Routh is an unknown quantity and while he’s passable in the role, he’s never given a root-for-him-type moment. In fact, he has never seemed more alien than in this movie, gazing with a sort of benevolent half-smile as he watches those silly humans get themselves in trouble.  It doesn’t help that the only really root-for guy is Richard White, Lois’ husband (played by James Marsden, given more to do here than he got to do in either of the last two X-Men movies as Cyclops). Bosworth is unremarkable as Lois, in a role that should have gone to an older actress (she looks her age of 23 and we’re supposed to believe she’s a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist…with a five year old child…sorry, we don’t).  And I understand that Singer is a gigantic fan of the original Superman movies and Richard Donner, as can be evidenced by use of archival footage of Marlon Brando from the first Donner Superman movie. But that can be just as much a hindrance as it can an homage, particularly if you weren’t around for the first film.  The film’s problems:

1. Length: it goes on for 2 ½ hours. It could’ve been much shorter.

2. Casting: Aside from my aforementioned issues with Bosworth, there is a lot of talent wasted in throw away roles. The two biggest examples are Parker Posey as Lex’s moll Kitty Kowalski and Kal Penn (Taj from “Van Wilder” ) as one of Lex’s flunkies who isn’t given a whole lot to do. 

3. The mystique of Superman – this is a Superman movie that doesn’t once decide to address the mystique of Superman, to its detriment (none of the others had Superman returning from a five-year exile). And the film also forgot it was based on a comic book character and you can’t make a superhero movie and completely remove those elements in favor of some kind of pseudo-realism. I’m not saying I need giant capes and pjs, but when the major conceit is that your alter ego wears a pair of glasses to hide his identity, if you play that too straight, the audience will wonder just who stupid all the people in the movie are.

4. Sense of humor – it’s completely absent. 

This movie would have benefited from a stronger script BIT TIME.  Woodchuck sez, “Not my cup of tea. Go see ‘Batman Begins’ instead.”

Eye Candy #473 - "The Little Mermaid"

The Little Mermaid: A Disney movie I’ve never seen prior to last night. I don’t think I was really in the mood for an animated musical (especially since I had just suffered through a viewing of the immensely unsatisfying X-Men 3), but I do remember having to sing at least one selection from this movie’s soundtrack as a choir concert piece in high school.Ariel, the mermaid, falls in love with a regular landlubber and promises a sea-witch her singing voice if the witch will give her legs. Hijinks ensue. You don’t need to know much more plot than that because there isn’t much more plot than that (the movie clocks in right around 1 hour 20 minutes, so I can’t give you a whole lot more of the plot, because it just doesn’t exist). Insert talking undersea creatures, singing, and an evil witch that looks like my high school pre-calculus teacher, season with a little calypso flavoring, and away we go.  This film didn’t knock my socks off. I’ve seen better cel-animated and computer-animated films than this, though it does fit into that same realm of films like “The Black Cauldron” and “The Sword and the Stone” – films that a.) did not age well; and b.) look shoddily put together in the first place. C’mon, Disney, Pixar has shown that you CAN do an animated film that’s longer than 80 minutes and has a script smart enough to keep an adult interested and you can do it consistently. Granted, after “Little Mermaid”, we got the superior films “Beauty & the Beast,” “Aladdin,” and “The Lion King”…but have since followed with a largely lackluster run of films (like the atrocious “Pocahontas”) up to present day (with the exception of my favorite Disney movie to-date, “The Emporer’s New Groove”).  Some folks may be ga-ga over this film. I am not one of them.  Woodchuck sez, “I’ve seen better and I’ve seen worse.”

Eye Candy #472 - "Lady in the Water"

Lady in the Water: As some of you know, I'm a huge mark for M. Night Shyamalan. I found his first three movies to be excellent (I own all three, too). "The Village" was okay, but didn't knock my socks off. I heard more about the hype surrounding "Lady in the Water", how he fought with movie studios to get it made because thought that it wasn't worth making into a film. And after having viewed the film, there is some truth to that claim. I also know that the film got savaged by the critics...but if you watch the movie, you know there is one character in particular (a movie critic) so blatantly over the top, it's obvious he was trying to piss them off and it made most of the reviewers look catty that lashed out at him for it.  Cleveland Heep (Paul Giamatti) is a building superintendent for a Pennsylvania apartment complex. He discovers a naked woman in the swimming pool at the complex named Story (played by Bryce Dallas Howard). She is a narf, a water-dwelling creature sent to help mankind and then return to her world. However, because she is here, there is also a scrunt (think big, grassy wolf-dog) who kills narfs. Cleveland must find out how to save Story, with the help of other tenants of the apartment.  An attempt to create a modern-day fairytale, the film lacked for magic and wonder. The film has several problems - The film has several problems -

1. obvious issues with credibility - if magical creatures began to show up at your apartment complex, would you automatically jump on board and believe they are true? Well, you shouldn't live the Cove Apartments because apparently everyone else would

2. the acting - Giamatti has to carry this film by himself. Ms. Howard is given very little to do except sit in a shower wet and look pale and cold all the time. Some people bemoaned M. Night casting himself as a tenant of the complex, but I couldn't see what the big deal was, in light of some of the lackluster casting (and wasting actors like Geoffrey Wright in nothing-roles).. What can Story do? Not a whole helluva lot apparently. The scrunt is the only one that actually does anything remotely interesting. 

3. The sounds - the people talk in such low volumes that when you raise the volume to hear them, you get you eardrums blasted out by the scrunt. M. Night, the dialogue isn’t important is no one can hear it.

4. Oomph - the film just lacks “oomph”. It’s got no big reveal like all his other movies, the reveal which makes the rest of the film make sense, like Bruce Willis realizing he’s dead in “Sixth Sense” and “The Village” being built upon a lie. There is no such device in this film, thus dramatically, it’s got no ups and downs because of it. It’s flat as a board.

I tried really hard to like this movie. M Night just didn’t give me much reason too. So apparently, the study execs that thought this story wouldn’t carry a film...were right.  Woodchuck sez, “Only if you are an M Night completist”.

Eye Candy #471 - "Syriana"

Syriana: A modern-day indictment of the oil industry and its players, the legal and illegal, the greedy and the poor and the corrupt. ‘Syriana’ itself is a term used by various Washington think-tank groups to describe a hypothetical Middle East (or so imdb.com tells me).  Directed by Steve Gaghan (who wrote “Traffic”, which is an excellent film), we have a variety of points of view and plot threads on the move here:

-the young, idealistic oil analyst with big ambitions (Matt Damon)

-the grizzled CIA agent (George Clooney) who knows the Middle East and its political climate better than any other current agent, but no one, including his handlers, are willing to listen to him

-the eldest son of a Saudi emir (Alexander Siddig) who wants to use his country’s oil wealth to revitalize his nation

-a corporate troubleshooter (Jeffrey Wright) responsible to investigating a recent oil merger that is mightily inconvenient for his employer

-a young Pakistan émigré who loses his job at an oil refinery (because of the aforementioned merger) and finds himself falling under the sway of a radical madrasah and the path of martyrdom

All these threads intertwine here, to show what is done in the name of oil, profits, power, religion, greed, and hate. And while it is an arguably depressing view, it has taken the time to demonstrate how it is not just a “Western” problem - none of the parties involved are in it for the greater good, they treat it like war, with nation-states fighting over resources like generals with armies. The battles are legal and extra-legal, the tactics sometimes fatal.  The movie is technically solid. Gaghan is able to keep all the stories moving and interesting to what may seem like an inevitable conclusion. The performances, particularly by Clooney (who is really against type here for him), are solid. I couldn’t find a weak link (it doesn’t hurt that the small parts are played by Chris Cooper and Christopher Plummer). I was really impressed by Alexander Siddig (who you may remember as Dr. Julian Bashir on “Star Trek Deep Space Nine”). He really hasn’t been given that many opportunities to flex his chops (the closest I can think of “Kingdom of Heaven” and even then, he’s a supporting role). He's excellent here, as the eldest son of the Saudi emir who wants to undo the damage to his country economically that oil has wrought (specifically the squandering of oil wealth so that S.A's GNP is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30th place, behind such economic "powerhouses" as Thailand and Pakistan).  What I enjoyed about the movie the most is its unwillingness to blame one side exclusively for the situation. We are shown the worst in human nature on all sides acting in conjunction. Whereas it is SO easy to fall into a trap condemning American foreign policy and oil company profits (which are easy outs that don’t identify all sides of the problem, and because it doesn’t, it doesn’t educate the audience beyond the easy visceral, emotional ‘right/wrong’ response of getting people pissed off with incomplete information, which seems to be happening more and more in all forms of media).   If you are going to tackle this subject, I always vote on the side of thoroughness, because then you have enough information to draw your own conclusions.  An excellent film and one I think everyone should view. This film was better than “Capote”, “Crash”, "Munich", and “Brokeback Mountain”.  Woodchuck sez, “Check it out.”

Eye Candy #470 - "X-Men 3 The Last Stand"

X-Men 3 The Last Stand: I put off seeing this in the theater because I just didn’t get a good vibe from the trailers or any of the preview literature I’d read. I’m glad I did. This film is a huge disappointment and more proof that Brett Ratner wasn’t the reason that the “Rush Hour” movies were so good. I enjoyed “X-2" a ton, I think it’s a great fun movie. And apparently the reason is a.) the director Bryan Singer (who hasn’t let me down yet; even his movies that I don’t think quite work like “Apt Pupil” are still decent films); and b.) screenwriter David Hayter (Zak Penn is also listed as a screenwriter for both X-2 and X-3, but he also gave us the craptacular “Elektra” so I’m assuming that Hayter was the successful part of that duo).  There’s almost nothing about this movie that is good.  Script? Trite and dumb. Insultingly slow, with dialogue that is beyond bad or compelling. Also, it’s chock full of needless deaths, variations on comic themes that are lousier than their inspiration (turning Phoenix into an aspect of Jean Grey instead of an alien entity, for example). We also get heroes who are now villains (like Madrox and Psylocke). And none of it rings true, none of it works.  Casting? Some HUGE gaffes, with the largest being the casting of Vinnie Jones (who I love dearly as Bullet Tooth Tony in “Snatch”) as Juggernaut. He’s completely inappropriate for the part. And some of the series mainstays are COMPLETELY wasted, especially Rebecca Romijn and James Marsden (I don’t know who he pissed off, but he was so poorly used in the last two movies, he should slap his agent). Famke Janssen spends most of the movie silent and looking too old for the part. Anna Paquin (Rogue) vanishes fifteen minutes into the film. Patrick Stewart phones in his performance. And then Ian McKellen, in an attempt to salvage the film, over-acts his little a$$ off. And it doesn’t help.  The only good thing? The introduction of new characters like Beast and Kitty Pryde, and getting to see more of Colossus. But they aren’t given a whole lot to do, unfortunately, as Ratner decided to make the film about Phoenix, Magneto, and Wolverine.  And so the X-Men franchise comes to a close with a dull *thud*. This movie couldn’t end soon enough.  Woodchuck sez, “Skip it.”

Eye Candy #469 - "First Descent"

First Descent: More and more, I’m finding the X-Games much more entertaining than the more conventional Olympics. We really get the impression that the athletes are trying to top themselves year after year, not just for the benefit of winning a medal, but for the enjoyment of the fans, who follow some of the athletes in a very cult-like fashion. They make you care about their sport moreso than the U.S. Women’s Synchronized swim team.  Also, if you watch X-Games, you know Shawn Farmer, the red-haired, freckled Olympic gold medalist who can pretty much do anything on a snowboard his mind can imagine. Helluva way to make a living.  This documentary juxtaposes the history of snowboarding from its original pioneers, with an all-era group of them descending mountains in Alaska that most people have never even seen before, much less skied or snowboarded down. Some of the mountains attempted look phenomenally dangerous as they are breathtaking.  Snowboarding also has the benefit of being one of the better filmed sports in recent history so there is a ton of archive footage in the film as well.  This film just didn’t have the *oomph* of “Dogtown and the Z-boys” and “Riding with Giants”. There is no mysticism with snowboarding, no mythical “waves”, no mythical figures from early in the history of the sport. It was real easy to get other stuff done around the apartment with this in the background.  Woodchuck sez, “Skip it.”

Eye Candy #468 - "Jet Li's Fearless"

Jet Li’s Fearless: Billed as Jet Li’s last chopsocky flick (what kind of movies he’s going to make now, I have no idea, which I imagine is the same boat the casting directors are in). In addition to being his last film, this is the film which best personifies his philosophy about martial arts (referred to as “wushu” throughout the film).  Li is Huo Yuanjia, legendary martial artist famous for successfully besting foreign fighters at the turn of the 20th Century. The problem with Huo is that he doesn’t always act like the upstanding person. In fact, his vanity results in the death of his daughter and family, at which point he wanders the land to reconnect with himself, returning a stronger, more humble man concerned with strengthening the Chinese self-image. And when a contest is announced in Shanghai for the best German, British, Japanese, and French fighters versus the best the native population can offer, Huo is the only person to step forward for the task. He manages to best 3 of the 4 fighters but, fatally poisoned by skullduggery, he dies shortly following the conclusion of the fight. His martial arts school, Chin Woo, continues to this day. A variation of this same story was told in Bruce Lee’s “Fist of Fury” and Li’s earlier “Fist of Legend” (both of which are better movies than this one).  This is hardly Jet Li’s best movie. The script is laughable, the dialogue deplorable, and the people doing the English editing are pootastic. The previews would have you think this was the be-all-end-all for his oeuvre, and sadly it’s not. And it pales greatly when compared to movies like “Hero” (which I thought was phenomenal, and was better looking and had a better script). It’s unfortunate that Li decided to leave the stage with this film. C’mon, Jet, John Candy had no choice to leave us with “Wagons East” and Raul Julia had no choice to leave us with “Street Fighter”; you aren’t going to get a lot of romantic comedy roles. Look at Steven Seagal and Jackie Chan as proof.  Sure, we’ve got fights galore and that’s all well and good if that’s all you’re looking for. But it’s not enough for me. It's not as mystical as it wants to be and not as well-made as it is assumes it is.  Woodchuck sez, “For fans only. Everyone else will probably be disappointed.”

Eye Candy #467 - "Pulse"

Pulse: This movie, like many movies these days, was marketed wrong. Instead of marketing it (appropriately) to the sci-fi crowd, it was marketed to the (inappropriate) horror crowd. I will admit right off the bat, Kristen Bell is HAWT so I had already pretty much decided that I would check this out on DVD regardless of what I’d heard. Not surprisingly the reviews were uniformly bad but after having viewed the film, I don’t think they are completely deserved.   The skinny: people, including our dear Ms Bell, are all going to school at an unnamed American university. Soon, shadowy shapes, flitting images of people, and ghost-like beings begin to appear, attacking regular humanity. Soon, society is breaking down, people are committing suicide in gruesome fashion, and more and more of the ghosty people keep appearing and appearing.  The conventional wisdom would have you believe they’re ghosts. However, they’re NOT. And the explanation of who they are is intriguing – there was an experiment by several college students involving wireless communication, resulting in them discovering frequencies that weren’t previously known. Once they discovered these frequencies, they also discovered voices communicating on said frequencies, but the voices had the ability to modulate frequencies if they thought they were being listened. And then they began to invade our world, attacking humans so they could (and this is the only really dumb plot point) steal their “will to live”, at which point a human’s body is consumed from within and eventually causes them to turn to ash and such (it would have been better if they had just said that they stole souls, because that’s what it looks like). So they kill people by making people want to kill themselves.  Because the beings travel by frequency, they can appear anywhere there is a cellphone, a computer hooked to the internet, email, instant messenger, PDA, or walkie-talkie (but oddly enough, not radio). The only way to stop them is to either destroy the signal or go some place where there is no signal or network like the desert. Or, you can make your apartment airtight cover your entire apartment in red tape because the red blocks their ability to travel by signal. So I guess it’s partly a comment on our technology-driven society and our over-reliance on wireless communication devices (it’s certainly much more compelling of argument: “Don’t use cellphones or you’ll get cancer!” versus “Don’t use cellphones or evil creatures will come steal your will to live!”). Bell does okay with what she’s given. She is accompanied by Ian Somerhalder, Boone from “Lost” as a hacker who discovers how to stop the creatures (or at least how he thinks they could be stopped). The rest of the cast isn’t noteworthy (though we do get a little Ron Rifkin love).  So, it’s not a bad movie at all, and it's got plenty of creepy images in it to go around. It’s also certainly not the full-on horror movie that the ads would have you believe (I swear some of the marketing departments for the studio houses need to learn their audience better; if there’s no blood and gore, you can’t market it like “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”).  Woodchuck sez, “Worth a look.”

Eye Candy #466 - "The Proposition"

The Proposition: A bleak Australian western penned by Nick Cave, I heard about “The Proposition” months ago and its successful round of film festivals. It never got a large theatrical release and after watching the film, it’s perfectly clear why. You know you are in for a violent, violent film when there is a disclaimer about the treatment of aborigines in the film.  Mikey and Charlie Burns (Guy Pearce) are two of a three-brother criminal family who are captured by Australian police in a tin shack whorehouse (into which the police put a lot of bullets). Charlie is given a deal by the police chief Captain Stanley (Ray Winstone) to track down and kill his older brother Arthur (Danny Huston) to spare the life of his younger brother Mikey from the gallows. Seems that Arthur is the most unsavory of the three and is very much still at large and killing people.  But finding Arthur is not as easy as it sounds. He lives out where white men do not go, and where the native population of aborigines put big damn spears in trespassers (5-6 long and at least an inch or two around, make you look like a spiny blowfish you get 3 or 4 of them in you). While Charlie is off finding Arthur, Captain Stanley finds himself quickly losing control of the situation to a vigilante mob who want to dispense a little frontier justice to poor little Mikey who has been left behind (to the tune of 40 lashes) and don’t care for the deal extended to Charlie, who is a violent murderer in his own right.  Charlie eventually finds Arthur, but is wounded by aborigines in the process (and if you ever wanted to see an aborigine’s head explode due to a bullet, this is your picture), and that doesn’t bode well for Mikey, post-whipping. Nor does it bode well for Captain Stanley when Arthur Burns comes a-calling for his little brother. Because then all we’ve got left is revenge.   Some of the reviews I’ve read of the film compare it to an Australian answer to “Unforgiven”. In some ways I think they are right, but they are much more graphic here in their depiction of violence (if you aren’t getting your throat cut, you’re getting a bullet through your brainpan) The environment is so bleak and harsh, is it any wonder that that world bred violent criminals like the Burnses in the film, and Ned Kelly in real life? The reviews also stressed the themes of family, loyalty, brotherhood, and other such hogwash. This film is about revenge. Period.  The acting seems to be more in the speak-little-look-moodily-around vein. Pearce has maybe a half-dozen lines in the whole film. Huston seems to be trying to evoke his father John’s famous voice.  Winstone is given the most to do and he’s fairly solid. Supporting cast also has Emily Watson (who isn’t given much to do as Stanley’s wife) and David Wenham (who is apparently content to be a goofy character actor and NOT capitalize on any possible sex appeal as Faramir).  If you are looking for a warm, fuzzy, feel-good movie, this is NOT your picture. If you are looking for a solid western, it’s up your alley.  Woodchuck sez, “Check it out.”

Eye Candy #465 - "Beerfest"

Beerfest:  This movie is just a lawsuit waiting happen.  Something probably involving death by binge drinking.  Probably some frat guys.  I run hot-cold on the Broken Lizard guys.  “Super Troopers” was entertaining and “The Dukes of Hazzard” had its pluses.  I wouldn’t say either was high art, but it certainly looked like they wanted to have fun and we’re doing it however they wanted to do it.  “Beerfest” is their latest offering, about a secret beer-drinking competition held during Octoberfest in Germany.  Americans have historically not been invited to participate.  Enter the Wolfhouse brothers who, trying to get the ashes of their grandfather back to Germany, end up in the middle of Beerfest and get thoroughly embarrassed in the process.  They decide to put together their own team of drinkers, comprised mostly of some of their old college buddies.  They spend a year training to beat the German Beerfest team, helmed by members of the von Wolfhausen family, who blame Grandpa Wolfhouse for stealing their secret beer formula for the greatest German beer ever created and absconding to America.  The bulk of the film is about preparing for the games (competitive quarters, you get the idea) and getting the team together.  A LOT of alcohol appears to be consumed in this movie (hence, the disclaimer at the beginning of film: “If you try to drink as much as they do in the movie…YOU WILL DIE.” ). I can’t help myself – this movie was funny.  Like “Super Troopers” before it, there are some great, great quotes in this film.  And I’m continually amazed by the legitimate talents that end up in these films beside Broken Lizard, with this go-round including Donald Sutherland, Cloris Leachman, and Jurgen Prochnow.(playing, you guessed it, an evil German).  I wouldn’t own it, but damn it had me laughing a couple of times.  Woodchuck sez, “Worth a look.”

Eye Candy #464 - "Miami Vice"

Miami Vice: I was a little too young to enjoy the TV show “Miami Vice” in its heyday. I remember watching the occasional tidbit, seeing the “Miami Vice” stunt show at Universal Studios. But as I’ve grown older, I’ve learned more (and seen more) about Michael Mann, the TV series creator. I’ve enjoyed some of his other films: Heat, Collateral, The Last of the Mohicans, Manhunter, The Insider. They’re all fairly stylish, well-written, good movies that are watchable again and again (I own quite a few of them). So seeing Mann revisit his old stomping grounds of “Miami Vice” wasn’t a scary idea. I knew that it wasn’t going to be a retread of old looks, actors, and stories, and Mr. Mann really hasn’t let me down yet.  Gone is Don Johnson as Sonny Crocket. In is everyone’s favorite Irishman about town (no, not Liam Neeson) Colin Farrell. Gone also is Phillip Michael Thomas as Rico Tubbs. In is Jamie Foxx (a Mann alum from Collateral). Trudy, Switek, Vito, Calabrese are all here as well, played by younger, hipper actors.  An FBI undercover deal goes sour, resulting in the death of a former informant of Crockett and Tubb’s. They are pressed into service by FBI Agent Fujima (Ciaran Hinds) to find out who the shooter is and close them down. This brings them into contact with Colombians, Cubans, the Aryan Brotherhood, Haitian mobsters, and one Chinese businesswoman/interpreter (Gong Li, in only her second all-English role, the first being “Memoirs of a Geisha”). We also get fast cars, fast boats, explosions, incidental nudity, and the trademark loud Michael Mann gunfight.  The dialogue is good (some of it lifted from old “Miami Vice” episodes), the action set pieces are solid (as I’ve come to expect from Mann), and the acting is relatively good. It’s a fun movie to watch, entertaining, but does have some flaws.  While this movie has got style to spare, the plot leaves some gaping holes, including one major one in particular - Tobbs and Crockett are supposed to find who ratted out the FBI agents that got killed when the original operation went into the pooper...and they never do.  Mann’s use of music, which is usually spot-on, seems more muddled than usual - there is almost too much music and not all of it serves the film.  And at 2 hours 26 minutes, the film is about a half-hour too long.  But I enjoyed it. I took my dad with me for his birthday and he enjoyed it. So there you go.  Woodchuck sez, “Check it out.”

Eye Candy #463 - "The Prestige"

The Prestige: Read this book a few weeks back in preparation for this movie. It’s the story of two magicians in the late 19th-early 20th century England whose rivalry goes beyond just the professional. This is the 4th major film outing for director Christopher Nolan, who gave us “Memento” and “Batman Begins”.  Borden (Christian Bale) and Angier (Hugh Jackman) are journeyman magicians under the same stage magician who have a falling out over a trick gone horribly, horribly wrong (resulting in the death of one of the participants). They become competitors, each seeking to find the secret of the others tricks and preventing the other from being successful, including acts of sabotage and violence. But the more we learn about each magician, the more answered questions about who they are come up until the final 15 minutes of the film when all is fairly well revealed and we learn more about who each man really is.  Bale and Jackman are both excellent, with a solid supporting cast in Michael Caine as Jackman’s “engineer” (the designer of his stagecraft), Scarlett Johansson as the love interest of both men, and David Bowie in a great turn as Nicola Tesla (he does an excellent; you hardly recognize him as Bowie…even with the different colored eyes). Throw in Andy Serkis and Roger Rees, and you've got an extremely talented group of people on screen.  There are quite a few changes from the book upon which the film is based. For one, a framing sequence involving descendants of both men in the present day is the device the book uses to retell each man’s life and passion/obsession in the other. Also, the electricity device created by Tesla and used by Angier onstage works somewhat differently than in the book. There were several other changes that I won't elaborate here (they have to do with the fate of both men in the book, parts of which were changed significantly). I don’t think that any of these changes took away from the story shown in the film (there were some pretty weak parts of the book, particularly in the contemporary pieces).  An all-around well-made, watchable film.  Woodchuck sez, “Check it out.”