Double Feature: The Counselor and All Is Lost

With Halloween past us and more and more titles hitting local theaters, there are a lot of options from which to choose. Adults especially have no end of options, as only a few releases in the coming months will be even remotely geared towards kids (Free Birds, anyone?). So which ones are worth your ten (or more) bucks? Here are a couple of considerations.

Ridley Scott... what the heck happened? I mean, I know a ton of folk were disappointed with the renowned director's return to both science fiction and the Alien universe in last year's underwhelming and confusing Prometheus, but I never imagined it might actually get worse. There, his confused storytelling was at least partially made up for by his technical wizardry. In The Counselor, an all-star cast cannot make up for that that aforementioned poor plotting and an editing process that is as uneven as such ventures can ever get.

Michael Fassbender plays the titular character, a lawyer who gets involved in shady business dealings with the Mexican cartel due to money problems. But when an expected (and lucrative) shipment is hijacked en route, the criminal organization comes to believe that he is involved, putting any and all of his friends in immediate danger at the same time.

You will learn absolutely nothing about these people.

If The Counselor has one strength, it's the outstanding cast. Besides the always-strong Fassbender, Brad Pitt and Javier Bardem also put in noteworthy performances, really putting some personality into this crime thriller. Cameron Diaz also surprises in a role that is both her best performance in years, and her most shocking (unlike Bad Teacher, which was just shockingly bad). Diaz will do things as an actress here that you've never seen before, and come off as the best part of the movie. Only Penelope Cruz appears completely wasted as a casting choice, given little to do and bad dialogue to do it with. Actually, this is a problem with all the actors, as characters are barely fleshed out and motivations are all but unexplored. What you're left with is an aimless cast reciting endless repetitive monologues explaining the nature of the story, instead of actually showing us any of the interesting bits.

Cameron goes after that Oscar.

This is largely the fault of screenwriter Cormac McCarthy. In his first screenplay since 1976 (and the first to be given feature film treatment), the novelist fails to reign in his enthusiasm for the complex story and the result just isn't pretty. It would be easier to blame Scott, but it's obvious the director did absolutely everything he could with a screenplay that treats little things like the passage of time as an inconvenience. Scott captures the beauty of sweeping landscapes with his camera, and captures the gritty underworld in which our characters find themselves. Another issue he has to deal with as a director however is that there are far too many players in the game. Scott is forced to weave a narrative that is constantly weighed down by about a half-dozen side characters - each with their own arc - with each absolutely necessary to the overly-complicated plot. That wouldn't even be so bad if the leads had anything noteworthy to do; they absolutely do not.

Stetsons are cool, now.

If there's any consolation for Scott, it's that - unlike Prometheus - there really wasn't anything he could DO to make The Counselor good. This kind of high-concept story definitely would have worked better as a novel, and McCarthy should not give up his (undoubtedly lucrative) day job. This film is about as far from a must-see as you can get, and while it's not quite as bad as last year's Killing Them Softly, it runs that same vein of slow-paced, violent crime thrillers, and may appeal to fans of that set. But when a cast and director this good are wasted on a screenplay this bad, nobody is walking away clean.

There's a small, but still decent chance you realized that All is Lost existed. Starring resurgent Oscar winner Robert Redford (after a break, he appeared earlier this year in The Company You Keep and will have a big role in 2014's Captain America: Winter Soldier) and captained by Margin Call (I haven't seen it yet but hear wonderful things) director J.C. Chandor, this is the survival-against-all-odds movie everybody would be talking about if it weren't for the mere existence of Gravity.

Redford plays a nameless sailor, whose private ship "The Virginia Jean" undergoes some of the worst luck you can have when in the middle of the Indian Ocean. First, the boat is struck by a lost shipping container, which rips a hole out of the hull and fries all the electronics in one fell swoop (including the navigational equipment, radio and all wireless communication). Then, after our hero manages to patch up the hole, a storm hits that finishes the cargo container's job. Adrift and with little chance of rescue, Redford's character must do everything in his power to make it back home.

He's looking a little rough around the gills, there.

All is Lost is unlike any similar film you've seen before, with the first divergence being the complete lack of character backstory. As I mentioned before, Redford's character doesn't have a name. We also learn nothing about his family, friends, or reasons for being all alone on that side of the planet. Most movies would attend to those aspects with multiple voice-overs, something All is Lost proudly does not provide. In fact, with the exception of a couple of sentences spoken at the very beginning of the film (and a few incidental outbursts), there's really no dialogue at all. All by his lonesome, Redford's character speaks so infrequently that when he does he usually has to clear his vocal chords from inactivity (I can just imagine Redford refusing to speak on the set in preparation for the role). There is no CGI tiger, nor a volleyball named Wilson, to keep him company, and I'm certain a lesser actor would not have been able to put together such a brilliant silent performance as we see here. Even at 77, Redford reminds us why he's such a renowned actor, as he not only does most of his own stunts but carries an entire film without the need to even open his mouth.

Huh. That doesn't look encouraging.

Unfortunately, that brings with it its own set of problems. As I stated earlier, I never saw Chandor's rookie effort Margin Call, so I have little experience (like most) with his style of directing. And to his credit, he certainly does a great job capturing shots and helping his lone actor maintain that image of the bleak atmosphere of being lost at sea. But without character interaction, we're left with only character activity, and half of this film follows the actor performing acts that may confuse and bore anybody who does not sail on a regular basis. Chandor does a little bit to help, making sure we see the clearly printed signs on things like the "Life Raft" and "Survival Supplies", but those moments are inconsistent with the vast majority of the film, where we're shown things that MIGHT be important, but we're unsure why.

He ain't singin' in the rain.

You'd be forgiven for thinking that - sight unseen - you might have already seen all that All is Lost has to offer. You'd be wrong, however, as the tandem of Chandor and Redford make for an impressive movie, if not necessarily one you NEED to see in theaters. This is a brave production, one that really takes a good, long look at the human spirit and leaves you hanging until the very last moment to see whether it is found lacking. Thematically, it is very similar to Gravity (if a bit in reverse), and since Alfonso Cuaron's drama is DEFINITELY a must-see on the big screen, this being in theaters so soon after seems like a bit of a scheduling misstep. Redford is certainly enough reason to check it out (though Oscar predictions might be a bit out of reach), and Chandor does a good enough job, despite his inexperience as a filmmaker. But if it comes down to this or Gravity (and really, why haven't you seen it yet?), the choice is glaringly obvious. Check out All is Lost only after you first surpass that hurdle.

... While Rome Burns

Last year, acclaimed director Woody Allen released his most successful and arguably best film in years in Midnight in Paris. The romantic comedy, which saw Owen Wilson's young artist travel back in time to what he considered the best creative moments of the city he loved, was an astounding piece of film making. I didn't think it was one of the BEST movies that came out last year, but it IS one of the few from 2011 that I saw twice in the theater, and it won the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay, while Allen and his movie were respectively nominated for Best Director and Best Picture. Midnight in Paris was simply beautiful, and there was no doubt that the next step by Allen would either barely live up to that high standard, or fail miserably in comparison.

Somehow, To Rome with Love manages to evade being totally eclipsed by its predecessor, but naturally it cannot stand up to the wonder that was Midnight. The story takes place in four vignettes, depicting both residents and visitors to Rome and their stories. In one, Jerry (Allen, in his first acting role since 2006's Scoop) and Phyllis (Judy Davis) visit their daughter (Alison Pill) and her fiance Michelangelo (Flavio Parenti). Jerry, a retired classical music composer, discovers that Michelangelo's blue collar father (Italian tenor Fabio Armiliato) has a natural operatic voice, and wants to help the mortician become famous. In the second, newlyweds Antonio (Alessandro Tiberi) and Milly (Alessandra Mastronardi) are in the city for the first time, where Antonio is hoping to impress his successful family and get a job in the family business. But Milly gets lost in Rome and Antonio must try to pass off a prostitute who mistakenly showed up at his room (Penelope Cruz) as Milly. In the third, John (Alec Baldwin) is revisiting the city he lived in when he was younger. He runs into aspiring architect Jack (Jesse Eisenberg), who lives with his student girlfriend Sally (Greta Gerwig). Sally's best friend and aspiring actress Monica (Ellen Page) arrives to stay with her friend for a while, and tries to seduce Jack along the way. Finally, Leopoldo (Roberto Benigni) is a desk-bound clerk whose life is turned upside down one day as he (for reasons unknown) becomes an overnight celebrity.

Yes, he's back and looking better than ever.

While To Rome with Love contains some of the more fantastical elements of Midnight in Paris, and is of course told in Allen's signature voice, but that's precisely where any comparisons come to an end. Rome is Allen's third movie in five years (the first two being Vicky Cristina Barcelona and Midnight) that focuses on a famous and beautiful European city. Unlike those films, Allen only sporadically captures the essence of the city in question here. While every shot in Midnight in Paris and many in Barcelona evoked wonder and awe purely in the visuals, there is little of that ability shown in Rome. Sure, Allen manages to get some lovely shots of the city through his lens, but compared to the constant "Wow" factor that he had accomplished previously, what we see is somewhat disappointing.

Alec's still got "it".

There are also major hiccups with the stories themselves, a shocker considering how much thought Allen usually puts into his written work. Both the newlywed and celebrity vignettes pale in comparison to their contemporaries. Benigni's piece, in particular, feels totally out of place, simultaneously railing against an establishment of unearned celebrity while acknowledging that, still, it feels good to be recognized. Despite Benigni's great work, the theme smacks a bit too forcefully, and the piece feels unfinished and unpolished. Cruz also is the best part of her vignette, as both Antonio and Milly are too stupid and uninteresting to fully get behind. Meanwhile, showing everyone how it is done, Cruz blows everyone she interacts with out of the water, a force of nature that I wish had been granted a better tale. While the other vignettes are not perfect, they do have plenty more to interest the viewer, from Armiliato's rise as an opera star to Jack and Monica's flirtations to just about everything Alec Baldwin. Allen's dialogue is at times razor sharp, reminding you why he has remained so popular for his entire career.

Say it with me now: "Rawr."

Sadly, these few positives are not enough to make for a great movie. The film feels rushed at points, and not just due to the filming pace. Allen's themes of celebrity and infidelity are nothing new, and in fact are simply rehashed from his previous works. While there are plenty of laughs, they are unevenly dispersed among the ensemble, with some character getting next to nothing for their efforts. Allen also seems to have set a record for characters based on aspects of himself (five, including Allen), and while he manages to create some unique female characters, his inability to make a man that is not himself stands out. And the acting itself is not much better, with only Baldwin, Benigni, Cruz and the surprising Armiliato doing better than their scripts would dictate. Allen himself stammers his dialogue even more than usual, making you wonder which of his takes did NOT make the final cut. And his was still one of the less dry performances in the entire film. All this speaks to lazy writing, and drop Rome from the underrated piece it could have been to the undeserving theatrical release it has become.

This is literally the best the film has to offer... and it's damned good.

This really can't be surprising. Woody Allen hasn't hidden the fact that he hates the film's title, which he only settled on because previous names Bop Decameron and Nero Fiddles were deemed too confusing by many people. How can we be expected to like a film when it's creator is not happy with an aspect of it? Still, there is a bit to appreciate about To Rome with Love, but if we're being honest with ourselves then it's just more burden than it's worth. This is a title that has certainly benefited from the weak summer schedule, and as a result it may get more attention than it really deserves come award season. If you REALLY can't wait to get your Woody fix, then you're going to go see this no matter what I say. But if that's the case then you already OWN this movie. It's already on your DVD shelf, if under a different title. You'd be better off re-watching the superior Midnight in Paris than seeing this new film on the big screen, so only die-hard Allen fans need apply.

"What do you mean, 'I'm the weakest link?'"

Theme Ride Retread

2011 might be remembered as the year of the Hollywood sequel. In January, it was announced that 27 film sequels were scheduled for release during this year, and many of them not the first continuations of their franchises. While nine titles were the first attempts to continue series such as Pixar's Cars 2 and the live-action The Hangover Part II, many more are even further along film-wise, with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 being the eighth addition to the series. As for fourth-film sequels, 2011 will have featured the greatest number of franchises that have lasted until the fourth release, including additions to the Mission: Impossible, Scream and Spy Kids sagas. For most of these releases, it is a sign from the powers that be that they can't (or won't) take chances when it comes to business as usual, so the sequel seems the way to go for guaranteed positive business. Most notable in that vein may be Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, the latest offering from the series based on the Disney park theme ride of the same name. When the original Pirates was released back in 2003, it made a legitimate blockbuster star out of Johnny Depp and his legendary character of Captain Jack Sparrow, and the film's financial success guaranteed that there would be much more to come. The first two sequels, Dead Man's Chest and At World's End, were disappointing to many critics and fans, but still sold out theaters and made gobs of dough for their efforts. Hence this attempt to rejuvenate the franchise with new characters, a new director (Rob Marshall), and otherwise the same old crew of miscreants, scallywags and swashbucklers appearing for your hard-earned dollar. For the last few months, I was convinced that this newest addition (supposedly the first of a new trilogy) would be either the best or the worst the series had to offer. By the time the final credits rolled, I was somewhat surprised by the results.

And THAT'S where the rum has gone!

Some time after the events of At World's End, Captain Jack Sparrow (Depp) finds himself in London. There, he searches for an impostor who is hiring a crew under his own name, supposedly on the hunt for the legendary Fountain of Youth. Discovering the impostors, Sparrow finds himself an important cog in a race to the location of the fountain, as three major forces move in for the prey: the powerful Spanish Armada, a British privateer ship captained by none other than Sparrow's rival Hector Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), and a pirate ship captained by one of the most prolific legends of all time, Blackbeard himself (Ian McShane) and his daughter and Jack's former lover Angelica (Penelope Cruz).

"Carriage Surfing" was all the rage in London back then. Go ahead, put that in your term paper.

For one, I was quite happy for the change of characters in On Stranger Tides. While Sparrow and Barbossa are back, I was relieved when I learned that Keira Knightly and Orlando Bloom would not be returning as fated lovers Elizabeth and William, since their characters had run the course (and yes, I'm aware that the actors opted out for that same reason, you don't need to tell me). Instead, Marshall's plan implemented a more original route than his predecessor Gore Verbinski, who became so engrossed in the universe he had created he forgot that he was supposed to be making entertainment. Marshall's fresh eyes (as well as inspiration from Tim Powers' classic pirate novel On Stranger Tides) help to almost reboot the series while still remaining faithful to the original material. Intact is Jack's atypical sense of wit and logic, Jerry Bruckheimer's action-oriented strand of narrative, and the twisted bits of pirate lore and history that engulf the series's background. Sure, you could see a much more historically-accurate portrayal of life at sea in 2003's underrated Master and Commander, but that's never really been what Pirates was about. While it might pick and jab at historical iconography, the original trilogy reveled in silliness and good humor, while never backing away from the real and imaginary dangers of the world at that time. It reminds me so much of another swashbuckling adventure series, the Monkey Island games for the PC, of which the films have often been implied or accused of having copied.

Iam McShane warns Depp of the dangers of typecasting.

It's really a shame then that a film with so many things I love felt so disjointed. On Stranger Tides feels almost like a second cousin to its grandiose forebears, as even the effects-heavy bits don't stand up in scale to even those of the lesser Pirates sequels. Of course, that is no moon; one of the original trilogy's problems was Bruckheimer's overly-leaden special effects were merely cover for inane plots and plain silliness that didn't benefit the film at all. By scaling down the SFX here (even while incorporating the unnecessary 3D), the story is forced out into the open, allowing the screenwriters to flesh it out a bit more to modern standards. It isn't enough; the plot is very linear and uncompromising, with promising sub-stories either jarringly off the track or ignored altogether. While some genius exists (for instance seeing Jack's brain working out an escape plan in an early scene) the vast majority of the film is merely okay, generic pirate stories masquerading as an equal to The Iliad or The Odyssey.

In other news, Geoffrey Rush tries on a new hat!

Jack Sparrow himself is also dangerously overexposed as a character; while Depp never makes any obvious miscues, Sparrow doesn't have nearly as much of the strong support needed to thrive as a leading star. While I don't miss Will and Elizabeth, I do miss the way their normalized manners grounded Sparrow as a character, not allowing himself to get too carried away; here, he's a free bird, and this bird you cannot change. Depp still does an amazing job delving into the role of Jack Sparrow, I just wish he could have had someone to play off him better. That job COULD have belonged to Penelope Cruz, but despite the amazing chemistry that develops between Depp's deranged charmer and Cruz's sharp-tongued schemer, they simply don't spend enough time together to make it fulfilling. Worse, Angelica transforms from bad-ass femme fatale  to devoted daddy's girl to vengeful psychotic, much to the chagrin of The Opinioness, I'm sure. Ian McShane is the best, no surprise to any who have witnessed his starring turn on HBO's Deadwood. The veteran actor perfectly takes over from previous villains Rush and Bill Nighy emulating one of history's most notorious pirate lords. Edward "Blackbeard" Teach has a reputation for ruthlessness and cruelty (which history may dispute but hey, it makes a good story) and McShane brings it out brilliantly. His voice also emulates that of Monkey Island's Ghost Pirate LeChuck, so he's got that going for him too (okay, no more M.I. asides, I assure you). Geoffrey Rush returns once more, but despite his not-inconsiderable talent, the character of the pirate Barbossa has pretty much run its course, and should have been retired after At World's End. Sam Claflin and Astrid Berges-Frisbey have little to do, and their story is sadly off-kilter with the rest of the film. Claflin plays a missionary who Angelica obtains to try and save her father's soul, while Berges-Frisbey is a mermaid who the crew needs to find the Fountain of Youth. Like Will and Elizabeth, the two have a romance that defies expectations, but because the characters aren't very well developed and the side-plot all but ignored by the script until it matters, both are relegated to the largely-silent background.

"And just like that... the rum was gone again."

I suppose expecting that Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides could top Curse of the Black Pearl for top Pirates movie might have been a little ambitious. Curse was a wonderful fantasy story in a setting that hadn't seen any film popularity in years, and what it succeeded in was more than could be hoped for in ANY sequel. Still, On Stranger Tides does what only a Pirates movie can do best: disarm you with witty humor before the epic sword fight or sea battle keeps you on the edge of your seat. As a franchise film, it's better than either of Verbinski's attempts, and as a sequel it's better than Scream 4 but not as good as Fast Five. Far from masterful but still a lot of fun, On Stranger Tides is one good director and one great screenplay away from rekindling the magic that was the franchise's origins.