Darkness Falls

I've been on more or less a hiatus the past two  weeks. A busy work schedule, not to mention plain old fatigue, has been gnawing on me, and between that and the string of blah releases recently the result I'm afraid has been me been neglecting Hello Mr. Anderson and my readers. Still, I couldn't imagine a better return to the site than reviewing possibly the most anticipated movie of the summer, The Dark Knight Rises. The finale to Christopher Nolan's take on the caped crusader has certainly earned it's "epic" label: at 165 minutes, it is the longest of his Batman trilogy, and borrows extensively from the comic book character's mythology in the formation of its story. In this third installment, the director took pages from one of the Batman's all-time great stories, 'Knightfall', which chronicled a hero driven to the point of both physical and mental exhaustion before being broken entirely. With Marvel having dominated the comic book film wars the past few years - Iron Man, Thor and of course The Avengers performing more impressively than DC's Superman Returns, Jonah Hex and Green Lantern - Nolan's films have been a light of hope for the company to somehow find their way back to the quality of storytelling for which they were once known. We're a long way from the "Bat-Nipple" sham that was Batman & Robin, and I was certainly of a mood to see this movie after spending this last weekend in the REAL inspiration for Gotham City, good old NYC.

You guessed it: he's Batman.

Set eight years after accepting the blame for the death of District Attorney Harvey Dent in The Dark Knight, Batman has retired his cape and cowl. Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) has lived in seclusion, avoiding any public appearances both due to the physical trauma his body endured in his battle with Two Face and the Joker and his emotional instability following the death of childhood friend and former romantic interest Rachel Dawes. Gotham has enjoyed a modern Renaissance, with Dent's legacy ensuring that the city is free of the organized crime that had crippled its peace and prosperity in the previous decades. That all begins to change with the arrival of Bane (Tom Hardy), a brilliant, mysterious and deadly mercenary who has Gotham set in his sights, to bring chaos in his wake. What is Bane after? Why has cat burgler Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway) targeted Bruce Wayne? And how are Ra's al Ghul and the League of Shadows involved? It's no wonder the thing stretches out to nearly three hours, as Nolan definitely needed that time to tell the whole story.

You'll wake up to an empty apartment... but it will be worth it.

This was to be the big one. The Dark Knight Rises was going to be bigger, more explosive and exciting than Marvel's The Avengers, being the end of Nolan and Bale's involvement with the storied franchise. It was far and away the most anticipated movie of the year for most people. Naturally this is where you start to pick up that The Dark Knight fails to live up to those impossibly high standards you have set. It's not so much that Nolan does anything particularly WRONG, not really. But there were several curious decisions made that - while not making TDKR as disappointing as Prometheus - seriously hinder the film's narrative flow. The movie starts off exciting with the introductions of Hardy's Bane and Hathaway's Catwoman, two major characters in the Batman universe who benefit from the amazingly talented actors who portray them. Hardy, nearly unrecognizable, has turned himself into a force of nature, and Hathaway masters all the angles of Selina Kyle, from her natural seductiveness to her brilliant strategic mind to her physical prowess. We even get to see a different side of Bruce Wayne, one that has been seriously affected by the battles and losses in his life. For Bale, it might not be as impressive as his turn in The Fighter, but his ability to invest himself fully into a role is nothing if not impeccable. And Nolan has always had a talent for drawing a lot of emotion out of his audiences with stellar visuals and explosive action.

Sure, he's not quite like the comic character, but Hardy's Bane is one of the best villains this year.

Unfortunately, even Nolan can't keep it up in a three-hour film, and when the film inevitably slows down for excessive plot exposition, you start to notice all the things that are wrong with The Dark Knight Rises. Like how Catwoman, despite her and Hathaway's many talents, still turns out to be kind of a one-dimensional character. Or Bane's ending, which is about as anti-climactic as one can get. Or Alfred's (Michael Caine) actions, which would never have happened in the comics. Or how Nolan ceases to focus on Batman for stretches at a time, turning the movie into the John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) show. They're great actors and do wonderful jobs, but the last time I checked the protagonist was supposed to be Bruce Wayne, not some orphan cop. Or hey, remember when the villain conspired to use a Waynetech invention to actually destroy Gotham City in Batman Begins? Well, expect to see that again! Or Batman's steadfast refusal to use guns, while having no qualms about using the machine guns and missiles on his new "Bat" flyer late in the film. Or how there's no reference to the Joker, who contrary to the first law of Batman movies did NOT die at the end of The Dark Knight? I understand that nobody can replace Heath Ledger's Joker at this point but I don't need an actor in makeup, just some sort of sign that he was loose in Gotham as all the craziness was going down. Or the film's surprising predictability. Don't even get me STARTED on Marion Cotillard's character. And that ENDING...!

This guy gets more attention than Batman...

One of the biggest complaints you will hear about films based on comic book characters is that you can't fully get into the story unless you already know all about the character in question. That has at least been partially true of Marvel's recent efforts, especially for The Avengers, which did have some moments that might have been confusing if you hadn't seen any of its predecessors. The irony of The Dark Knight Rises is that newcomers to the franchise will handily be able to follow along whether or not they've read the comic, so long as they've at least seen Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Even marginal Batman fans, however, may find themselves frothing at the mouth with all the liberties Christopher Nolan has taken with Gotham's favored son. At it's best, The Dark Knight Rises is a fun, exciting and entertaining thrill-ride with enough action, character development and intrigue to overcome its most glaring faults. It's the little things that will dig into your fun at the theater however, and there is no moment like that one Avengers scene of the collected heroes preparing for battle that will make you cheer and clap your hands in pure joy and exhilaration. TDKR is not that kind of movie, and doesn't try to be. Nolan's Batman is a character mired in darkness, ultimately alone in the battle against injustice. It's unquestionably his creation, and I'll say it's good enough to be the #9 film of 2012. That it could have - and perhaps SHOULD HAVE - been so much better is a shame, but Nolan's successes far outweigh his failures. His Batman epic, though now over, will be remembered as one of the best superhero series of all time, if not THE best. It's too bad it didn't finish better, but perhaps this was the ending Nolan's trilogy needed, if not necessarily the one it deserved.

Dancing lessons have since been cancelled.

Movie Monday: Wild Thing

Film festivals can be a great source of information. News from these shows can illuminate the hot new films that will be coming out soon. And if a title gains major favor and awards, you know that it is a movie you should look forward to seeing. This isn't a guaranteed sure thing, however; there are huge differences between Little Miss Sunshine and The Tree of Life, after all. Beasts of the Southern Wild certainly looks interesting, and it won Sundance's Grand Jury Prize and Cannes' Camera d'Or (their award for best film by a first time director). But can it possibly live up to that level of expectation?

 Hushpuppy, a six year-old girl, lives in the "Bathtub", a southern delta community, with her daddy. The folk of the Bathtub happy live apart from modern society, even as they know that eventually their homes will soon be permanently underwater. When tragedy befalls the community, Hushpuppy must undergo a journey from where she needs her father's help and guidance to a place where she can care for herself, and discover her place in the universe.

Beasts of the Southern Wild is directed by Benh Zeitlin and stars Quevenzhane Wallis and Dwight Henry.

Click here for the full review at Open Letters Monthly.

Movie Monday: A 'Savage' Review

This past weekend was all about The Amazing Spider-Man, but what if you've already seen the latest superhero film twice over between its Wednesday release and Saturday morning? What do you do then? As Todd and I discovered, the answer is certainly not to see Savages, the latest film by Wall Street and Platoon director Oliver Stone.

When Ben and Chon, co-owners of Los Angeles' best-run and least crime-ridden marijuana business, feel the pressure from Mexican Cartels who want to partner with their methods, they decide that they want to get out of the illegal drugs business. But the Cartel wants their expertise, and their leader, Elena Sanchez, has the pair's shared girlfriend O kidnapped as collateral to make sure the young men fall in line. When Ben and Chon instead decide to fight back and rescue their girl, the result is an orgy of violence and double crossing that involves rival cartels, Navy SEALS, and the Drug Enforcement Agency. Nothing will get between the pair and O, not even a well-armed militia intent on taking their heads.

Savages is directed by Oliver Stone and stars Taylor Kitsch, Aaron Johnson, Blake Lively, Salma Hayek, John Travolta, Demian Bichir and Benicio del Toro.

Click here for the full review on Open Letters Monthly.

Totally 'Amazing'

Now THIS is the type of summer action movie I like to see! Though there was no way it could be possibly outshine The Avengers, and there's a good chance it won't be quite as good as Christopher Nolan's conclusion to the Batman trilogy in The Dark Knight Rises, The Amazing Spider-Man was one summer blockbuster I'd been waiting months to see. Having seen so many big budget duds, I NEEDED something genuinely good to write about, especially with a July that sports only seven major film releases (I write about a dozen reviews a month; you do the math). Thankfully the superhero reboot directed by (500) Days of Summer's Marc Webb (I don't think his name had anything to do with the selection process) was exactly what both Todd and I needed, as both of us wanted something that came CLOSE to bringing back the giddiness of seeing The Avengers on screen.

As a film franchise, Spider-Man had hit on some hard times. Remember, the Sam Raimi trilogy of Spidey films were all released in the past decade, and most people going to see Andrew Garfield play their favorite web-slinging hero not only remember Tobey Maguire's take on the same role, but in fact bought tickets for it in May of 2002. But after Sony Pictures (supposedly) screwed up Raimi's vision of the series in 2007's second sequel, they're giving it the old sophomore try in the reboot. There's little question as to why Sony reset the series; the previous stars were getting old, Raimi wasn't on board, and if they didn't do something with the license the rights would revert back to Marvel, as well as all those box office dollars. That wasn't much of a problem when Marvel couldn't make a good movie if they tried, but now that they're owned by Disney...

Oh, Peter Parker; you nerd, you!

Well, it doesn't matter anymore. Despite any early reservations, both Todd (who doesn't miss a superhero movie if she can help it) and I loved The Amazing Spider-Man. This was a classically-told story executed so well that it mattered little if Webb and company didn't add anything significant to the mythology of the character. Peter Parker is the same loner, smart-ass high-schooler that the comics remember, trying to make it through his school years while living with his Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) and Aunt May (Sally Field). A renewed search into the disappearance of his parents as a boy brings him to OsCorp, the scientific research company for whom his dad used to work. There he meets the one-armed Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), who had worked alongside Richard Parker on genetic research intended to cure diseases around the world. Peter also manages to get bitten by a genetically-modified spider, which somehow turns him into something more than human, with the proportionate strength of a spider, excellent reflexes and the ability to cling to walls and ceilings. Eventually the genetic experiments break down (as they invariably to at the cinema) and the newly-christened Spider-Man must protect the city from Connors, whose work has resulted in him have transformed into the rampaging Lizard.

He's just hangin' around...

Most Spider-Man fans know the major events that have shaped the unusual life of Peter Parker. First of course is the spider bite, the source of all his powers (when I get bitten, usually all that is involved is a lot of scratching). Others include the myriad of tragic deaths left in Spider-Man's wake, usually those close to him. I won't say who perishes for the sake of the dozen or so people out there who have somehow managed to escape all references to pop culture, but trust me on this one: Spider-Man is definitely the harbinger of death. But one thing I don't recall from any comic books was the loss of Parker's parents, or at least the idea that their absence is a major factor in his development. It is here where Webb makes his biggest divergence from the source material, and it is indeed a welcome change from what we already know about the teenage superhero. The character was never so driven in the original trilogy, and that change of focus does wonders for making this film fresh despite everything else remaining practically the same.

The sequel will feature Spidey vs. the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

Garfield is especially impressive in his first major leading film role. Throughout the movie, Peter Parker goes from smart-assed teen to super-powered bully and arrogant jerk (where I became worried would be his final resting place) to, finally, the wise-cracking, responsible superhero we know and love. I was so relieved than the creative minds behind Parker manged to perfectly emulate what was so great about the teenaged hero and get it so RIGHT. Garfield is simply amazing, bringing with him a darker, more brooding tone to the role and  actually taking the character on an emotional journey that changes how he sees the world and his place in it. Not to disparage Maguire's impressive (if somewhat campy) take on the part, but Garfield simply blows his predecessor's incarnation out of the water. It's a moment of celebration when Spider-Man finally attains that "hero" status from the city of New York, especially since he's no longer seeking approval for his actions, but just trying to do the right thing. This was a rushed process in Raimi's version, but Webb allows Parker to mature as a character over the length of the film, not something you often see in blockbuster movies.

Peek-a-Boo!

Webb did a great job in surrounding Garfield with exceptional talent, both on the acting and creative sides. Most notable is the fantastic Emma Stone as legendary Spidey girlfriend Gwen Stacy, as she and Garfield together possess excellent chemistry, far more than Maguire and Kirsten Dunst (as Mary Jane Watson) ever boasted. Gwen is the kind of seemingly unattainable girl we've all known at one point or another; beautiful, smart and driven, but without the bullish attitude that often accompanies those qualities. She has very strong feelings on right and wrong, and with a police Captain for a dad, it's easy to see from where those good qualities came. It feels like Stone has been around forever, though it's easy to forget that she made her big screen debut AFTER Spider-Man 3's launch in 2007. Her rapid ascent has been her legacy, and she has quickly garnered quite the impressive list of credentials. Her inclusion here is the perfect example of casting done right. Other examples include Sheen and Fields, whose character's no-nonsense goodness exemplify the Golden Age of Comics in being bright lights in otherwise dark surroundings. The always-strong Dennis Leary also impresses as George Stacy, where his unique personality (I like to call it "Charismatic Rage") fits perfectly with the perpetually-stressed and high-strung officer of the law. Ifans is another actor who has really turned it up a notch of late, with his excellent turns in Anonymous and The Five-Year Engagement. The Lizard is one of those Spider-Man villains I had not been familiar with, and I was afraid that The Amazing Spider-Man would turn into a "monster-of-the-week", doing little but prep you for a more plot-based sequel. Thankfully (as Todd later related) Curt Connors has always been a strong villain, and continues to be so here. He's really a tragic character in fact, trying desperately to use his new-found formula for good, only to change his tune and turn into a fearsome creature when things go horribly wrong. Ifans plays a good (ish) man forced into an evil destiny because he was pushed one time too many, and it's easy to sympathize with his plight. It makes for a great tale, and along with the rest of the cast really sets the standards for the whole theatrical experience.

Dramatic pose... and GO!

The best things about The Amazing Spider-Man were all the little things that Webb and company got right. Gone are the "organic webbing" that Parker could somehow (and conveniently) excrete from his wrists in the Raimi films, replaced with the gosh-darned web shooters we knew we always wanted. I loved how Parker, while top-of-his-class smart, used technology derived from OsCorp designs to develop his shooters and web fluid, as even a genius-level student designing those from scratch would have been a bit of a stretch. Speaking of OsCorp, I loved how corporate head Norman Osborn's presence was felt but never overtly shown, even in the post-credits "reveal." They're taking their time with Osborn, which is great since the character is easily Spider-Man's nemesis in the comics, even more so than the popular Venom. I loved how the ending left a number of things in the air, not forcing itself to resolve every little conflict in Parker's life in just 136 minutes. I loved the special effects, which felt both realistic and breathtakingly spectacular all at once. Even early scenes of Parkour are excellently conceived and pulled off, though they're all but gone once Parker finally dons the famous red and blue spandex.

"I'm going to throw you out the window, now."

Sure, Spider-Man has a few blemishes, but that was mostly in the visual department. Maybe it was just because we were late getting to the show and the only central seats left were in the front row (damn you, MBTA!), but the action scenes were often shot much too close to what was happening, obscuring any details. It's a common problem in even great action films, and for a first-time action director like Webb, it's unsurprising that he would fall into that trap. Also, as I stated earlier, there was little beyond the focus on Peter Parker's parents that mark this as anything but a typical Spidey film, and so the director has little to actually call his own when all is said and done. Still, The Amazing Spider-Man is a well-cast, well-made and ultimately "amazing" movie, and easily the 7'th best film this year. It contains by far the best Stan Lee cameo of any Marvel movie, and is one of the best superhero films in recent years, better even than any of those released in 2011. I know it's easy to get excited for the new Batman film on July 20'th, and don't think this excuses you from not having seen The Avengers, because you really need to do so. But this was a pleasant surprise while I await other things, and if you'd be doing yourself an injustice if you don't take the time to check out this worthy reboot.

A Kind of Magic

Of all the films I hoped I would like in 2012, I think I can safely say that I did not imagine going into a movie about male stripping and come away happy with what I had just witnessed. And yet Magic Mike had a lot going for it when it was released to theaters this past weekend. For one, the whole thing was directed by Steven Soderbergh and while I don't always get behind the man's movues, he certainly does solid work with interesting, unique ideas. The second reason I wanted to see this was star Channing Tatum, on whose early days as a stripper in Tampa the screenplay is partially based. For what feels like a long time I have criticized Tatum's largely wooden facial expressions and general lack of acting ability, as he has been allowed to get by mainly on his looks (or in the early Step Up films, his dancing). But this year has been a turning point for the young actor, whose performances in Soderbergh's under-appreciated Haywire and the amazingly funny 21 Jump Street showed a side of the star we hadn't really seen. He's quickly proving that he is more than just a fem-friendly beefcake, and Magic Mike seemed like the kind of film that pushes a man like Tatum to the next level of his career. I knew I'd likely be the only straight male in the theater (as it was a matinee, I turned out to be the only male, period), but I was ready to see something completely different at the cinema this week.

Yes, there is quite a bit of this going on.

And boy, do Tatum and company deliver. Our star plays the titular Magic Mike, a man of many hats. He runs several small businesses, but makes most of his money as a male stripper (I don't think the term "exotic dancer" is ever used; these guys know their job) at Xquisite, a popular club run by unscrupulous manager Dallas (Matthew McConaughey). But what Mike really wants to do, what he has been working hard to do for the past decade, is make custom furniture from broken and discarded items. He's been steadily saving his money, but so far has not been able to get the concept off the ground. When he meets Adam (Alex Pettyfer), a slacker with no idea what he wants in life, he takes the young man under his wing and introduces him to the business, which Adam gradually gets into despite the disapproval from his sister Brooke (Cody Horn). Xquisite's business is rapidly growing and Dallas is looking to change venues to the more populous and popular Miami. This excites most of the dancers, but Mike is slowly coming to the realization that he doesn't want to be a stripper his whole life, and is ready to settle down. But with the job being seriously lucrative and banks not lending him money to pursue his dreams, how can he possibly step away?

Yes, McConaughey actually dressed like that in the morning.

On one level, it would be easy to label this a movie for women and gay men and leave it at that. In fact, a lot of people believed just that, as ladies made up something like 75% of last weekend's box office for Magic Mike. When you have this much bared male flesh on the big screen, that's just going to happen. But underneath the rippling chests of guys like True Blood's Joe Manganiello or White Collar's Matt Bomer - not to mention the threat of cliched romantic comedy by Tatum and Horn - beats a story about brotherhood, of guys who do what they do to make money, meet women and have fun. Very little of the events depicted here are actually based on Tatum's experiences in the business, but Soderbergh I think does a good job of looking at the industry from multiple angles, from the highs (money, women) to the lows (drugs, dead-end prospects, damaged relationships) with an honest and nonjudgmental eye. Sure, most of the veteran strippers enjoy their jobs, but it's the transformation of Adam in which we see how much it can change a person over even a short period of time. The story makes for something of a cautionary tale, albeit not one nearly so preachy as you might expect.

Even the ladies get in on the skin-baring act.

Both the acting and dancing are top notch and excellently choreographed, and Soderbergh deserves credit for really putting a team of talented performers together and making Magic Mike a full package deal. Tatum continues his incredible run, oozing his usual charm but creating a clear separation in his personality between his civilian life and what he does for a job. Though it might be due to Tatum's experience, Mike might be his deepest and most resonating character to this point, and it is primarily his contributions that make this so much more than a chick flick. I didn't think Cody Horn had a whole lot to do, but Brooke's serious, no-nonsense attitude makes a nice foil for the more laid-back Mike and Adam. And yet she's not such a different or ignorant creature that a pairing between Mike and Brooke is impossible, which is good as the film forces the idea upon us whenever they share the screen.

All he's missing are the bongos...

As for the rest of the cast, most of them have little to do besides reside in states of near-undress, but at least there's a variation in what they bring to the table. I still think Alex Pettyfer is a far more a talented actor than he has been given credit, but lousy box office returns tend to sour you in the face of Hollywood execs. Still, his villainous turn in last year's In Time was the perfect example of lightning in in a bottle, and he continues that trend as a failed college athlete who lacks the drive or commitment to make it in the real world. His is no obvious transformation, but a subtle one that doesn't change the personality of his character, but exploits his already-prevalent weaknesses over the course of the script. In all, a brilliant turn. McConaughey doesn't bring anything new, but is perfectly cast for his southern drawl and ability to pull off a thong. Olivia Munn's topless scene should be all guys need to get into the theater, and her role as a psychology student who met Mike while studying the emotional stability of strippers isn't half bad, to boot. Finally, Joe Manganiello, Matt Bomer and Adam Rodriguez can be applauded for their additions to the cast, even if most of their character development seems to have been scrapped in favor of seriously excellent dance moves.

"Now remember, they have to reach into your pocket to get the candy."

Magic Mike is certainly no fluff piece. The stripping scenes might be outrageous, the romance might be a little forced, and the twists might be somewhat predictable, but this is the type of film that rides high on character and charm, both of which it has in spades. Tatum once again scores, and it would be great if his surprising 2012 could serve as a launching pad for the young man to achieve greater things. It's not often when I am wrong (and even less so when I admit it), but Tatum actually seems to be turning into something special, not just a pretty, unproven face. As far as Magic Mike goes, he MADE it, and if he continues to work with talented directors like Soderbergh and with choice casts like the one here, there's simply no limit to how far he can go.

Movie Monday: Ted

I had a choice this week (what a concept, Hollywood) and had been leaning towards the Steven Soderbergh male stripper flick Magic Mike to cover this Movie Monday. Todd diverted me elsewhere, however, and together we went to see Ted, the Boston-based comedy directed by and starring Seth MacFarlane, the creator of TV's Family Guy and American Dad! I do owe Todd thanks for that, as both she and I enjoyed some of our best laughs since March's 21 Jump Street opening.

Twenty-seven years after successfully wishing that his teddy bear could come to life and become his best friend, John Bennett and Ted have become inseparable. This is not only a problem for John, who seems to have trouble accepting his responsibility for the trouble Ted gets him into, but for John's girlfriend Lori, who believes Ted is keeping John from becoming all he can be in their relationship. John eventually agrees, and he helps Ted move out and get on his feet so that they can live their separate lives. But things do not go smoothly, and soon John may have to choose between his lifetime friend and the love of his life.

Ted is directed by Seth MacFarlane and stars Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis, Giovanni Ribisi, Joel McHale and Sam J. Jones, and features the voices of MacFarlane and
Patrick Stewart.

Click here for the whole review at Open Letters Monthly.

Not Too Friendly

Some things just seem to work better on paper than they do in execution. At first glance, Seeking a Friend for the End of the World looks like what it aspires to be, a comedic disaster film in the vein of 2012 or Deep Impact but focusing more on the impending victims of this end-of-the-world event. Combined with the solid work of Steve Carell, whose mere presence in The Office, Little Miss Sunshine, Crazy Stupid Love and Date Night raised their comedic efforts tenfold, you could expect that this film would feature a ton of laughs, all the way to Armageddon. Or you could get the much different, far less satisfying movie seen here.

Screenwriter and debuting director Lorene Scafaria, who had previously penned the script for the averagely-reviewed Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist, explores the idea of neighbors who had never before acknowledged the others' existence coming together in a time of impending doom. To that end, he pairs the mild-mannered, fatalistic Dodge Petersen (Carell) with the young, optimistic Penny Lockhart (Keira Knightley), as they travel together on one final quest before the end times. Dodge, whose wife has left him in the aftermath of humanity's final failed mission to divert the collision trajectory of an asteroid known as Matilda, is searching for a previous flame, the one that got away. He recruits the unlucky-in-love Penny for her car, claiming that he knows someone with a plane that can get her home to England to see her family one last time. The unlikely pair come upon different shades of humanity, people whose infinitely varied ways of dealing with the upcoming disaster can do nothing to stop the ticking clock of Matilda's arrival.

They're bored already by the premise.

Those interactions are the best thing Seeking has to offer, as exploring how people might react to a calamity of this size proves to be an able source of amusement. It doesn't hurt that Scafaria brought in a boatload of amazingly-talented performers to work these small roles, including Melanie Lynskey, Patton Oswalt, Martin Sheen and William Petersen. Especially entertaining are T.J. Miller and Gillian Jacobs as servers at "Friendzies" (think Friendly's) who have turned the family restaurant atmosphere into the scene of a drug-fueled orgy. Sadly, not everything is as good, with a scene featuring a military-trained group hoping to survive Matilda's impact by burrowing underground is neither funny nor important to the story overall. Most of these scenes also feel inconsequential, with the events occurring only with the explicit presence of the protagonists (an early-scene riot appears to have left no lasting damage when Dodge and Penny return to the area). With such a varying reactions, you would expect some sort of lasting impact. That doesn't happen until the end, and even then it does so in a most unspectacular fashion.

"Why yes, we ARE high! What was your first clue?

It doesn't help that Carell does little and less in this particular motion picture, a shame as he was my main reason for going to see this film. Not given a whole lot to do, Carell's job seems to be to react to each scene with the same sort of confused look in his eyes and a perpetual frown on his face. He's never given a chance to break out, and his role here is more for your pity than anything else. Relying on his more natural, easy-going charm, Carell plays the straight man in a world gone mad, and it doesn't help that you can see in his eyes a desire to play along that never comes to fruition. I haven't liked Knightley since her role in the very first Pirates of the Caribbean movie, so I wasn't expecting to enjoy her performance here. But lo and behold, she actually picks up where Carell left off and does her damndest to carry the whole thing on her back, and to her credit she mostly succeeds. Unlike the dour Dodge, Penny actually goes along with much of the silliness that pervades each scene, making her more sympathetic and in tune with the audience. It's her best performance in years, and while still not a GREAT one, it was certainly a nice surprise.

He'll have to settle for writing the Great American Letter.

Unfortunately, while there are plenty of nice ideas that Schafaria puts forth, Seeking is not the movie that decisively puts them all together in anything resembling a cohesive narrative, or even a decent use of a couple of hours. It's not BAD, but the idea that it could have been so much better is a lot to take. The movie never diverts hard to either hilarious spoof or romantic drama, and so the final product has not enough of either to keep afloat. The result is a jumble of decent scenes that somehow add up to less than the sum of their parts. For such a good-looking trailer to turn out as a merely "okay" movie is a little disappointing, but it could still prove somewhat worth your while, depending on your mood. If you decide to watch this, go see a matinee or wait until it's available to rent; whatever you do, don't bother paying full price for your ticket.