David O's Hustlin'

Oh, no, we're starting to overrate David O. Russell!

Don't get me wrong, I think Russell has put together a solid career, especially these past few years. The Fighter is one of my favorite modern sports movies, and while I contend that the mental health topic was just a smokescreen for an otherwise-predictable romantic comedy in Silver Linings Playbook, it was still a well-made, exceptionally-acted motion picture. And so when this man pumps out a movie, it's fairly easy to drum up audiences, even when your trailers reveal none of the plot and thrive on catchy pop tunes. He's gotten to that pedestal that all directors hope to achieve, where their name holds more allure than many of the all-star cast that people are actually going to be staring at for over two hours. And all in all, he's deserved it, getting excellent performances from talented casts and piecing together a strong filmography. So it's a surprise to no-one that American Hustle has gotten so much praise from critics, and that audiences have been solidly filling theaters to see it. There's just one problem... the movie's not really all that great.

If you grew up in the 80's, you knew this guy.

The movie is a fictionalized retelling of the FBI's ABSCAM investigation that saw several US politicians convicted of corruption charges from the late 70's to the early 80's, saying that "Some of this actually happened" but also changing all the names and details involved. So right off the bat we have a problem. Yes, last year we had an historical drama that changed many a detail for the purpose of telling a good story in Argo. But while Ben Affleck might have fudged a few lines in adapting his Best Picture winner, he was still determined to tell stories about real people faced with impossible odds. It didn't matter that not everything in the movie matched up with its real world counterpart, because at the end of the day Affleck was representing these folks as truly as he knew how. Russell meanwhile uses such an important moment in US history as ABSCAM as a mere baseline for his own simple morality play (which he rewrote from a screenplay by The International's Eric Singer), and doesn't really seem care about the event's historical significance, or how it relates to the story he wants to tell.

Okay, guys, you can play patty-cake later.

The film also stutters through an opening act told almost entirely in voice-over monologues. Even if you can accept this clear breach of "show but don't tell" (at which movies of this level are SUPPOSED to excel) as a quick and easy method of introducing our leads, there's no real excuse for not settling on one voice; the narration starts from the perspective of small-time conman Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale), which makes sense, because he's the protagonist of the story. But Russell quietly ushers in a change by adding in the disembodied voice of Amy Adams (playing Irving's business partner and mistress Sydney Prosser) for no discernible reason other than to make fun of the main character's comb-over. What's painful is that the scenes are actually so well-shot, and these actors so evocative despite lacking dialogue, that the scenes really do speak for themselves, making the voice-overs completely unnecessary. It's almost as if the director dumbed-down these scenes in an attempt to create a more audience-friendly atmosphere. That's not something you want to see from a man who was never concerned with mainstream success in the past.

Just... wow.

Fortunately, most of the succeeding acts are much better compiled, as they focuses on what makes David O. Russell movies so revered: the interplay between characters. The relationships between each pair of personalities are so well-constructed and believable that they MAKE American Hustle as entertaining as it is. For instance, many sides of Irving can be seen through his interactions with others, from his tempered fury for FBI handler Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper), to the genuine (and conflicted) friendship he develops with well-meaning corrupt politician Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner), to his poisonous relationship with young wife Rosalyn (Jennifer Lawrence). Each character has a litany of such relationships to one another, and one of the film's true pleasures comes from seeing those emotional turmoils move the story forward from scene to scene. The actors have great chemistry, and it ups the payoff that is delivered, even when their actions are quite so noble as to be respected in that way.

There's a fetish for that.

It's a shame that the individual performances couldn't have been more consistent. Now, Bale is absolutely great, carrying the movie with an unusual combination of charm, honesty and a little bit of sleaziness to sell the con man angle. He's obviously deeply invested in this character, and it shows, as he proves once again to be among the best actors in Hollywood today. But even he is upstaged by his ladies, American Hustle's true stars. Adams has a rich, meaty role that she wholeheartedly throws herself into. Her sensual performance and easy chemistry with her costars makes for a lot of fun to watch, and she steals about half the scenes in the flick. Most of the others are stolen by Lawrence, who puts on one of the year's best performances despite being given material similar to Kat Dennings in Thor: The Dark World. Despite a role that feels largely written for laughs, Lawrence handily floors the audience with excellent comedic timing, an intense, believable on-screen presence, and more sheer talent than most career artists achieve in their lifetime. Both of these women deserve Oscar nods this year, despite the crowded Supporting Actress field; there might be a riot if even one of them fails to garner a nomination.

These scenes - and these ladies - are out of this world.

I just wish more of the cast had stepped up as those three. Cooper's FBI agent is so over the top, though to be fair he certainly was written that way, what with the completely forced love triangle and the prototypical interfering mother and a feud with his boss that in the real world would never be tolerated. But even then Cooper goes way over the top, over-exaggerating every syllable and becoming even more of a caricature. Worse off is Renner, whose script choices have not allowed him to approach the potential he showed in The Hurt Locker and The Town. Here he's barely used, and when he is the dialogue is so rote as to work against him. And yes, I know many of the scenes were ad-libbed, but those moments were infinitely better than those that were plainly scripted. Beyond the big five are a cavalcade of side characters, one-note parts given WAY too much material to justify their collective presence while wasting the considerable talents of the actors brought in to play them. It's this kind of lazy character development that sabotages much of the good the actors try to bring to the screen, and keeps the movie from ultimately reaching the zenith it ought to have.

Obligatory cast shot.

I feel like I've been saying this a lot in 2013 (and as I write this, it still IS 2013... Happy New Year!), but American Hustle just isn't as good as we expect it to be. It's still GOOD, but you have to navigate a messy story, hit-or-miss character development, and - perhaps its worst sin - a poor, heavy handed ending that comes out of left field and negates many of the "true story" ideas. Here, David O. Russell is a director not at his best, though he at least still has some of the year's best performances under his guidance. Maybe this is part of an inevitable decline from greatness, or perhaps it's simply a slight downturn and his next picture turns into one of the best of all time. But while there's an interesting ABSCAM story out there begging to be told, it's not this one; because it's not really ABOUT the event. There was another director this year who took a "true" story, created a fictionalized narrative around it, changed everything that didn't work or might be controversial, threw in a solid cast and tried to take a humorous approach to it. Who was that again... oh, right, it was Michael Bay. And when your movie can find more apples-to-apples comparisons to Pain & Gain than it can to Argo, you've definitely got some problems.

Don't Call Me Superman

What a turnaround it has been in recent years for both comic book movies and Marvel Studios. In the early years, they sold the film rights to their best-selling titles to studios such as Paramount, Sony and Fox. In doing so, Marvel often saw their franchises treated with disdain or indifference by major for decades. For every excellent X2 or Spider-Man, there was a Ghost Rider or a Fantastic Four that would ruin everything you might have liked about the characters. But while Marvel still doesn’t own the rights to some of their biggest comic titles, their perfectly-executed “Phase One” plan reversed their fortunes almost immediately. By taking several of their titles and placing them within the same overall universe and timeline, they created a force of nature that started with 2008’s Iron Man and finished with The Avengers, not only one of 2012’s best movies but the biggest blockbuster not directed by James Cameron (coming to a rest third on the worldwide box office behind Titanic and Avatar). Between that and Marvel’s purchase by Disney, the studio is locked in to deliver more greatness with their “Phase Two”, which began this summer with the extremely popular Iron Man 3.

What a day to not be wearing shorts!

DC Comics, meanwhile, would love that kind of success right now. Once seen as the creative superior to Marvel when it came to the film medium, their output the past decade has consisted of two-thirds of a great Batman trilogy (thanks to director Christopher Nolan) and a string of disappointments that includes Catwoman, Watchmen, Jonah Hex, Green Lantern and arguably the biggest bust, Superman Returns. A sequel to the first two Christopher Reeve classics (and ignoring Superman III and Superman IV: The Quest for Peace), the Bryan Singer-directed Returns was in fact moderately successful. Unfortunately, moderately successful doesn’t cut it with a film that costs over $200 million to put together, and plans for two future sequels were scrapped as a result. Now DC (and their resident film studio Warner Brothers) has attempted to recreate the success they had in rebooting their Batman franchise with their other major comic superstar, giving Supes a grittier, more grounded origin and dripping the story in emotional layers in Man of Steel. In doing so, they want to build the DC film universe to the point where they can answer Marvel’s challenge and issue their own superhero-team flick with The Justice League. And while the director they assigned this task – Zack Snyder, of Watchmen and Sucker Punch infamy – wouldn’t seem like quite the right guy for that job, DC did good by getting Christopher Nolan to produce, placing the best director they’ve ever hired just behind the shoulder of the flashy, style-over-substance Snyder.

Is he getting jealous?

The result of this pairing? Well, it’s good, for the most part. Man of Steel has some great moments, especially the early flashbacks of a dying planet Krypton and scientist Jor-El (Russell Crowe) saving his infant son by placing him in a rocket and sending him to the distant planet Earth before his home can be destroyed. Growing up knowing he is different from the people around him, Clark Kent (The Tudors’ Henry Cavill) travels around the world, helping people through his actions (and enhanced strength and abilities), and trying to discover where he comes from and his purpose in life. In flashbacks, we see how Jonathan Kent (Kevin Costner) encouraged his adopted son to keep his powers a secret, feeling that the world would be unprepared to accept Clark’s abilities. These are beautifully captured moments, mixings of bittersweet emotion, artistic camerawork, and excellent CGI when required (not just when it would look cool). Looking back, with the exception of the fall of Krypton, there isn’t a real action sequence until almost the last act of the movie, and the fact that you can forget and forgive that transgression from a supposed Summer blockbuster is a testament to how invested we become with the characters themselves.

Absolutely terrifying.

Those characters are the backbone of the film and its greatest resource, and Snyder (with perhaps some cajoling from Nolan) does an excellent job of using them to the best effect. Cavill and Amy Adams (who plays tough-as-nails investigative reporter and intergalactic love interest Lois Lane) are excellent both together and apart, with Cavill showing (often without dialogue) that he is an actor on the rise. Adams has arguably never done a bad performance, and her veteran presence is not only the best-ever interpretation of Lane, but a stabilizing agent for the up-and-coming Cavill. As for the rest of the cast, both Crowe and Costner do excellent jobs as Clark’s biological and adoptive fathers, respectively. Crowe seems born to play Jor-El, and Costner’s homesy look and drawl make for an excellent Papa Kent (Diane Lane however is kind of boring as mother Martha). Michael Shannon takes up the Terence Stamp’s mantle when he plays the Kryptonian General Zod. To look at Shannon on paper, you wouldn’t expect him to be so frightening a character as someone with all of Superman’s strengths and none of his morals, but the veteran actor really carries Man of Steel in the second half. As a result, he’s definitely going to be a tough act to follow in any potential sequels. My only disappointments in the cast were located in the Daily Planet, Lois Lane’s newspaper. Lawrence Fishburne plays the first ever African-American version of Editor-in-Chief Perry White, while Rebecca Buller plays intern Jenny Olsen, obviously the adaptation of the comic books’ Jimmy Olsen. The problem I have is that these characters are largely pointless, taking part in some expository scenes but otherwise not contributing much to the overall movie. I don’t care if Perry White is black or if Jimmy Olsen is a woman; I just wish that wasn’t the beginning and end of their character development.

Lois Lane: Kicking ass and taking names since 1938.

But Man of Steel’s biggest problem is not its development of poorly-scripted secondary characters or even the strangely wide-open plot holes that are scattered about the script, but an abrupt change of pace in the final act. That’s when the action strikes, and while it contains beautiful imagery, excellent CGI and character-defining moments, it’s just not that much FUN. Snyder’s direction has always been visually-appealing, even when the product was the mind-numbing horror of Sucker Punch. I’ve said before that Snyder should direct music videos, as his ocular palette works wonders in spurts a few minutes at a time. By the time we’ve gotten through twenty minutes of action sequences involving bright beams of light, explosions, rescues, destroyed buildings and a ton of violent acts, we just want the whole thing to be over with. The filmmakers also make the questionable choice of changing a major aspect of the caped crusader – in other media, you’ll never see Superman put defeating the bad guys in a higher priority over protecting innocent bystanders in big fights. Here the term “bystander” appears all but ignored in the script, resulting in simplistic good-vs-evil battles that never break the mold, and feeling almost like a typical Jerry Bruckheimer production. The film never gets Great Gatsby boring, but there’s still no excuse for such beautiful action that is so generic that we almost don’t care about the outcome.

Maximum security just got an upgrade.

The limp finish is really the only major thing wrong with Man of Steel, but it’s still enough to turn a potentially great film into a merely good one. I’ll give credit where it’s due: Snyder, Nolan and their crew succeeded in creating a Superman movie more grounded and realistic than anything done before them, and it’s the next-best thing in the DC film universe to Nolan’s first two Batman projects in terms of quality. Obviously Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are high watermarks to cross, and expectations of the like from Man of Steel are definitely unwarranted, though you can still have a good time should you see this on the big screen. In the battle of Marvel vs. DC, Man of Steel is a long way away from being as iconic as The Avengers or Iron Man, and is probably closer to Marvel’s second-rate Captain America movie. That’s not a bad place to be, however, and if the folks at DC and Warner Brothers can build upon its early successes (and bypass its weaknesses), then this might just be the first step in its own “Phase One”. Can a Justice League movie be far in the future? Give me a Wonder Woman I can get behind, and that’ll be a step in the right direction. Just like Man of Steel. 

Open Letters Monthly: The Master

Have any interest in Paul Thomas Anderson? Or Scientology? Then you've probably been hearing about The Master, Anderson's newly-directed effort that came out a few weeks ago. It tells the story of mentally traumatized WWII sailor Freddie Quells, who attempts to discover his place in the world during peacetime. In his travels, he discovers a religious group calling themselves The Cause and their enigmatic leader Lancaster Dodd. At first Freddie thinks he has found his calling as Dodd's right-hand man. But Dodd's methods to help heal Freddie seem to have no effect, and more and more Freddie hears from others that Dodd is making the whole thing up as he goes. As Freddie becomes more and more frustrated with The Cause, they are growing weary of his violent, immature attitude, with only Lancaster Dodd arguing his importance to The Cause.

The Master is directed by Paul Thomas Anderson and stars Joaquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Amy Adams, Laura Dern, Ambyr Childers and Jesse Plemons.

Click here for the complete review at Open Letters Monthly.

"Trouble" with the Curve

You see what I did there? How I used quotation marks to emphasize the one word in the title of the movie that actually describes its execution? Wasn't that clever? What? It wasn't? Well, Clint Eastwood has made a career out of making similar unsubtle statements in his films he directs. No, it hasn't always been a deal killer; he has built movies wonderful (Unforgiven, Million Dollar Baby), awful (Letters from Iwo Jima, Hereafter) and everywhere in between (Mystic River, J. Edgar). But anyone who contends that he is a great director has obviously been swayed by his long acting career and forgiven many of the cliched storytelling elements he includes in his pictures, ones that most truly talented filmmakers would never use in this day and age.

I was worried at first that this style would be the problem with Trouble with the Curve, which is also Eastwood's first acting gig since people say he was snubbed for a Best Actor nomination in 2008's Gran Torino. Surprisingly, while there are a few cliched moments (parent releasing child's hand to show abandonment, a few lingering shots expressing a character's loneliness), Trouble was not the technical abomination I had been expecting. I found out in the closing credits for the reason for this; turns out the film wasn't directed by Eastwood at all. Instead it was filmed by Robert Lorenz, who had been an assistant director on over twenty films. While Lorenz certainly learned a bit from working with Eastwood on Bloodwork, Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby, it's obvious he also developed his style from working with other directors, making for a thankfully more adept movie than I was expecting.

Timberlake gets directing tips from Eastwood.

It's a shame that my expectations had been so low, as a movie featuring baseball, Eastwood, Amy Adams and BASEBALL should have been one of my more highly expected theatrical releases. It was, but more for potential than what I actually thought I would see. Eastwood plays longtime baseball scout Gus Lobel; an employee of the Atlanta Braves, Gus is as old-fashioned a talent scout as you can get, completely eschewing the modern computer age and relying exclusively on what he can see in a player. This hasn't endeared him to his superiors in Atlanta, who want him to check out a highly-touted player in the Carolinas as their potential top pick in the upcoming draft. The expectation is that if Gus fails, they can simply let his swiftly-expiring contract run out. When his longtime friend and superior Pete (John Goodman) worries about his diminishing health, he calls Gus' daughter Mickey (Adams) to join him to see if there is anything she can do. With relations already strained between Gus and Mickey, all they can do try to communicate with one another while bonding over the one thing they both seem to love; baseball.

"OMG JT is SOOO HOT"

Unfortunately, just because it's not directed by its star doesn't mean that it's automatically better. This is the first ever published screenplay by Randy Brown, and it definitely shows in the overly-simple rendition of what should be deep emotional themes. There doesn't seem to be any consistency in the routes the characters take, with the relationship between Gus and Mickey especially jumpy in between scenes. One scene they seem fine, the next they're at each others' throats. There are reasons for that, and the film does its best to lay them all out, but I never felt as though any middle ground between those two points was explored. Adams is nevertheless wonderful, her naturally bubbly persona taking a backseat to a serious, dramatic side that gets her attention and awards. Eastwood however tends to rest on his laurels, with only a few scenes making him reach as a performer. His role is fine, as is that of Justin Timberlake as a former player turned scout (turned love interest for Mickey) for the Boston Red Sox, but both are limited to performances that are high on levity and short on storytelling.

Standing around waiting for something to happen; just like the real game!

Worse is the cliched junk that seems tossed in as filler. Of COURSE there's an "evil scout" who relies solely on computer data (Matthew Lillard) who actually seems to want Gus fired. Of COURSE the player Gus is asked to scout is a complete asshole. Of COURSE he has a fatal flaw which is not apparent at the college level but that Gus knows will prevent him from being successful in the big leagues. Of COURSE the answer to everyone's dreams is telegraphed a mile away. Of COURSE Gus is losing the ONE THING (his eyesight) which would prevent him from excelling at his job. Of COURSE they use a Dirty Harry scene for a flashback. Okay, that last one was a bit out of left field. The point is that for every decent or genuinely good thing Trouble pitches us, it lobs more than a few stinkers that undermine the quality of the film. A script rewrite should have been in order, and the lack of one indicates that Eastwood was more in charge than we were led to believe.

"Wait, he gave us a bad review?"

Trouble with the Curve came out with a LOT of potential. Baseball may not be that popular sport, but it has inspired more great stories in film and print than just about any other game, even the all-powerful sport of football. For a baseball story to appear so hollow and disingenuous is certainly a disappointment, especially when it gathers such a solid blend of acting talent as its foundation. Still, Curve disappoints, especially considering its fighting the scout/computer battle has been more or less settled in the years following the publication of Moneyball. Like Eastwood, Curve is a story out of time, not exactly sure where we are today, and both scared and angry about it.

Professional Puppet Productions

Well, what's a decade between friends?

It's 2011, a dozen years since the Jim Henson-created puppet characters known as "Muppets" appeared on the big screen, in 1999's Muppets from Space. The franchise, which began as a variety show and had been most popular in the seventies and eighties, was hitting popularity canyon around that time, as Muppets from Space was a financial failure and a signal to the entertainment industry that the franchise as a whole was no longer popular enough for mass entertainment. What followed was less than thrilling, as the puppet troupe pulled out a couple more made-for-television movies, and the Muppets themselves slowly faded into obsolescence. Well, that wasn't enough for How I Met Your Mother and Forgetting Sarah Marshall star Jason Segel, who along with running buddy Nicholas Stoller pitched a new entry to the series, a tall order considering the aforementioned lack of presence in today's pop culture. Still, that persistence (and a fiercely loyal fan base) paid off, and this Thanksgiving weekend became host to The Muppets, the first appearance of our favorite cast of misfits and divas on the big screen in twelve years.

Kudos for fitting them all into one station wagon

Gary (Jason Segel) and Walter (a new Muppet) are brothers, living in the small town of Smalltown, USA. Always feeling like an outcast, Walter has survived mainly thanks to the love and care of Gary and his fascination with the old Muppets television show, the characters of which are his idols and heroes. When Gary and his girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) bring Walter along on a trip to Los Angeles with the intent of seeing the renowned Muppet Studios, they unwittingly set off a chain of events that sees them get a group that hasn't performed together in over a decade back into show business. The Muppets are constantly told that they are no longer popular, but they hope to shock the world in their big comeback that will include wisecracking bears, pig and frog duets, a barbershop quartet, and perhaps even Walter as the troupe's newest performer.

Animal! We LOVE Animal!

I was surprised to discover that The Muppets was in fact a full-blown musical, a fact that could have been suspected had I actually paid attention to the trailers but still somehow caught me unawares. Naturally I expected there to be a few songs from the Muppets themselves, and the film doesn't disappoint, especially when you have Kermit the Frog singing the original song "Pictures in My Head" and later on playing a duet with Miss Piggy of the classic Muppets' tune "The Rainbow Connection". And of course the original Muppet Show theme is still around, as delightfully cheer-inducing as ever. Only a couple of songs fail to entertain, though that isn't entirely the music director's fault (okay, some of it is, but we'll get to that later). Even though these specific song-and-dance numbers don't quite work out as planned, they still contain a ton of charm, and don't detract much from the film.

Seriously, who's that big blue guy in the back? Why is he there??

What does detract unfortunately is the human element that has almost ungraciously inserted itself into the narrative. Oh, I'm not talking about Amy Adams. Adams, for whom the part was specifically written, is the perfect actress to take on this kind of light parody of a real human being. As an elementary school teacher who fixes cars and speaks in a consistently high-pitched accent, there's no actress I can imagine besides Adams in the role. And of course when it comes time to actually sing, Adams' pipes come in handy for fending off critics of the relative simpleness of the songs themselves. I am also not dissing Chris Cooper, who but for an ill-advised albeit short hip-hop scene is perfectly at home as sleazy businessman Tex Richman, the film's main antagonist. And I'm not speaking of the hosts of guest cameos that make their way into the Muppet's latest film endeavor. The never-ending list includes Jack Black, Alan Arkin, James Carville, Whoopi Goldberg, Neil Patrick Harris, John Krasinski, Sarah Silverman, Mickey Rooney, Emily Blunt, Donald Glover, Dave Grohl and Zach Galifianakis, and those are just the interesting ones.Well used, the constant stream of cameos makes for at the very least an interesting ride and at best shows how influential the Muppets are among the current Hollywood stars. No, when I say that the film's human element is underwhelming I'm really talking about Jason Segel, which is a shame for several reasons. I hate to discredit his work because I love his role on How I Met Your Mother (no, I haven't seen Forgetting Sarah Marshall yet, sorry) and because of the obvious love he has shown in pushing this film forward, both in its creation and in its marketing. While he nails the huggable teddy-bear type for much of the film (that's pretty much HIS role...), this can't block the fact when the music numbers roll around he's not that good a singer and obviously suffers from having two left feet. When he's just called on to act he's fine, but the film would have been better with another, more musically-oriented actor in the lead role.

Uhm, yeah, you don't want to see that

Of course, the best (and perhaps only) reason to see The Muppets is... well... The Muppets! It was fun to see the film poke fun at how out of touch the characters are with the times; they constantly rock out to "We Built This City" and reference Dirty Dancing, and Kermit tries to get President Jimmy Carter to be their show's celebrity guest host. If you have a favorite character from the old show, new show or any of the movies, you likely won't be disappointed by their absence. Most of the "classics", as well as a few newer personas, make at least sporadic appearances, though you might have to hunt visually for them. The focus of the story is very top heavy, and most of the light is shone on stars Kermit, Piggy, Fozzie and Walter. Some effort is made with a few others, most notably Animal, but some fan favorites such as Gonzo and Rowlf the Dog are almost completely cast aside. This wouldn't be too bad in itself, but Walter's story of finding himself isn't always fun to watch. That some characters were pushed to the sides to make room for such a short-sighted character seems wasteful.

There's nothing like taking in The Muppets live on stage!

But perhaps I'm being a bit too critical. The fact is that if you can stand sitting in a theater surrounded by small children with short attention spans, The Muppets is a fun way to spend less than two hours of your weekend. As Jim Henson always intended, and Jason Segel dutifully followed, the film is silly enough for kids while still being entertaining for the adults who brought them there. That makes sense, as it would hardly be appropriate to alienate that nostalgic audience who made this title a reality to begin with. While not perfect, lacking perhaps the ability behind the camera to match the wit and bravado of titles earlier in the franchise's history, it's a nice opportunity to try and take this oft-neglected property as far as it can go. If people come out and support this film, good things will happen. I don't see any reason that shouldn't be, as the real crime would be to take something with this much promise and tuck it into a dark corner to stagnate and dull.

I Love a Good Fight

When I first saw the trailer for The Fighter, the latest collaboration between principal actor and Boston native Mark Wahlberg and director David O. Russell, my first thought was that it didn't seem like a traditional Rocky retread. While certainly hailing from the same genre of "based on a true story" that has littered Wahlberg's career - films such as Perfect Storm, Invincible, and Rock Star - it felt different than what you might expect from those similar titles. This was thanks in part to the local (Lowell, Massachusetts) scenery and gritty, generally dark atmosphere. But the film's biggest coup was probably the performers that flanked Wahlberg in the credits, namely excellent performers Christian Bale and Amy Adams. Lending their talents to Wahlberg's strong showing made the film look like one that could be contending for awards at year's end, and made for one of this year's most anticipated releases.

Yes, let's take boxing lessons from the lightest weight in the room

The Fighter is the story of real-life boxer "Irish" Micky Ward (Wahlberg), who grew up in Lowell in the shadow of his older brother Dicky. Dicky Eklund (Bale) was once a boxer known as "The Pride of Lowell" and whose crowning achievement - and the family's glory - was facing Sugar Ray Robinson and knocking him down in the ring, though he actually lost the match. These days Dicky has degenerated into a crack addict, though he does care about his brother and has trained Micky as a boxer, using everything he has learned. Managed by his hard-nosed mother Alice (Melissa Leo) and supported by his bartender girlfriend Charlene (Amy Adams), Micky rebounds from early disappointments, both in his sport and his family relations, to become a respected boxer and eventually en route to an epic championship match.

Okay, so I put extra caffeine in Four Loko... so what?

Though the film took a long time to put together, it seems to have benefited from the extended production time. Since 2003, the film has seen such names as Martin Scorsese, Darren Aronofsky, Brad Pitt and Matt Damon identified with it, but the film doesn't suffer for not having them in the final product. Russell does a great job of establishing locations and shots that can be recognized by the audience at a glance, and manages to get the proper mood of the working class Lowell neighborhood. There's not a lot that's pretty about Lowell, not in it's streets or it's people, and the beauty that Russell manages to convey is in all things subjective to its surroundings. The well-crafted storyline that the film possesses weaves its tale through the people portrayed and their personalities, and not just in the film's major events.

Marky Mark's family scared Adams juuuust a little...

That those people are also such great artists is no small feat either. As the film's lead, Wahlberg does a tremendous job playing the film's blue collar boxer, though truth be told it's hardly a stretch for him. He does immerse himself in the role, however, going so far as to not use a stunt double for his boxing scenes and working out for almost four years leading up to the role to achieve the proper body type. He probably won't win an Oscar for his work (Colin Firth and Ryan Gosling and perhaps even Stephen Dorff will be the likely front-runners in that race) but he certainly has earned at least a dark horse run at the prize, as his commitment to the role cannot be overstated. Bale's addition to the cast is an even bigger reason the film works so perfectly. As the drug-addicted older brother, Bale had to lose a lot of weight for the role, which he's done before, but that's not the reason he's amazing. He effortlessly takes on a Boston accent, but not the standard "pahk ya cah" that so many people initially think of for the region. He comes off as a veteran boxer who knows what he's talking about, and a drug-addled punk who doesn't commit a lot of time to his family or his problems. The reason Bale is so great is that he doesn't merely play the part well. For the purposes of the film he BECOMES Dicky, through and through. It's the kind of performance that makes careers.

Huh, what?? WOAH!!

It's great that in a Hollywood where strong female roles are few and far between you can see two great such roles in this film. Amy Adams, best known for happy, carefree characters plays amazingly against type here as Charlene, a bartender and Wahlberg's romantic interest. Charlene made mistakes early in her life and is trying to make up for them by supporting Micky in his rise to stardom. And Oscar-nominated Melissa Leo is amazing as Micky's churlish mother and manager Alice, who has a cruel tongue but holds family as most important. Both have already been nominated for Golden Globes thanks to their accurate, amazing characters and if either are left out at the Academy Awards it will be well and truly a snub, as the pair are the heart of this film.

Okay, look. It's called "shampoo." Use it once in a while!

The film has a few small issues, mainly pertaining to its boxing scenes. While comparisons to Rocky aren't unjustified, there are no fewer than five different boxing matches referenced in the film, and while a few are focused on, many of those bits are truncated to the point that the viewer would be unable to differentiate between them were it not for the interjecting story scenes. Also, the fights that Ward are best known for, those with Canadian boxer Arturo Gatti, don't take place until after the film's conclusion.  Still, the boxing scenes are well choreographed and researched, and with the exception of the silly close-up camera angles that muddy up some of the shots, are well done. Again, Wahlberg's decision not to use a stunt double makes the scenes more realistic when you can clearly see it's him hitting and getting hit. The film is helped by the fact that there is no true "bad guy" in the film. Sure, Dicky's addiction and Alice's crassness don't help matters, but the villains in this film are much more ingrained in the culture and biases within which the characters exist. Again, a great choice by the director to not artificially install a bad guy to make things more interesting.

Remember, when he hits you in the head, just fall down and curl up. We'll be home by dinner.

Though in the end it does get to be a little schmaltzy and not a little predictable, The Fighter doesn't disappoint as it was easily one of the best films I've seen this year. All the performers deserve credit for their accomplishment, as they were the ones that made it the amazing experience that it was. I was sure The Town was going to be the best locally based film of the year, but The Fighter made me change my mind, placing as the new #4 on my Top Ten. This was a love letter from Wahlberg not only to Micky and Dicky but also the city of Lowell, and if the film gets some awards this season, they will be wholly deserved.