Crazy

One movie I sometimes hear mentioned is 2008's In Bruges, the black comedy from director and screenwriter Martin McDonagh. The film, which has quickly become a cult classic, combined an interesting premise with a violent story, earning star Colin Farrell a Golden Globe for his performance and In Bruges itself a Golden Globe nomination for best screenplay. It was McDonagh's first feature film, and set him up as a director to watch in the future.

The future is here now, and his sophomore effort Seven Psychopaths seems to have it all; a high-caliber cast, an overdose of inappropriate humor and more than enough violence to keep you on your toes. I mean, come on; how can you not get excited about a film called "Seven Psychopaths"? In a weekend of four major interesting releases (the others being Argo, Sinister and Here Comes the Boom), McDonagh's was the most original and intelligent option. That's what Todd and I agreed, and what several of our friends and cohorts affirmed was the title to see.

They won't take any Shih Tzu

Marty (Farrell) is a struggling screenwriter depressed over his current state of writer's block. He's got a title in mind - Seven Psychopaths - but is having a hard time coming up with ides for the seven. He is assisted by his best friend Billy (Sam Rockwell), an out of work actor and part-time dog-napper who alongside the non-violent Hans (Christopher Walken) steal dogs from their owners and then return them for the reward money. The business is going well until Billy steals the Shih Tzu (the breed was picked I'm sure so the characters could purposely err in pronunciation) of violent crime lord Charlie Costello (Woody Harrelson). Marty gets caught up in the mess, and soon the three men are on the lam, with Marty hoping he can finish writing his movie before he becomes the victim of one of his Psychopaths.

This dog needs more cowbell!

There's one guarantee I will make about this movie; you will NEVER be able to predict what will happen next. From the intense violence of the very first scene, Seven Psychopaths follows its own individual path. Unlike every title out there. it doesn't follow the same trodden paths to the same boring conclusions, and refuses to confine itself to any particular genre. At some moments it's light-hearted comedy, at others Quentin Tarantino's wet dream. The characters, especially the eponymous Psychopaths (who are gradually introduced throughout), are so incredibly unpredictable that you will never see the next action coming, and the resulting surprise makes Seven Psychopaths unlike anything you have seen to this point.

"Fire Danger" is right!

The Psychopaths themselves are a varied bunch, whether they originate from real life or Marty's imagination. They range from simply bizarre (the Quaker Psychopath, for instance) to the intensely violent Charlie Costello. Each has their own quirks and back-story, and even if they appear only for a few minutes they make lasting impressions on the film. My personal favorite was the masked Jack O'Diamonds, whose gimmick was killing mid-to-high-ranking members of organized crime syndicates and leaves playing cards on their bodies. You never knew when he was going to show up, and you found yourself relishing every moment he did. But none of the psychos is unforgettable, and you'll find yourself following the bread trail as each is reluctantly brought to light and developed.

Move over, Uggie.

Surprisingly central to the story was the the interplay between Marty, Billy and Hans as they work on Marty's script. It's quite the mix of methodologies as each wishes to make their mark on the budding screenplay. Marty doesn't want to go down the cliched, violent road that you would expect from a film called Seven Psychopaths, while Billy practically demands the big shoot-out to take place at the end. Hans meanwhile, being a Buddhist by nature, wants a more peaceful conclusion to things. What's funny is that they're fighting about the ending of the movie they end up being in, and I thought it made for an interesting mix of Tarantino and Spike Jonze's 2002 gem Adaptation. The final act is especially well-woven, and makes for a fine and appropriate conclusion to a wickedly funny and insane narrative.

Abbie Cornish's five minutes are about up...

The film also takes advantage of an excellent, underrated cast that delivers both laughs and heart in a script that doesn't broker any weak performances. Farrell doesn't always get the best scripts, but he always puts everything he has on the table. Though playing an alcoholic Irishman wouldn't seem like much of a stretch, it's hilarious to see him get berated (even by the Psychopaths) for his excessive drinking. He always puts everything on the table in his performances, even when he isn't given the best scripts, and so on this screen his performance is genius. Rockwell, another supremely-talented actor, balances that dynamic by playing up Billy's zany antics and manic tendencies. What's great about Billy is his ability to do the absolute wrong things for the right reasons, and I can't imagine anyone besides Rockwell pulling it off.  It would have been interesting to see what Mickey Rourke could have done with the role, but I'm glad Harrelson eventually got to play of Charlie Costello. Continually proving that he has broadened as an actor since his Cheers days, Woody Harrelson has the right look and is as perfectly cast as one can get. So surprisingly is musician Tom Waits as a bunny-carrying Psychopath in a minor role. The ladies are sadly underutilized; with high-profile castings of Quantum of Solace's Olga Kurylenko and Sucker Punch's Abbie Cornish, and their appearances in the trailers, I was expecting more. Marty and crew do somewhat make up for it by joking about it later, but the only thing not making it a deal breaker is that this movie is really about the guys anyway.

"Alas, poor Yorick. I knew him, Horatio."

And the guy of the hour is most definitely Christopher Walken. Despite how much I loved the rest of this flick, there's no way I'd have enjoyed it half as much if not for his mere presence. There have been plenty of impersonators over the years, but the best continues to be Walken himself, who gladly uses his offbeat speech rhythm and deadpan facade to great effect. Whatever he's talking about automatically becomes comic gold, and when the subjects turn to the completely insane topics the film addresses, he reaches a whole other level. You could easily see this movie for him alone and walk away satisfied. Like John Malkovich, he is one of Hollywood's most unique actors, and it almost always worth watching.

"But where has all the RUM gone??"

But Seven Psychopaths is no mere one-man show. It's one of the best times you'll spend at the theater this year, and appropriately steps in at #7 for 2012. It will probably be little remembered by audiences who don't want a new experience when they visit the theater, but for anyone wanting something NEW and FRESH with their cinema experience, this one becomes a must-see. Get to it before Paranormal Activity 4 knocks it from theaters for good.

A Good Film

Yes, this is another romantic comedy. With my current travels to see family in Florida this week, I'm dipping into the film reserve I've gathered on DVD of late, the same batch from which last week's You've Got Mail was a part. Once again I can thank my friend Anne for her suggestions, though I'm sure my readers will like me to move onto more varied fare, such as the R-rated comedy Horrible Bosses or the final Harry Potter film. There is no time to see new movies this week, however, so for now I'm afraid you'll have to settle for me lecturing you on a film you perhaps should have seen but didn't. This is hardly a surprise; despite his name recognition, Russell Crowe has never been the box office hero you might have imagined. In reality, he's much more well known for his quick temper and bad-boy attitude than his actual acting talent, which is unfortunate since he has in my eye proven himself to be quite the strong performer. With the notable exceptions of titles Gladiator and A Beautiful Mind (and maybe LA Confidential), Crowe's films can be categorized two ways: either they are so costly that they fail to recoup expenses despite good efforts (Robin Hood, Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World), or they are inexpensive flops that limp out of the gate. A Good Year was Crowe's first collaboration with director Ridley Scott after the cinema juggernaut that was 2000's Gladiator, a pairing that has often been spoken among the more legendary actor/director partnerships in Hollywood history (whether deservedly or not). Based on the bestselling novel by Peter Mayle, A Good Year should have garnered some support from audiences, but for whatever reason they were absent, leading insiders to call it a flop mere days after the film's release. It was an unfortunate failure for Scott and Crowe, but one that might have been simply undervalued not only by audiences, but by the very production studios that pushed this film.

I'm not sure you should be trusting your money with this man...

When hard-nosed London investment trader Max Skinner (Crowe) learns that his uncle Henry (Albert Finney) has passed away leaving Max the sole beneficiary of a vineyard estate in Provence, his first instinct is to sell the land. After all, Max has no use for a summer home when he hasn't taken day off from work for years, worrying about being usurped in his absence. After all, that's what he did to his predecessor. However, a suspension from his job for shady business practices forces him to at least visit his new property before selling it. While the estate could use a serious makeover, Max ends up nostalgic for the childhood spent there with his uncle, though not enough to reconsider his decision to sell. This creates conflict on several fronts, however; the land's chief winemaker Francis (Didier Bourdon) is adamant that Henry didn't entrust the estate to his nephew just so he could sell it off. And the sudden arrival of Christie (Abbie Cornish), claiming to be Henry's long-lost American daughter, threatens Max's sale of the vineyard by contesting his ownership. Finally, Max falls for a local cafe owner named Fanny (Marion Cotillard), who has supposedly sworn off men while becoming irresistable to Max. The reigning question becomes whether Max will sell the French vineyard, and if so whether he could possibly be redeemable afterwards.

"And if you look even farther, you'll see when Mr. Anderson DOESN'T review RomComs..."

For a film with such a high-profile star and director, problems have no shortage. Flashbacks to a young Max hanging out with his uncle Henry feel almost out of place against the backdrop that is the rest of the film, but unfortunately they are also important to the main tale and therefore cannot be ignored. This means that the scenes in which you are least interested are among the most needed to understanding what exactly is going on, a sad happenstance that reflects poorly on the quality of the script. Humor is also somewhat lacking. While many of the verbal quips are good enough for a nice chuckle, too often does A Good Year rely on slapstick and physical comedy to reach out to the audience, often to little positive effect. The romance itself, necessary for a film claiming to be a romantic comedy, is all but ignored until the film's final act, as the main focus until then seems to be on Max's nostalgia, the least interesting aspect of the entire story.

Apparently this is what passes for extremely funny in France

The film does have numerous strengths to assist in its cause, however. The script does have that charm that truly great actors can take advantage of, and I've seen no better use of Russell Crowe than his transformation from emotionless trader to charming romantic. Crowe's Max plays well through the first two-thirds of the movie in a performance that takes somewhat from earlier work thugs, malcontents and ne'er-do-wells, but with an easy charm that never lets you dislike him as we all did in LA Confidential. That charm really comes out to play when the romance with Fanny is (FINALLY!) explored later on. Until then we're happy to see him frolick verbally with costars Bourdon, Cornish and Archie Punjabi, who plays his personal assistant, matching him word for word. Looking back, it would be easy to say that Crowe is playing against type in A Good Year, but here is one of the few times that I think Crowe was most comfortable in a role, not playing to his usual thuggish ways.

Those Gladiator royalty checks didn't go as far as he thought...

The rest of the cast is also quite good, a sign that Scott had at least an idea what he was doing in that department. Finney is excellent despite being nearly relegated to the duller portions of the film, with Henry's paternal instincts in regards to Max coming through quite nicely. Sure, Finney amounts to little more than a scene-chewer (and with only young Freddie Highmore ever playing against him, he needs to), but he does it extremely well. This was Australian Cornish's first Hollywood role, and though it comes well before her beloved performance in Bright Star or even her mainstream success in this year's Limitless and Sucker Punch, she proves that she can handle working with the big boys as Henry's purported daughter. Witty as Max with little of the humor, Christie is a welcome respite from the bickering between Max and Francis. Bourbon does an okay job, but he's really among the least interesting of the cast, and almost cliched as a surly and dissheveled gardener. Punjabi raises smiles when paired with Crowe but has little overall impact on the story. Cotillard is by far the best, as its easy to fall in love with the woman who only a year later would take the world by storm in La Vie en Rose as singer Edith Pilaf. Here she plays a much more down-to-Earth role, but her beauty and talent combine to make her one of the best international actresses.

Minutes later, the two were at each other's thrats

A Good Year is not a great film. In fact, with director Ridley Scott clearly out of his element, I'm shocked that it was even a reasonably good one. Scott and Crowe have often worked well together, even if the behind-the-scenes arguments have stood out more than the products themselves. It's easy to forget that both are supremely talented, but fortunately it still can come through when you go back and watch what they've done together. A Good Year has a broken story and is extremely predictable, lacking in sufficient levels of romance or comedy. However, it is still talent and charm-packed, making up for much of what is missing from the big picture. You might want to fast-forward through a few bits, but if you check this film out I guarantee you'll be sucked into the Crowe-Cotillard relationship, as it's one of the more understated film romances of the past decade.

Fail Fatale

From the moment the trailer for Sucker Punch debuted at 2010's Comic-Con, it had become my most anticipated film of 2011. More than Thor. More than Captain America. More than just about any theatrical release you can imagine scheduled for this year. With it's engaging special effects, talented cast and explosive action, Sucker Punch looked like a crazy three-way love child borne of Kill Bill, 300 and The Pussycat Dolls. There was only one major obstacle between this film and guaranteed awesomeness: director Zack Snyder. While I (among others) loved his directorial debut in 2004's Dawn of the Dead, the remake of George Romero's classic zombie-ocalypse, his films have since been known more for style rather than substance. 300 (which I admit I haven't seen) has been described as a generally brainless film with beautiful sets, and Watchmen would have been unwatchable if not for the same style of visual splendor. Even his animated feature Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Houle was criticized for it's lack of character development and predictable story, while any who see it might "ooh" and "aah" the ocular stimuli. Simply put, Snyder is good at making things on screen look good, but that alone doesn't make for a good director. He was the main reason for any scenario in which Sucker Punch would not live up to its full potential, and that's a shame, as going in I (and my friend The Opinioness, who ventured with me) was worried that without Snyder this film might actually have had a chance of surprising us.

Yes, yes I think I will follow you into battle

After the death of her mother, Baby Doll (Emily Browning) is sent to an insane asylum for violent girls by her evil and lecherous stepfather. That same evil bastard wants to have Baby Doll lobotomized to prevent her from talking about his transgressions, and an orderly named Blue (Oscar Isaac) assures him that an expert is coming in a few days to carry out the procedure. With only days before completely losing her identity, Baby Doll hatches a plan to escape along with several other inmates: diva Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish), her sister Rocket (Jena Malone), Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens) and Amber (Jamie Chung). Sneaking behind the backs of Blue and the asylums' doctor Madam Vera Gorski (Carla Gugino), the five follow their plan via highly-exciting imagination-action music videos, and attempt to overcome the many obstacles in their path to gather what they need to escape.

Sorry Gugino, your Polish accent doesn't make up for your lack of necessity

The film's best achievement is by far the visuals. Yes, I know, stop your vigorous head-nodding, we all knew this was going to be the case. The film has a very Inception-esque vibe, not only in the amount of imagery used but in the story's concept as well: the young women live in an asylum, but create an image in their minds of a Roaring 20's-era brothel, because the real world is too painful. From there, Baby Doll imagines this whole other world in which she and her friends battle dragons, robots and monsters to obtain the real-world items they need. So Sucker Punch can be described as a dream within a dream, just like last year's summer blockbuster. However, while the theme worked for Inception because it was an integral part of the story, these overly-designed sets act with no real purpose to the plot of Sucker Punch, serving as merely an alternative telling of the far more mundane events; apparently Baby Doll has a hypnotic dance that immobilizes her target while the other girls simply steal what they need to escape, THAT'S IT. And I'm sorry, but after a completely gonzo first action scene in which Baby Doll takes on a trio of vicious giant Gollems, the rest of film's like scene feels remarkably similar, never growing in spectacle or explosiveness. Instead, they are just one steady hum, like that of a dead man's pulse.

Worse, the film's story is so dry and uninteresting that it's filled with miniature music videos of random stuff happening, mostly the transition from the first dream to the second. While the film's opening is an amazing feat, mixing tragic storytelling and amazing imagery (Snyder did a similar opener for Watchmen), the musical montages that follow are obvious filler for having nothing else to do while the film moves to the next major plot point. At least Snyder is the master of the film soundtrack, from the haunting tones of "Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)" in the opener to Emiliana Torrini's "White Rabbit" and a Queen hip-hop mash-up and Bjork's "Army of Me" (proving perhaps that Bjork appeals to all the people some of the time). It's only the excellence of the soundtrack that makes these scenes even remotely entertaining, as even what we can see on the screen doesn't always make up for just how lousy the storytelling gets.

Her hair moves more than in a Japanese anime, and the audience gets about as many nosebleeds

The acting is at least solid throughout, though by no means special. I have to imagine this is more due to the especially weak characters, not the actual talent involved (okay, it doesn't hurt that I'm convinced everyone on the cast minus Vanessa Hudgens could beat the crap out of me). Browning doesn't have a whole lot to do besides stare blankly and speak dry, unoriginal dialogue. She does get some juicy scenes (including being the star of the film's opening) but otherwise her biggest contribution to the film might be in the form of three musical tracks. Cornish is the best of the ladies, but also is limited by poor repartee and no character growth. Malone and Chung appear also to be talented while delivering their cliched lines with as much emotion as they can convey. Hudgens is the worst of the bunch by a long shot, so it's good that she doesn't really do much besides smirk and cry, given the context of whatever scene she's in. Oscar Isaac chews scenery as the film's main antagonist but was much better in 2010's Robin Hood, and Carla Gugino is merely a cypher when it comes to being the closest thing to a maternal character seen in the film. Serving no purpose, it's hard to imagine what Gugino was thinking when she took this part, especially as her tole in Snyder's Watchmen did her no favors. Finally Sean Glenn emulates a Carradine to great effect as Baby Doll's guardian angel, who guides her to the tools she needs.

By far The Real World's greatest contribution to society

Once again, we're left with the idea that Zack Snyder should probably stick to visual artistry. I could forgive him not being able to set up the audience for the meat and potatoes that is his amazing effects, but the film's sheer inability to produce anything original or noteworthy is inexcusable. It's as if the large number of possible inspirations for the strong female roles (Ellen Ripley, Sarah Connor, The Bride, and Thelma and Louise) didn't exist in creating characters so anti-feminist. While they fight against injustice and sacrifice for one another, any considering these emotionally-stunted girls as "strong" female roles doesn't really know what they're talking about. Under another director, perhaps a woman who could more empathise with the themes Snyder fails in properly understanding (Kathryn Bigelow, Lexi Alexander or Karen Kusama, to perhaps name a few), would have been more successful. I do applaud Snyder's attempt to tackle something new and different, but the film's lack of originality and his failure to capitalize on the great ideas he himself put forth are the main reason Sucker Punch will be in contention for 2011's worst movie of the year. As it stands, the film barely cracks the Top 10 films of the year, coming in square at #10. Fans of DC's Superman beware, you will be unprepared when Snyder takes on your beloved hero next in the franchise's upcoming reboot, called for now Man of Steel. It will most likely make Superman Returns look like a masterpiece in comparison.

Limitless Opportunities

When it comes to choosing films to watch, sometimes it's not about what film you want to see most, but what you're stuck with when all is said and done. If I'd had my way, I probably would have used this morning to see The Lincoln Lawyer, Matthew McConaughey's thriller that hearkens back to his amazing performance in A Time to Kill. I also want to see the adaptation of classic Bronte novel Jane Eyre, and I've been looking forward to Tom McCarthy's latest indie film Win Win for some time now. But, due to no good showings of Lawyer, as well as Eyre and Win Win not making it to my preferred theaters as of yet (soon, I hope), I was left with fewer choices than I would have preferred. Stuck between films I've seen, films I've never heard of, and films I have no inclination to see, I decided to settle on a title in which I had at least a small  interest. Limitless I think surprised many when it went #1 at the box office this past weekend, and the film boasted of its star power in the rising Bradley Cooper and Hollywood icon Robert De Niro. Still, the trailer to me seemed a little weak, with what seemed like an interesting idea doubtlessly bogged down by convention and normalcy, despite it's sky-reaching goals.

Hey, Cooper looks like my 2010, only more greasy.

Based on the 2001 novel The Dark Fields by Alan Glynn and directed by Neil Burger, Limitless introduces the viewer to Eddie Morra (Cooper), a hopeless writer at the lowest point of his life. He lives in a crappy apartment, his girlfriend (Abbie Cornish) has just left him, and to top it off, he is in danger of losing his book contract because he cannot frame a single sentence. When fate introduces him to new experimental wonder drug, NZT-48, his life is changed. NZT-48 allows one who takes it to access 100% of their brain functionality, as opposed to most of us who at most can reach about twenty. Eddie goes from zero to hero faster than an episode of Queer Eye, dropping his slovenly looks, finishing his book and making gobs of dough through the stock market. It isn't long though before his action is threatened by the limited supply of the drug, it's revealing side effects, unscrupulous mobsters and crooked Wall Street goons, led by Street legend Carl Van Loon (De Niro).

Obviously nobody ever told Eddie to not take money from Russian gangsters

Where the film succeeds is showing us how easy it can be for the desperate to cling to anything, ANYTHING, when they are at their most downtrodden. Even though Eddie is competent and sane enough to know that taking an illegal drug is probably not a good idea, once he gets that good feeling coursing through his system he's helpless against it's power. That it allows him to be arguably the best person he can be is almost irrelevant when you factor in all the trouble that brings him. In fact, this film might be seen by many as anti-drug, even going into the hazards of overdosing. Not all the film's details match this hypothesis, however, and in the end the moral of the story is muddled and unclear.

De Niro attempts to wow Cooper with his Taxi Driver skills

And that's Limitless's problem: we're not sure what to make of this tale of sometimes morals and drug dependence. On one hand, Eddie is anything if not a sympathetic character. Even when on his binges, he never does anything I would think of as WRONG. Instead he is practically dragged from conflict to bloody conflict, almost never actively making a move unless coerced, by drug or otherwise. On the other hand, he somehow seems to be addicted to this substance, even if it steadily brings him more trouble. So what's the point of it all? The script doesn't offer any answers to these thoughts, or even the questions asked in its own story. For instance, if 100% of someone's brain is activated by this drug, how in the hell does this guy not think that borrowing money from a Russian mobster (Andrew Howard) is a bad idea? This and other banal problems have no place in the unique realm that this drug is supposed to produce, and yet there you are.

Wishing he had a bigger window

I probably would have walked out of the theater if it hadn't been for the acting talent on display. You might at first accuse Cooper of playing the same kind of playboy he appears to be in many of his films, but in Limitless he actually plays two distinct editions of Eddie Morra. As the "classic" starving artist, Cooper realistically portrays the depression and frustration of being an unaccomplished writer in the world's greatest city. For Eddie's "enhanced special edition", Cooper can be the more confident, affable and charming performer we're used to, which I'm sure is much less of a challenge. Still, his overall ability is rightfully the mainstay of the entire film, and anybody else in the role would have simply felt wrong. Abbie Cornish is slowly turning herself into a genuine superstar, and while smallish parts like her romantic interest role will only help so much, they WILL help if she treats them as seriously as she does here. She's obviously immensely talented, and it would have been nice to see a larger role created for her. She's not the only waste of talent, however. It seems Burger can be lumped in with a multitude of directors who don't know what to do with Robert De Niro in his later years. De Niro is as gravelly and posturing as he can possibly be, but it doesn't make up for the fact that his character is a fairly useless one. Seriously, I kept waiting for Van Loon to become relevant over the course of the story, but the film's biggest fallacy is the idea that they would do anything interesting with this star. Some stronger performances belonged to an unrecognizable Anna Friel as Eddie's ex-wife and Andrew Howard as the film's real human villain.

Cue green screen... and go!

Limitless would probably work fine as a P.S.A. to keep kids from doing drugs if it had managed to fall on that side of the moral spectrum. Instead, it lionizes a drug's effects and seems to indicate that we all might benefit from a bit of chemical help to be our best. That seems like a dangerous philosophy to adopt, and even taking The Gospel of Uncle Benjamin into account, it's an idea tough to justify within the parameters set by the story. But that's beside the point when the film doesn't do enough with the great ideas it puts forward. Far too conventional to take advantage of an otherwise interesting story, Limitless debuts rather low at #8 for 2011. It had the potential to be something; it could have been a contender. Instead it will meet an early exit by the end of next month at the latest.