Still Hungry? 'Catching Fire' Sates

I can't imagine there was anyone happier than myself when it was announced that Gary Ross would not be returning to film the sequels to The Hunger Games, his highly-successful adaptation of Suzanne Collins' epic young adult book series of the same name. Despite being a solid movie in its own right, Ross' vision was damaged by unnecessary shaky-cam (one of Hollywood's true evils), an uneven narrative that didn't take advantage of the excellent casting, and a failure to understand and/or retain many of the book's essential themes. Though Francis Lawrence didn't come into the franchise with experience in young adult adventure (his previous works include Constantine and Water for Elephants), fans of the novels and movie lovers overall ought not be disappointed in The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, a sequel that is superior in every way to the original.

Picking up a few months after the end of The Hunger Games, we see the PTSD-afflicted winner of the recent games, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), trying to readjust to her life in the remote, criminally poor, coal-mining District 12. But her actions in the previous Games - which saved not only her life but that of the unrequitedly-smitten Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) - have been seen as a beacon of hope by the other Districts, and rumors spread of unrest targeted at the Capital and President Snow (Donald Sutherland). Soon, the amoral dictator urges Katniss under punishment of death upon her family to do what she can to quell the masses on her and Peeta's upcoming victory tour. But when this only serves to fan the flames of revolution, Katniss and Peeta find themselves back in the Games, as Snow and new gamesmaker Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) add a new wrinkle, pitting former victors against one another to show that they are not immune to the power and strength of the government. The two most recent winners find themselves squaring off against seasoned killers, unsure of whom they can trust and how they can possibly survive another impossible situation.

CGI fire is much more effective this time around.

If one thing is for certain, Catching Fire definitely benefits from both the change in director and the substantially larger budget the success of the original allowed. The Hunger Games was no cheaply-made motion picture, but at times it FELT like it. What was supposed to be an epic, sprawling movie felt quite claustrophobic, limited in both scope and vision. Lawrence (no relation to the main star) succeeds in making the postapocalyptic land of Panem a visual spectacle, but also manages to capture the cultural aspects of the land as well, whereas Ross' version would simply throw different costumes out as something to distinguish characters. It also helps that Lawrence the director skews much closer to the source material, making the movie less about surviving impossible odds and more about the political landscape and the ramifications of one's actions. He shows an amazing understanding of Collins' vision of this world, and that understanding means that he does a better job of keeping in the bits from the book that are actually important. Ross, meanwhile, simplified the whole first book to the Hunger Games themselves and the love triangle between Katniss, Peeta and Gale (Liam Hemsworth, who returns). This new director does a great job taking the important parts of the source material and condensing it into a full-length motion picture, and even though clocking in over two hours for a movie that is mainly targeted to young adults is usually considered a no-no, Catching Fire never feels long thanks to a strong approach to filmmaking and a story that never feels uninteresting or trite.

The costumes possess the same vibrant flare as the original.

He is also assisted by a returning cast that has so many more interesting things to present the audience. One of The Hunger Games' biggest disappointments was that there wasn't nearly enough for its supremely talented actors to do. Catching Fire is absolutely a character-driven affair, however, and it's refreshing to see true artists given actual material with which to ply their trade. Lawrence certainly stands out, putting forth an even greater performance here than her Oscar-winning appearance in Silver Linings Playbook. Lawrence the actor is a revelation, a talent well beyond her years, and as long as she remains in the business, she'll be among the very best at any given time. She has the ability to carry every scene, sometimes without dialogue, but the biggest improvement over her performance in the original has to be her chemistry with co-star Hutcherson, another burgeoning star. Though Hutcherson's Peeta was bland before, his rising talent (not to mention some healthy character development) make for heady improvements, and after two films we're finally buying into the idea that the relationship between our two romantic leads is actually going somewhere.

She's not listening to those House at the End of the Street reviews...

And they're not alone, as Lawrence the director and screenwriters Simon Beaufoy (Salmon Fishing in the Yemen, Slumdog Millionaire) and Michael Arndt (Little Miss Sunshine and Toy Story 3, credited here as Michael deBruyn) parcel out much activity to Panem's supporting characters. Again, with such a strong cast, this should have been a no-brainer, and the creative minds don't disappoint. There are the obvious stand-outs, such as Woody Harrelson as our heroes' alcoholic, emotionally disturbed mentor, Stanley Tucci's perfectly flamboyant game show host, and Donald Sutherland's stand-in for the evil Emperor Palpatine (I especially loved how Lawrence added scenes of President Snow with his granddaughter, who absolutely adores his arch-nemesis Katniss). Some are even a little unexpected, such as Elizabeth Banks, who was strong in The Hunger Games but whose character goes through such a personal and emotional transformation that you are shocked by the strength of her performance. But Catching Fire introduces a whole slew of new characters, and strong performances come from Sam Claflin as a mysterious charmer and warrior, Jeffrey Wright as an enigmatic tech genius, and Hoffman as a wily strategist. You even have to love Lynn Cohen (Magda from Sex and the City) as a mute, elderly volunteer for the new Games. But my absolute favorite of the new entries (and I imagine for most others) has to be Jena Malone as a feisty, unapologetically abrasive tribute who drops not one, but two f-bombs (censored, of course) in a fit worthy of her character. It's thanks to these strong performances that this sequel stands above the bland, emotionless material it was forced to work with the first time around.

Well, at least hydration shouldn't be a problem.

Not that Catching Fire is a perfect movie. Acting-wise, some performances don't live up to the others. Given more to work with, Hemsworth proves he's nowhere near the talent that big brother Chris has become, remaining as dull and emotionless as he was the first time around, and exposed as a performer all the more. With this, his painful-to-the-senses work in Paranoia, and the designation of his latest film, Empire State, to direct-to-video status, we may be seeing the end of Liam Hemsworth as a viable movie star. Another disappointment was Lenny Kravitz, who charmed many in his role as clothing designer Cinna the first time around. Though his role was certainly lessened, it looks like he's frustrated just being on set. Though Kravitz has been good in the past (Precious is a good example), the fact that he's not principally an actor really becomes apparent at moments like this, when he can't disguise that he wishes he was doing something more. Finally, while Lawrence the director does add a few scenes to build the world a bit more from the books, his adaptation is sadly slavish to Collins' original novel. Much as I enjoyed reading the books, Catching Fire was NOT particularly well-written, and Lawrence maintains many of Collins' missteps, from introducing potentially game-changing characters and promptly doing nothing with them, to adjusting the rules of a situation to suit the story's purposes, rather than letting things happen organically. Because it is an adaptation, I'm not suggesting MAJOR adjustments needed to be made, but polishing the edges a bit more would have been a good idea.

They actually kinda like one another this time around!

Gary Ross' Hunger Games was a good, solid, adaptation of a young adult novel. As standards go, that's probably closer to the middle of the pack than most fans of the franchise or Suzanne Collins enthusiasts might be willing to admit. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire in comparison is a MAJOR step up, with Francis Lawrence's sequel matching the tone of the original, but improving the product in every single possible way. Catching Fire isn't just a great YA adaptation, but a great overall MOVIE, and potentially one of the year's best. Granted, it hasn't been an overall superb year for the cinema, but that shouldn't take away from the success this film makes in walking that delicate tightrope most adaptations have to execute. I'm certain most people with any interest in seeing this have already done so (November box office records, and all that), but if you're taking a wait-and-see approach to this franchise because you're comparing it mentally to other young adult titles like Twilight or Beautiful Creatures or Warm Bodies or The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones, then you're truly missing out.

Please Don't Stop the Music

How many times in the past year have we been subjected to attempts to recapture the magic that was Bridesmaids? The fem-semble take of a Judd Apatow production was not just a great film, but also an extremely popular one, grossing (and that is the right word) $288 million and earning itself a ton of Oscar buzz in the process. Since then, we've seen some decent stories that have tried to match that movie's blend of feminine camaraderie and raunchy humor, but neither Bachelorette nor Friends with Kids had much mainstream appeal, and Bridesmaids now threatens to be an exception of fem-first comedies rather than a rule.

On the surface, it doesn't appear that Pitch Perfect would be the type of movie to talk about as a spiritual successor to last summer's blockbuster, considering how much their promotional material is a blatant copy. But I think this one has the chance to surprise you. For example, preconceived notions of the film's goody-two-shoes nature last about five minutes, after which you will see exactly how I drew this comparison. Pitch Perfect takes a seemingly innocent topic - the rise of a capella (non-instrumental vocal music) as competition and community in college - and absolutely goes crazy with it, resulting in a movie you likely will never see coming.

Surrounded by women is not a bad way to go through college.

Socially-withdrawn Beca (Anna Kendrick) doesn't want to go to college. The aspiring music producer and talented sound mixer knows exactly what she wants to do with her life: move to Los Angeles and begin paying her dues as a producer. Her father insists she get a college education however, and gets her admitted to the school at which he teaches, hoping that she will find something in her peers that inspires her. Beca at first rejects the idea that campus life holds anything of value for her, as boys and classes have nowhere near the draw for her that music does. Things change when she is heard singing and begged to join a capella group "The Bellas", who are desperate to win the regional championships after an embarrassing end to the previous season. Beca's contemporary beats and the traditional style of senior member Aubrey (Anna Camp) fail to mesh, and the other young ladies chafe under Aubrey's strict leadership, but the Bellas still manage to put together a competitive group that is on the road to reach the finals. But will the tension break the group - and everyone's musical aspirations - before the final curtain is drawn?

Oh, no it's Mormons... look the other way, look the other way...

I don' t know about you, but my experience with a capella growing up was restricted to PBS's Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego, whose theme song was performed by quartet Rockapella and for the longest time was my only connection to the music style. What Pitch Perfect re-introduced to me was not just a capella itself, but how good an ELITE team could be in performance. And this movie does well by it's soundtrack, from the all-vocal rendition of Universal Pictures' opening credits to wonderful performances of classic tunes to excellent mash-ups including one of Bruno Mars' 'Just the Way You Are' and Nelly's 'Just a Dream'. These represent some of the best the film has to offer, as the emotional and professionally-done performances draw you in and force you to discover the glee (no pun intended) you get from watching.

As if with a name like 'Treblemakers' they could be any less than rivals.

I remember being told that in order to make it as an actor, you have to be a lot more than just an actor. Often the best actors have a multitude of secondary talents, whether they be singing, dancing or juggling. Often these talents can lend themselves to aspects of their performances, and multifaceted performers can simply do more. For instance, I never knew that Anna Kendrick was the third-youngest Tony award nominee at age 12 for her work in Broadway musical High Society. The Up in the Air and 50/50 actress was already among the best up-and-coming performers of the past few years, and her multi-tiered role here is a a strangely perfect compliment to her career so far. But beyond Kendrick is a surprisingly deep pool of talent. Promotions may have focused almost exclusively on "Fat Amy", played by Bridesmaids' Rebel Wilson, and the Australian actress certainly does her part in sowing chaos as the brutally honest, free-thinking international vocalist. But while Wilson is perfect, the film's heart is not unjustly heaped on her shoulders. There is also Brittany Snow as Chloe, the Bellas' other senior member who tries to mitigate Aubrey's iron fist. Skylar Astin, Alexis Knapp, Ben Platt, musician Ester Dean and Hana Mae Lee provide tons of entertainment, with Lee perhaps the sleeper of the bunch. Adam DeVine provides an effective - albeit unnecessary - face to the Bellas' problems as a rival group leader. And duo John Michael Higgins and Elizabeth Banks (who was also a co-producer) provide hilarious commentary during the competition scenes; Higgins is a hilariously misogynistic Regis Philbin while Banks is... well... Kathy Lee. In a comedic sense, it works perfectly; both are immensely well-used, but thankfully don't play any larger a role in the film than they need to.

The biggest thing to come out of Twilight?

Great music, good acting, great heart... it might seem like a cliche, but Pitch Perfect actually does turn out to be the feel-good film of the year. It's not without minor glitches; rookie director Jason Moore and screenwriter Kay Cannon try a little too hard to work the words "pitch" and "a capella" into jokes and puns that are far less entertaining than the bulk of the film's humor. Still, Moore's amateur style actually works better for this type of film than a more polished effort, and makes Pitch Perfect feel scrappy and earnest. Cannon also shows some potential, and might inspire me to start watching her TV series New Girl as a result. If you even remotely like musicals, college comedies, and a humor range that spans the gap between gross-out and brilliant, then this is most definitely your jam. If you're even remotely on the fence, do yourself a favor and give this one a try. I promise it won't be quite what you expect.

Don't Tell Me the Odds

Yup, that time has finally arrived. Only two things kept me from going to the midnight release of The Hunger Games and writing my review it this past Friday. One, midnight releases, in my eyes, are a group thing. I've gone to midnight release showings by myself in the past, but there's simply no replacing the experience of that frantic conversation you have at 2 a.m. with the people who witnessed it all alongside you. That's what makes going to a midnight release so much fun, often even more than the film itself. Second, Todd had become interested in the highly-anticipated film, but as she was unable to attend a midnight release show (the downside of any typical office job) we instead saw it on Saturday. We still didn't avoid the crowds, though. In fact, I ran late getting to the theater, and so we were lucky to get good seats at all. I don't think I have to go into just how popular the teen novel trilogy, written by Suzanne Collins, has become the past few years. My day job is at a bookstore, and I estimate that every third customer the past month has been buying The Hunger games or one of its sequels, on average. There was no doubt that the film adaptation would be just as successful, and with an opening weekend of $155 million, it's the owner of the largest opening weekend for a non-sequel film, besting former leader Alice in Wonderland by a healthy margin.

One of you must die... who shall it be?

But that's not the whole story. Despite being all the rage with teens and young adults these past few years, more than a few experienced readers/movie lovers (myself included) will tell you that The Hunger Games is little more than a poorly-transcribed copy of Battle Royale, written by Japanese author Koushun Takami, which spawned a film and manga series in its own right. Certainly, there are a number of easy comparisons between the two, most notably corrupt governments enforcing their hold on the huddled masses by pitting the children of their citizens against one another in a fight to the death. To appeal to teens exclusively, however, Collins did make some changes, including a strong female lead and a love triangle for the teens to focus on, almost Twilight-like in its execution. In fact, the supernatural series has been mentioned often in comparison to the Hunger Games franchise, almost exclusively because of that romance story. That doesn't mean you can only like one if you enjoy the other (or dislike for the same reason). While Twilight held no interest for me, my reading of The Hunger Games was quick and enjoyable, and I'll certainly read the sequels before too much time has passed. I can definitely understand why teens get so excited about the series, but it makes one wonder what the result will be when what worked so well on paper gets transferred to the big screen?

"Wait... you mean we're not here for a disco dance-off?"

Seventy-four years ago, the Civil War against the Capitol of Panem ended with the government forces utterly defeating those of the twelve rebelling provinces. As retribution and a constant reminder not to rise against their leaders, the capital holds an event called the Hunger Games. In it, a male and female child between the ages of 12 and 18 is picked at random as "Tributes" from every district and brought to the city, where they are trained in combat and wilderness survival. After that, they are dropped into an arena filled with weapons and other dangers and forced to fight to the death, with the whole event televised in every district. Of twenty-four teenagers, there can only be one victor. This year, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) finds herself the female contestant for District 12, and while she is a talented hunter with a strong will, the measure of any Tribute can only be measured by what they are willing to do and sacrifice in order to survive.

Yuck it up, kids; you're all dead soon enough.

It's obvious from the start why The Hunger Games wasn't slated for a mid-summer release. Usually films released in June and July sport the kind of special effects that draw most of the attention from the director, rather than a script or acting. Just look at last year's Transformers: Dark of the Moon for a perfect example of a film that made a ton of money just for looking pretty, what I call the "Victoria's Secret" method of filmmaking. However, Lionsgate Films is an upstart film production company, without the financial resources of the big studios. They scored a coup by securing the rights to The Hunger Games (trending on a focus towards teen films), but they only spent $78 million to make this film, and to be brutally honest, it looks it. The actual visual effects are sparse, usually looking every bit the green screen or CGI abominations they are. To obscure the violence, director Gary Ross employs the evil tactic of "shaky-cam" to make sure you can't tell what the hell is happening at any given time. Note to directors: this only confuses and frustrates your audience. STOP IT. The sets feel small-scale as well, with scenes like the early ones of District 12 feeling too compact to be whole communities. However, the effects department shines when it comes to its use of makeup, which helps perfectly convey the attitudes and nature of the people who live in this universe. From the dirty coal miners of District 12 to the insane amount of opulence of the citizens of the Capitol, you really get a feel for the personalities of these areas thanks just to even the merest glance.

"Of course, I care about you, Jacob... I mean Gale."

However, it's a shame that the makeup is the best thing I have to say about this film. The overall acting is fine (and in some cases even better), but marred far too much by the trite dialogue the main actors are forced to recite. Let's face it: this was never going to be Hamlet, but I expected much more with this cast. Some of the actors are simply perfect in their roles. Liam Hemsworth doesn't get to do much but exist in the beginning, but you can easily see why he was chosen to play the strong Gale, one of Katniss's two potential love interests. Elizabeth Banks also stands out as Effie Trinket, Katniss's insufferable escort in preparation for the Games. Banks has been pretty consistent lately, and hopefully casting directors will give her more challenging roles in the future as a reward. Other solid and enjoyable performances come from Donald Sutherland as the Capitol President, Lenny Kravitz as the stylist Cinna, Stanley Tucci as a famous television personality, and Amandla Stenberg as a fellow Tribute named Rue.

Woody Harrelson; perfectly cast, imperfectly directed

But other roles were not done nearly as well, mostly due to how poorly they were written. When Woody Harrelson was cast as alcoholic former Hunger Games winner Haymitch Abernathy, it was widely accepted that this was a good call. However, the role never really fleshes out despite Harrelson's best efforts, and the result is a character that we just don't care about, or wouldn't if we hadn't read the book. Journey 2's Josh Hutcherson is fine as District 12 Tribute and love interest Peeta Mellark but doesn't really look the "strong baker's boy" part he's supposed to portray. But the most disappointing might be Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen, when all is said and done. The problem with Lawrence is not her ability but indeed what she's given for material. There's very little that makes Katniss a character worth rooting for, despite care made to make her a strong, solitary young woman. A natural hunter and used to being on her own, Katniss makes for a better contestant than she does a regular human being, and that's the character's problem; while Peeta is not as strong a combatant or survivalist, he does have the easygoing charm that people gravitate towards, making him imminently sympathetic to audiences. Not so with Katniss, who lacks anything akin to a personality despite the best efforts of Lawrence as an actress. I was honestly worried that Lawrence wouldn't live up to her Academy Award-nominated breakout in Winter's Bone after she stunk up X-Men: First Class, but it seems my fears were unfounded. Now if only Katniss Everdeen could be as well-written as she should be, and Lawrence (and the franchise) would be all set.

The new Crocodile Hunter, anyone?

Finally, there are a few more serious issues with this film. Some have to do with the film itself, the others having to do with the tale-telling of The Hunger Games in general. The ending. which wraps up much too quickly and with far too many holes in the tale left unclosed, is a disaster, and can be laid directly at the feet of Ross, who was obviously unprepared for this type of film after directing more family-friendly fare such as Seabiscuit and Pleasantville in his career. That he's already slated to direct the upcoming sequel is a head-scratcher, as he doesn't do this franchise any favors in this first installment. His attempts to escape Collins's Katniss-only narrative (arguably the book's weakest aspect) are poorly conceived and executed, the only tangible benefit being more Sutherland than I had at first expected. Finally, I had a criticism that Todd herself brought up: the whole method of using the Games to keep the Districts down simply makes no sense. If the Capitol had demanded that adults be tributes, then it makes sense, because at least that could be argued to be fair and just, even if it was morally wrong. But putting children in danger would present a whole host of side effects, from the rising risk of rebellion (what parents would do to protect their children), to drastically reducing populations (who would want to have kids to risk losing them in the games?) in areas that provide necessary resources for the Capitol. It's almost as if they make the teens compete to artificially create a story appealing to young readers/viewers, and to Hell with the cultural likelihood. Huh.

For the record, Mr. Anderson likes the ponytail look.

Despite what must seem like a scathing review (Already I can hear a crowd of fangirls outside my window, baying for blood), I actually enjoyed The Hunger Games as a decent sort of action film, despite its glaring issues. Obviously, this is no masterpiece, and I'm not sure anyone was expecting otherwise. I can at least appreciate The Hunger Games for its fantasy, as I liked The Woman in Black for its scares and Safe House for its acting, ignoring their other flaws. The only thing I can hope is that Ross and Lionsgate recognize what the problems were, and rectify them in the upcoming sequels. This was a film I really wanted to like, but sadly turns out to be just another okay 2012 release, debuting at #9 for the year. This film had a lot of potential, but lapsed thanks to an overly-chopped narrative, mediocre effects and a rabid fandom that overly-hyped it into oblivion. I expect and demand better from them in the future. If you're a fan of these books, you should too.

Beware of Falling Bodies

Ah, the plight of the up-and-coming Australian actor. It seems that whenever a performer arrives in Hollywood from "down under", they enjoy a brief run on the big screen before fading into obscurity. If they're lucky, they can at least follow up their short-lived superstardom with sporadic appearances that pay the bills. Eric Bana has done a nice job following that path, and even though he has the talent do more than play secondary characters in second-rate films, that is his lot in life now. Chances of a new Mel Gibson appearing among the industry's rank and file seem far less likely nowadays, especially with more and more nations contributing new Hollywood stars to outshine those who came before. And that brings us to Sam Worthington, one of the latest attempt Australia has put forward to try and prove their relevance in today's film industry. Sure, everybody was impressed with his American debut in the fun but otherwise frivolous Terminator Salvation, but since then his career the past couple of years has been... uneven. Sure, he scored great successes in Avatar and Clash of the Titans, but neither of those could be considered "acting" films. His only other widely-released film, the spy thriller The Debt, was successful at the box office only by virtue of being inexpensively made. While I have no doubt that this year's Clash sequel Wrath of the Titans will also be a massive success, I'm waiting for Worthington to prove that he can overcome that "action" motif and prove he has talent consistent with what we witnessed so briefly in Terminator Salvation. That's what made Man on a Ledge so interesting for me. Here was a chance for Worthington to have a taste of both worlds, with some of the action that has made him the actor he is today, alongside some legitimate dramatic and thriller bits that would challenge him to expand on his usual repertoire. Being surrounded by a talented cast (including Jamie Bell, Anthony Mackie and Ed Harris) doesn't hurt either, and the ensemble cast looked more than able to make up for what looked like little more than lightly clever heist film. At center stage is the Aussie actor, trying to show us that he indeed has what it takes to run with the big boys.

No, really, he just enjoys the view

One morning, fugitive and former police officer Nick Cassidy (Worthington) enters a Manhattan hotel and checks in under a false name. The man accused and convicted of stealing the Monarch diamond from Real Estate tycoon David Englander (Ed Harris), Nick apparently has little to live for, and climbs out on the high ledge of the hotel. This action soon gains witnesses, as a police and a shocked crowd gather, the law to try and save his life, the crowd to see whether he'll jump. The eyes of the city are on Nick... and that allows his brother Joey (Jamie Bell) and Joey's girlfriend Angie (Genesis Rodriguez) to sneak into a building across the street with a whole mess of thieving tools. Their mission? To prove that the Monarch diamond was never stolen, and that Nick Cassidy was an innocent man all along.

We love wires

Okay, to be fair, the whole situation is more than a BIT convoluted. You're going to be asking yourself a lot of questions, such as "why does he have to be right across the street? Why not be across town?" and "how did Joey and Angie afford all that extremely sophisticated equipment they use to break into a high-security building?" "Why would Joey give Angie a chance to back out when he would have had no chance of success on his own?" "How did Nick get convicted with no real evidence that he stole the diamond in the first place?" All good questions, never answered. While the premise in itself is indeed an intriguing one, it's also the film's fatal flaw; very little actually makes sense, and yet things turn out okay for the most part. When something comes up and a character says "we're not ready yet", there's no real explanation as to why they're not and by the time the moment comes to past, they usually are. Man on a Ledge has plenty of last-second gasps, but thankfully they are not what drives the film.

Nick made sure to get a live feed of the Giants game. Because some things are too important to miss

In fact, it's the human element of Ledge that is the real treat for audiences, and the film has a bevy of talented actors to build a film around. Best is the pairing of Jamie Bell and Genesis Rodriguez as the amateur robbers. Romantically linked, their conversations are full of humorous bickering and even innuendo, and the two have a great chemistry that makes it all work. Bell of course is amazing (as always) in a role more free-form than most he usually performs, even allowing him in one moment to draw upon his Billy Elliot history. He's an extremely talented actor, and hopefully he'll be leading films in his own right. Rodriguez, who to this point has mostly appeared in Spanish-language telenovelas, puts on a remarkably nuanced performance as Angie, portrayed as being smarter, stronger and more dominant overall than Bell's Joey. Angie is the perfect example of the strong female character you don't see in most Hollywood screenplays these days, and Rodriguez might prove herself into a successful acting career with this debut. Another strong female character is negotiator Lydia Mercer, played by Elizabeth Banks. I'm not usually a fan of Banks, but she does a fine job playing Mercer, a rookie who famously botched rescuing the victim of a similar suicide attempt and has been vilified by the press and her peers, as if she hadn't already been having a difficult time breaking into the "boys club" of the NYPD. I hadn't expected much, but the character's transformation over the course of the film is one of its highlights, one that makes the film much better than it should be. Other good performances come from cops played by Titus Welliver and Anthony Mackie.

"Dispatch? I forgot my lines again. Advise?"

Of course, the film does have major flaws, mostly in the acting department. Worthington is actually mostly okay, his energy and enthusiasm making up for some minor flaws and the fact that his Australian accent keeps popping up for no reason. He's got the charisma to lead a major motion picture; I'm just not sure this was the right one. There were two far worse performances to be had, one inexcusable and the other unnecessary. Director Asger Leth typically makes documentaries (and incidentally hasn't made a film in six years) and so his inclusion of a major character in the press corps is not all that surprising. What IS surprising is that in putting Kyra Sedgwick in that role, he has guaranteed that I'm that much further from bothering with her TV show The Closer, as her reporter is the worst representation of the free press I've seen in film. Her role is also borderline insulting, as she's playing a Latina (Suzie Morales), leading me to wonder at the laziness of the casting. I don't care if you thought she could pull it off; either cast a Latina, or change the character's name. As if we don't have enough high profile racial casting issues in Hollywood today. But Ed Harris has the unfortunate fate of having the worst role in the film, that of the completely illogical villain. His role is so poorly written, conceived and executed that you have to ask what it was that Harris saw in the script that made such an otherwise talented performer proclaim that he was in. Every decision David Englander makes during the film is stupid, making one question how he became so successful in the first place. A horrible antagonist would be a prime reason to stay away from Man on a Ledge, were it not for all the dominant GOOD work around him.

This won't end well

The stuff I liked? Anything Bell and Rodriguez and their adventures in breaking and entering, Banks' good cop schtick, the action and even Sam Worthington in a role that won't establish him as a star, but doesn't hurt his chances either. The bad? Harris, Sedgwick, a negative look at humanity in general, and a plot that is so contrived and dependant on things going JUST the right way that it becomes completely unbelievable in the face of pure logic. I enjoyed Man on a Ledge despite its flaws, but that doesn't mean that they can be ignored. For now, it's the #5 movie of 2012, and if this is the worst thing I'll see this year (and it won't be), I'll still be happy with it overall.

School's Out for Summer

This weekend didn't afford me any time to venture to the theater and see one of the few big screen releases I haven't yet seen (Midnight in Paris and Tree of Life will come soon), so it was up to Netflix to get me through the void. This time the film in question was another pick by Southland Dan, the 2001 camp comedy Wet Hot American Summer. I remember almost nothing about this film when it was first released, only the cartoonish movie poster and bad reviews that accompanied it. The same weekend Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes opened to the tune of $65 million, Wet Hot American Summer made less than the big screen re-release of Monty Python and the Holy Grail, which I actually DID see. A critical and commercial failure, the film released in only twelve theaters across the country, drawing in less than $300 thousand. Created by members of one-time MTV comedy troupe The State, it eventually became a cult hit, mostly on the strength of its satire and all-star cast. Despite it being Dan's favorite film, I was unsure how to proceed. After all, Dan and I miss more often than we hit, and often the reason one of us likes a film is the reason the other hates it. There's a reason I refer to him as "Southland Dan" in the first place, and it isn't because of a film we agree on.

Just before her career went nowhere

Taking place in 1981 at Camp Firewood, a Jewish summer camp, the story (if you can call it that) follows the final day of camp activities before the campers go home to their parents and the counselors go home to theirs. Of the vast amount of input shown, there are two distinct storylines. In the first, Camp Director Beth (Janeane Garofalo) tries to capture the eye of associate professor Henry (David Hyde Pierce) who just happens to live near the campgrounds. In the second, nice guy counselor Coop (Michael Showalter) falls for camp hottie Katie (Marguerite Moreau), who is involved with bad-boy Andy (Paul Rudd). Both lead up (along with a half dozen non-sequiter asides) to the big talent show that caps off the final day of summer, which might also be the camp's last day of existence.

It's time to play: Name That Preppie!

Let's ignore the fact that this camp is run by the kind of teens who pretty much created Jason Voorhees, and that the film contains far too many stories to be encapsulated within a single day. That's obviously intended. In fact, it's obvious how inspired the filmmaking process was by sketch comedy, as most sequential scenes had little to nothing to do with one another, and often seem to break logic probes in their desire to tell the next joke. Sure, that's hardly a knock with this type of film, but it does make the whole thing feel disjointed and unbelievable. A little of that is okay; a lot of that spoils the milk.

Camp Firewood's entry-level Jedi program

The film does feature some funny stuff in between long pauses of wait, and of course almost none of it has anything to do with the main tale. Tops is easily Christopher Meloni as a disgruntled short-order cook who talks about surviving the Vietnam war and utters unintentional self-revelations to those around of him. If you ever wanted to see Law & Order: SVU's Elliot Stabler comment on his "dick cream" or announce that he's about to hump a refrigerator, then that would be more than enough to recommend this film. Other good scenes include sex-driven Victor (Ken Marino) undergoing off-screen heroics to save a raft full of kids, Andy (Rudd) disposing of witnesses to his supervisory negligence, and a scene in which many of the counselors visit the local town "if only for an hour". It's a shame that these scenes have far too much of a break between them, as the vast majority of the film is utterly unfunny, lacking even in interest.

Yes, this is a pre-stardom Elizabeth Banks. No, she was no good then, either.

The really sad thing is there simply wasn't much interesting for this talented cast to do. Future stars like Rudd, Amy Poehler, Bradley Cooper and Elizabeth Banks mixed well with veterans like Molly Shannon and Michael Ian Black, but there simply wasn't enough for the various characters to perform. Some, like Rudd, were at least a part of the main story, while Shannon was segregated into her own private skit for much of the film to the benefit of no one. And it doesn't help that the funniest thing Janeane Garofalo ever did was associate with Ben Stiller. Am I the only one who doesn't get how she became a big star, even if it was only for a short while? I get the feeling that if Wet Hot American Summer had been produced as a regular television program instead of a motion picture, the storytelling would have worked much better, and the film's aimless approach to narration would have felt much smoother. Instead we have a movie that could have been funny being merely silly, and not always in a good way.

I don't think he likes where his hand has gone...

I suppose I should have seen this coming. Dan almost certainly should have seen this coming, but to be honest I'm not sure how he couldn't. I barely made it through Wet Hot American Summer, a poor film with some good bits that is more interesting for what came after it than the actual film product itself. There are some films that I can understand becoming cult hits; this isn't one of them. I know I'll have those who disagree with me on this, but I can't in good conscience recommend this to anyone, as it's not funny enough for comedy fans and not even the parody and satire aspects are good enough to recommend. If you have to see it, fast forward to the Chris Meloni scenes and a particularly humorous road trip. That's all you really need from this film, and even that's more than most people really deserve to see.