Double Feature: 'The Words' and 'The Cold Light of Day'

Last weekend was something of an historic moment for Hollywood. While the beginning of September has kids going back to school and is often a weak time for theaters in general, and production companies shove out what they believe to be some of their less prestigious fare, a feat was achieved in the release of ensemble drama The Words and action thriller The Cold Light of Day. The pair of new releases added little to a weekend in which the top twelve grossing movies brought in only $51.9 million, the worst since 2008 and one of the lowest weekend grosses in recorded history. Both films featured rising stars and proven performers, so why did nobody turn out to see them? Where did it all go wrong?

Of the two releases, The Words was felt to have far more potential. Beyond the original story (centering around the harmful effects of plagiarism) that would on the surface appear to agree with the literary-minded set of Hollywood, this was a time-traveling ensemble piece that more than a few people expected to contend for awards this winter. Pulling it together is the talented cast led by The Hangover's Bradley Cooper but also featuring Jeremy Irons, Zoe Saldana, Dennis Quaid and Olivia Wilde, with Cooper giving a surprisingly soulful performance that stands far out from his previous, more light-hearted efforts. The only negative thing I can say about Cooper's work is that the script does its best to get away from him in order to tell the story; when he's center stage, however, he's electrifying.

Don't worry; you're not forgotten, Mr. Irons.

But if there's one performance that will be remembered this award season, it will be Jeremy Irons as the nameless Old Man from whom Cooper's desperate author accidentally cribs in creating his best-selling novel. It's funny how Irons has reinvented his career in the past year, with his success on the Showtime series The Borgias likely a major factor in his casting. The Old Man vocalizes wide swaths of the tale, but that's no problem; if Irons' throaty rasps could do all narrative voice overs for the rest of time, I'd never complain about them again. The work he puts in here is exemplary, and cannot be easily defined by a few lines of text. He's easily redefined himself as one of Hollywood's go-to scene-stealers.

Yup, this is me at crunch-time.

But The Words' rookie co-directors Brian Klugman and Lee Sternthal just don't have enough narrative clout to make this film work overall. While most of the movie takes place in Cooper's present and Irons' past, a third time frame presenting the preceding events as a work of (maybe autobiographical?) fiction from ANOTHER author (Quaid) falls flat, although I can at least understand why the storytellers felt they had to go in this direction. However, the result is a choppy narrative that tries to delve too deeply into what shouldn't be all that difficult a message. Some great dialogue is wasted on a mediocre movie, though at least The Words was not the worst widely released movie to come out last weekend.

That distinction gets to belong to The Cold Light of Day, a low-tech action thriller that riffs off of the Bourne series without any of the charm and excitement that made those films such unexpected hits. The story pits an everyday guy (Immortals' star Henry Cavill) in an unbelievable situation; despite the extremely long odds, we've no doubt as to who will come out on top. When I first saw trailers for this film I was under the assumption that this would be the one to catapult Cavill into recognizable status leading into next year's Superman reboot, but apparently it wasn't even going to get a wide release in the states following the drubbing it got overseas. But with The Words as their only competition, it seems Summit Entertainment had a change of heart and started throwing the film at whatever theater would carry it. Honestly, they probably would have been better off going the limited release route.

Simply put, this is a dry, unoriginal action piece that has some decent actors rattling off inane dialogue and performing stunts that have been done to death in better, more groundbreaking productions. French director Mabrouk el Mechri certainly knows how to work his chosen genre (as he proved in the surprisingly good JCVD), but this movie has none of fun, charm and wit that is needed to carry a really good action flick. I get that every director needs to pay their dues until they get a REAL Hollywood job, but making films like this just because you don't want to give someone a shot just yet is kind of ridiculous.

The most awkward father-son chat EVER.

To make things worse, most of the veteran talent seems intent on cashing their paychecks, for all the enthusiasm they shrug into their performances. This should have been a big year for Bruce Willis, but between the last second delay of the GI Joe sequel, the "been there done that" of Expendables 2, and his uninspired performance here, it's been a mixed bag for the action star. Moonrise Kingdom has been his only legitimately good gig lately, and he might earn some points sitting across from Joseph Gordon-Levitt in the upcoming Looper, but overall this has to be a disappointing year for him. Likewise preening for the camera is Sigourney Weaver, which is a personal pain for me. In recent years Weaver has stopped caring about the roles she takes, and for every great cameo in Paul or Cabin in the Woods is matched by even more godawful dreck not fit for public consumption. What on Earth happened to Ellen Ripley and Dana Barrett? This used to be an actress I loved to see in movies; now she's little more than a famous face brought in to spruce up a sorry paint job. Finally, Cold Light does little to showcase Cavill as a potential action star. He's definitely working harder than his veteran cast-mates, but still lacks that special something that makes someone a movie star. Maybe that will change come Man of Steel's arrival next year; maybe it won't. But for whatever reason he doesn't have the inhuman strength required to carry this particular movie all that far.

Trying to hold a nonexistent audience hostage is not a good idea...

Hmm, normal guy whose existence is stripped away with the revelation that his family is not what he thought it was? And then in Bourne-like fashion he fights against all odds to retain his life, only to succeed thanks to highly irregular coincidences? Where have I heard of this before? Oh, that's right, that was the same story as Abduction, one of the worst films of 2011! You know things aren't right when you're copying the mission statement of a Taylor Lautner vehicle, but hopefully Cavill's career won't take the downward spiral that will siren-call Lautner after the final Twilight film releases. Cavill has the talent and potential to be a bigger star than most of the current "Next-Gen" actors currently working their way up the Hollywood ladder. Thankfully, nobody really sat down and watched this film, so he is in no danger of becoming the next Brandon Routh just yet. But it does raise yet another red flag in relation to the upcoming Superman film; with almost nothing (especially director Zack Snyder) pointing towards a positive experience with Man of Steel, can everybody involved in the project really step up and do a better job than they've ever done before? Because for that movie to even meet the insanely high expectations placed upon it, Snyder, Cavill and company are going to have to do just that. And The Cold Light of Day does nothing to allay those fears that it won't.

Stolen Time

Is it wrong that I actually wanted to see Abduction?

Don't get me wrong; I could care less that this film is the first project to be headlined by Twilight star Taylor Lautner as a leading man, as the pug-faced bodybuilder has done nothing to convince me that he's earned the shot. Being in a successful series of films based on an even more successful series of teen supernatural novels is NOT a recipe for standalone success; Kristen Stewart has had no tangible success outside of the Twilight movies and Robert Pattinson had to adapt another popular novel (in the great Water for Elephants) to star in another hit. No, Lautner was nowhere near the top of the list of reasons I had for wanting to see this film; it was instead his director and co-stars who baited me into the theater like a mouse to cheese. I've never seen a John Singleton film, but even a middle-class white boy can understand the impact he has had with the urban titles Poetic Justice and the Oscar-nominated Boyz n tha Hood. And the talent piled around Lautner? Sigourney Weaver, Alfred Molina, Jason Isaacs, Maria Bello and Michael Nyqvist are all top-notch performers whose presence spoke to me and guaranteed that I would be seeing this film as soon as I could fit it into my schedule.

Movie appealing to teens? Guaranteed liberal cell phone usage

Nathan Harper (Lautner) is a normal suburban teenager. He's on the wrestling team in high school, crushes on his classmate/neighbor Karen (Lily Collins) and lives with his parents Kevin (Isaacs) and Mara (Bello). His is a fairly normal life, but he is also troubled in that he suffers from insomnia and rage issues brought on by dreams he has of witnessing a woman he vaguely recognizes being murdered. As a result Nathan doesn't always feel like he belongs in the life he leads, all more complicated by the discovery of his childhood photo on a missing person's website. Soon after learning that the people in his house are not his parents, Nathan and Karen find themselves on the run from a CIA group led by Frank Burton (Molina) and a Russian terrorist group under the leadership of Viktor Koslow (Nyqvist). If they are to have any chance, Nathan must learn about his real father and the reasons his life up to this point has been a lie.

Because every teenager need a motorcycle for... stuff

Unfortunately, there's very little good to say about Abduction. While the premise has some potential, it is utterly wasted thanks to a terrible screenplay by Stellastarr frontman Shawn Christensen. This man needs to stick to his musical career, as the film's horrid dialogue and pacing fail on every level. Almost is bad is Singleton's work as director. As far from the subjects of his earlier work as humanly possible, Abduction simply didn't have the right man in charge, as Singleton can't do for upper-class white kids what he did for lower-class urban black youths in the nineties. The whole teen angst movement that has become so popular in recent years seems over his head and one can't help but wonder what would happen if someone more in tune like Catherine Hardwicke had been in charge (of course she made the atrocious Red Riding Hood so she might not be the best example). Maybe it's time Singleton go back to writing his own screenplays, as he really doesn't seem to do well when it comes to other people's stories.

Sweaty Taylor Lautner is not a pretty thing

And yet this might have been slightly redeemable if Lautner had been a more polished lead actor; sadly, this was a bad first pick for a shot at a post-Twilight career. It's not the Lautner is a BAD actor, it's just that he can't overcome the trite material he's given to work with at this stage. Looking like a poor-man's Tom Cruise is not a good thing if you can't capture that early Tom Cruise charm, something he will desperately need if he wants success in the future. Lily Collins is no better, having not lived up to her billing as an actress to watch out for. As she was in this year's other snore-fest action film Priest, Collins is a goal and something to protect, but never breaks out of that shell and becomes her own character. She does get one moment to shine, but the scene is so overlooked by the filmmakers that it barely warrants a mention. Together, the pair make for an uninteresting set of leads, complete with an entirely implausible romance.

Trying to be slick. Failing.

And so it falls to the support cast to keep this film completely out of the gutter. However, despite the amazing amount of talent present even this group can't save this mess. Sigourney Weaver, Alfred Molina and Jason Isaacs are all high-impact talents who usually raise the quality of a film just by their mere presence. Look at Weaver in Paul; the perfect example of a perfectly-cast small role. And Molina was easily the best part of Prince of Persia, one of 2010's worst titles. Both are completely wasted here, with Molina not quite ringing true as a CIA operative who may or may not be trustworthy, and Weaver shockingly bland as one of Nathan's true allies. Isaacs has been good in just about every genre of film you can imagine, from the women's drama Nine Lives to the action thriller Green Zone to the sci-fi horror Event Horizon. He's always been amongst the best performers that nobody in the community recognizes, and part of the reason for that is his inability to pick the great, popular movies. In that way, he's kind of a male, English Robin Wright. Here, he's the best part of the film, only to be killed off early, along with the equally-talented Maria Bello. The biggest hope I had for this film was for Michael Nyqvist to make an impact on Hollywood. Nyqvist, best known for his leading role of Mikael Blomkvist in the Swedish adaptation of Stieg Larssen's Millennium trilogy, had an opportunity to become a known quantity to an American audience. Unfortunately, he suffers the same fate as Weaver, as what talent he brings to the table is countered by cliche characterization and the lousy script. He'll have another chance with the latest Mission Impossible film when it releases later this year, but it's still a major disappointment to see him wasted in this film.

Sadly, Excitement missed the last train to the filming of Abduction

Let's get this straight: Abduction is not a good film. It's not even a mediocre film. A cheap knockoff of the Jason Bourne series, this is a bad film that takes the talents present and cuts it all out until you cannot tell that it was ever there. One of the year's worst, it has the wrong director, a misused cast, and lead actor who can't yet cut it as a lead actor. Unlike the much more polished Pattinson, Lautner hasn't proven that he can yet carry a film with any degree of authority. Until he can, and until he starts to pick better material, I think I can safely avoid his theatrical releases for now and the immediate future.

Alien Nation

Since I'm known as a movie guy in my circles (not THE movie guy, mind you; I'm still working on that), I often get asked my opinion as to what I think of certain films and genres. Some questions, for instance what I thought was the worst film EVER, are difficult. There are so many bad films released every year, you have to present the question to exclude the low-budget hack jobs that never should have been made in the first place. Even THAT doesn't necessarily pare down the list too much, as true scatological pieces like Waterworld and Red Riding Hood multiply in quantity each year. In short, some questions are so difficult that I may never have a true answer. Naming my favorite film is nowhere near as tricky. Long my movie of choice, Aliens has held a foremost place in my heart since just about forever. While I had been somewhat familiar with the series as a child, what really brought me into the franchise was the batch of Aliens toys that were released several years after that film's theatrical release, sometime in the early nineties. The toy series was loosely based on the characters and creatures from the film, and I had action figures of Ripley, Bishop, Apone and a few Aliens growing up. Later, my cousin showed me his VHS (no DVD back then) of Aliens, and it was love at first sight. It has ever since been my favorite title, and I will herald it as the greatest science fiction film of all time to any who will listen. With some free time on my hands and no compulsion to trudge out to the theater, I decided that I had gone long enough between viewings of My Precious, and enjoyed a perfect evening on the couch.

Campfires on LV-427 traditionally ended in bloodbaths

For those unfortunates not in the know, Aliens is the sequel to Ridley Scott's 1979 space horror film Alien. Directed by sci-fi prodigy James Cameron, Aliens was a vast departure from the film that preceded it. Unlike the horror archetype that dominated the story of the original, the new film introduced action and adventure to the mix, with the liberal addition of guns, soldiers and explosions. Fifty-seven years after surviving the events of Alien, Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) finally makes her way back to Earth frozen in a tiny escape capsule. After being thawed out, her warnings of an alien menace are ignored by "The Company", mostly because the planet where she and her crew dredged up the titular monster had become home to a colony in her absence, and none of them had encountered any problems. Not long after her warning, however, contact with the planet LV-246 is lost, and Ripley is asked/cajoled by her employers to return in the company of rough and tough Space Marines, assured that the mission is to go in and wipe the alien species out, once and for all.

"Got Milk?"

So what is it that makes Aliens so compelling? While the original is a classic, where it lacked was in the character development and plot aspects, two items that usually determine how much I appreciate a film. While Alien successfully introduced a brand new creature that still scares today, it did so in such a way that was somewhat derivative of similar horror fare, and the characters who died for our entertainment did so not as epic personalities, but big name actors (Tom Skerritt, Harry Dean Stanton, John Hurt, Ian Holm) playing shallow roles. Now, don't get me wrong; I LIKED Alien. I really did. But Cameron just did such a good job improving on the original that it feels like a whole other storyline, not the part of a whole that it is in reality. It helps that at the time Cameron was at the top of his game, having just finished Terminator and soon to be going on to make the spectacular sequel T2: Judgment Day. I know I may have my detractors, but I believe Aliens to be his best work, and it's a shame that these days the vision he once had seems to be rather limited in scope to what he can do with technology instead of story. After all, The Abyss was tons better than both Titanic and Avatar, two films for which he has received far too much dubious credit. Back in the eighties Cameron not only made great movie but managed to create two of the most memorable characters in film history, and both just happened to be women: Ripley, and Terminator's Sarah Connor.

Now you're his SPECIAL friend!

Strong character is a staple of any good film, and back in the day Cameron was among the best at building a wealth of personality into his films. And it's not just the leads that get a steady stream of development. Watch the first scenes of Aliens aboard the Marine starship Sulaco: those sequences where we are introduced to the diverse and dangerous marines practically weep character. After just a few moments of dialogue and interaction, we can map their entire biography and everything important needed to care about them as people, not just future cannon fodder. Sure, Ripley runs the show, and why not? Sigourney Weaver is an amazing performer (and as a side note has gotten so much more beautiful with age), able to convey her lines not only through practical dialogue, but subtle shifts in her facial expression and body language. It's easy to understand how she became the face of the franchise, and any film based on the Alien trademark that doesn't have her in a starring role just feels wrong, which of course is why the horrid Alien: Resurrection brought Ripley back from the dead (and of course she was the best part). Still, the strengths of the bit players makes the film feel just right. As I mentioned, it only takes a moment to understand the habits and motivations of the characters: from Sergeant Apone (Al Matthews)'s guttural growl and tendency to follow orders to the letter, to Drake (Mark Rolston) and Vasquez (Jenette Goldstein)'s tight friendship and bulldog attitudes, to the smart-mouthed nervousness of Private Hudson (Bill Paxton), Aliens was populated by smart roles that never felt stuck in first gear. When Bishop (Lance Henriksen) did the knife trick and Hicks (Michael Biehn) fell asleep in his dropship harness, those were moments when you really felt CONNECTED to the film and its occupants, and it's something you rarely get to feel when watching action movies nowadays.

My sister would approve Ripley's liberal use of duct tape to face the Alien horde

Another amazing aspect introduced by Cameron (and consequently ditched by the succeeding sequels) was the role of Ripley as a maternal figure. This was a motivation he sought also in his Terminator franchise with Sarah Connor and her son John, and the question of what a mother will do for her child makes itself known here with Ripley caring for the orphaned Newt (Carrie Henn). It escalates to to such a point that even the final showdown between Ripley and the Alien Queen is practically mom against intergalactic mom. While there is some inherent danger perhaps in overtly defining a woman by her maternal instincts, that aspect is done so well here that it takes the film to a whole other level. Scenes between Ripley and Newt are so compelling that they could easily be made part of a completely dissimilar film and still make perfect sense. Once again it's that attention to getting characters right that makes the film move forward, not the tension of waiting for monsters to strike - although that is still quite good, now that you mention it.

"Get away from her, you BITCH!" The best line in ANY movie

So why is it I love Aliens? Sure, the special effects are amazing for their time and Ellen Ripley is the most kick-ass character I can think of in film. Aliens spouts tons of memorable lines (including the near-famous "Game over, man!") and characters of such strength and motivation they would be leads in lesser titles. It also features one of the scariest movie monsters of all time, a creature that commits atrocities not out of malevolence but out of survival and procreation. The alien even enjoys its best day in the sun as Cameron's interpretation of the alien "hive" is one of the most enduring myths of the franchise. Finish off with a story that tells smoothly and with no wasted bits, and you could say that the ENTIRE FILM is in fact the best part. As complete a film as I have ever seen, and easily the first example you should point out to people who insist that science fiction brings nothing good to the table. My all-time favorite.