Class is in Session

When I first heard that the X-Men film franchise was going to be rebooted with an origins story of  Professor X and Magneto, I wasn't sure what to think. On the one hand, another X-Men film in the same vein of the first two series titles is overdue, as the superhero team is one of the more popular comic book organizations out there with hundreds of interesting characters and forty years worth of interesting stories to tell (there's a reason Marvel Comics has had dozens of spin-off titles to accompany their original X-Men series). On the other hand, well, X-Men Origins: Wolverine was merely okay, and don't even get me started with all the mistakes made with X-Men: The Last Stand. Thankfully X-Men First Class has a lot going for it. First you have the amazing cast that includes James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Oscar-nominee Jennifer Lawrence, Kevin Bacon, January Jones and Rose Byrne. Next you have director Matthew Vaughn, who has done an amazing job with story-based action films Layer Cake and last year's Kick Ass. Finally, the film seemed to step away from the popular-but-overused characters of Cyclops, Jean Grey and Storm to allow other, newer characters to grow into the franchise. That would allow for the inevitable staleness of the previous trilogy's cast to refresh, and make these characters more viable down the line. Still, in a summer full of superhero film fare, I wasn't sure whether X-Men First Class would rise to the top, or sink deep beneath the waves of the likes of Thor, Captain America and Green Lantern.

Obligatory cast shot! And go!

As I stated before, the film focuses on Professor Charles Xavier (McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Fassbender), and takes place during the height of Communism and the Cuban Missile Crisis. When CIA operative Moira McTaggert (Byrne) accidentally discovers the existence of mutants while conducting investigations into a secret society called the Hellfire Club and its leader, Sebastian Shaw (Bacon), she asks for help from Xavier, who is the foremost expert on genetic mutation. Of course, he is no mere observer of these events; Charles possesses a mutation himself, full-blown telepathy that he uses to read minds and communicate with others. With the CIA's help, they put together a full team of heroes to combat Shaw, including Raven Darkholme (Lawrence), a shape-shifter and Charles's childhood friend; Dr. Henry McCoy (Nicholas Hoult), a malformed athletic mutant trying to discover a cure to his physical appearance; Sean Cassidy (Caleb Landry Jones), who can create sonic bursts with his voice; Alex Summers (Lucas Till), who can absorb and discharge blasts of energy; and Lehnsherr, a former concentration camp victim with a lifelong grudge against Shaw and an affinity for moving metal with his mind. Together they hope to stop the Hellfire Club, whose goal is global domination and the rise of the mutant as the world's dominant species. From these beginnings comes the origin of comics' most unique superhero team.

Emma Frost about to come out of your screen, Ring style

X-Men First Class features one of the best stories I've seen from the superhero genre in quite some time. Almost epic in feel, the film doesn't rush a single detail, introducing the audience to Charles, Erik and Raven at young ages and the manifestation of their powers, before setting up the film's main story. Even then it doesn't rush things; even though Charles and Erik are the focus of the tale, they don't even meet for the story's first third. Nothing is sacrificed in the name of forcing the plot forward, and every pain is made to humanize each of these characters before going full steam ahead. Once everything is in place, First Class does go ahead quickly, but nothing feels lost to time spent. Even though the film runs well over two hours, it doesn't seem like anything close to that, as looking back I'm sure I could have sat through another hour comfortably.

Seems wrong to see Magneto wearing the classic X-Men colors... that doesn't last long.

One of the things I most enjoyed was getting used to all the different characters, many of whom haven't appeared in previous X-Films. Though comic fans will be quick to point out that the first actual X-team (according to their bible which is Marvel's database) was comprised of Cyclops, Beast, Angel, Iceman and Jean Grey, I'm okay with only Beast getting this first cut. Of the other notable additions, it was good to see lesser-known X-Men Banshee, Havok and Angel make their debuts on screen, even if the characters aren't nearly as fleshed out as are Professor X and Magneto. Sure, it's odd seeing Magneto and Mystique (two future X-Men villains) wearing the colors of the good guys, but the payoff by seeing their turns to the other side makes it all worth the while. I also loved the dichotomy between the mutants like Xavier who wanted to blend into society and could because they exhibited no physical abnormalities, and those - like Mystique and Beast - who knew they never could because they had to hide theirs. It made for great sources of conflict amongst the team, and a great commentary on human society as a whole.

Somehow, I don't think "I didn't do it" is gonna cut it.

The casting was also amazing, with only a few actors failing to live up to their perceived talents. McAvoy is once again amazing as Charles Xavier, as he proves himself a talent worth following. Somehow he's been overshadowed by his co-stars in many films, but any who don't appreciate the seriousness McAvoy brings to every performance simply can't recognize his immense charisma and acting chops. Of course, as I say this, he IS overshadowed by one of his co-stars by quite a degree. Michael Fassbender has amazed me this past year, with starring turns in Centurion and Jane Eyre catapulting him to stardom. Hell, even his performance in the otherwise-awful Jonah Hex was more than worth the price of a $1 rental. Fassbender far and beyond exceeds the talent potential for ANY action film, let alone one with superheroes, and so his role here as one of the X-Men's greatest enemies is a tour de force (see, they can't use that term just for serious films anymore) for the genre. Simply amazing. Bacon, meanwhile, feels half-baked. While he really seems to be trying in some parts, you can't help but feel that even HE knows he's just a placeholder for the next generation of X-Men villainy. Better is Shaw's number one, Emma Frost, played by Mad Men's January Jones. Though hardly a deep role, Frost has gotten more or less the shaft from previous films despite being one of the most important characters in the X-comics today. Still, Jones barely shows any range in her monotonous dialogue, though that only exhibits that she was perfectly cast for the role. Rose Byrne is good if underused as Moira McTaggert, a CIA operative who seems to be assisting the mutants while not actually seeming to be doing a whole heck of a lot. She's another actress with huge potential; it's a shame this film doesn't make use of it. Most of the secondary characters, played by Till, Jones, Hoult and Zoe Kravitz, do some interesting things but don't really get a chance to shine like McAvoy and Fassbender. At least they're more interesting than the "normals" like Oliver Platt as a nameless CIA agent. Most disappointing however is Jennifer Lawrence. Lawrence, who rightfully earned an Academy Award nomination for last year's Winter's Bone, doesn't seem fully in command of her character, Mystique. Compared to just about everyone else on the cast, her dialogue seems forced, with little to no conviction in her delivery. That's not a good sign, but hopefully this is a fluke and not a sign that her performance in next year's Hunger Games will be less than stellar.

"The Magneto!" is the new dance hitting Hollywood this year

Thankfully, that is the only major quibble I had with X-Men First Class. While I thought some of the special effects and makeup work was less than amazing (and really, no Stan Lee cameo?), the strong story and acting from most of the parties involved more than made up for any misses director Matthew Vaughn might have made. So far, it's the best superhero film I've seen this year, coming in at #3 for 2011. If you absolutely have to see one comic-book film this year, make it this one.

Hair of the Dog

When The Hangover was released in theaters two years ago, it was an unprecedented hit. Opening on June 5, 2009, the film went on to make nearly $470 million worldwide, a reign of success for an R-rated comedy not seen since the days of Beverly Hills Cop and other eighties classics. Simply put, The Hangover's success shouldn't have happened, what with the rare diamonds to be found in the comedy business. The film, telling the tale of three emotionally-adolescent men who manage to lose the groom after a particularly raucous Las Vegas bachelor party and wake with no memory of the night before, was so successful that a sequel was not only pondered but practically inevitable. Only two years later we have that product, one of 2011's most awaited summer releases. Reuniting the "Wolfpack" of The Office's Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis (for whom these films have imparted his lifetime role) and Bradley Cooper, The Hangover Part II was made to capitalize on all the good will its predecessor had sown. Of course, I thought the original was an overrated farce with few actual laughs, so would I be impressed by a revamped (and relocated) remake?

Somehow this year's fashion shows amounted to more of the same

This time, the Wolfpack of Stu (Helms), Alan (Galifianakis), Phil (Cooper) and Doug (Justin Bartha) are on their way to Thailand, where Stu plans to be married to his new fiance Lauren (Jamie Chung) in her family's homeland. After what was supposed to be just a friendly drink between the four and Lauren's younger brother Teddy (Mason Lee), Stu, Alan and Phil wake up in Bangkok with no memory of how they arrived there. Worse, they've somehow lost Teddy in the streets of that legendary city, and with only a little time left before Stu must be back to say his "I do". It's business as usual, as the three sort-of-friends unite once more to locate their missing comrade.

Of all the films to make in Bangkok, why this one?

To be honest, if you've seen The Hangover, you pretty much know what is going to happen here as well. The characters are even in on the joke, frantically shouting that it's all happening once more. After the setup that establishes everything you NEED to know, one of the cast disappears. Later, he is found. In between, a LOT of crazy shit goes down. This IS Bangkok after all, and there's a reason the city has the reputation it has gained from popular culture, such as John Burdett's series of novels centered in Bangkok's seedy underbelly. That this only serves to rehash the same schlock over again in a new setting is disappointing, even if some of the scenes are even more outrageous than in the first film. Director Todd Phillips obviously didn't want to mess with a winning formula, but that doesn't excuse the film's lack of courage, as the film only pushes the envelope slightly beyond the same specific boundaries of of the 2009 original.

A monkey replaces the sunglasses-wearing baby, because... you know... you can't shoot babies.

The Hangover Part II also features the return of most of The Hangover's original cast, and that doesn't just mean the heroic trio. Helms, Galifianakis and Cooper all practically live these characters during the film's shooting. Helms plays the perpetually nervous Stu as second nature by now, and of course Cooper is completely at home as rugged ladies man Phil, but neither is very far from their happy medium. The characters are easy for them to portray, so it's not like they had to put a ton of effort into Stu and Phil's personalities. Galifianakis suffers from the same problem, but balances that out by being a million times more entertaining than any of his co-stars. Even if he plays a man who you would never be friends with in a million years were he to exist in real life, you can forgive Alan's silliness when he regularly smacks your funny bone into submission. Possibly the most irreverent film character of the past decade, Alan MAKES The Hangover, and there wouldn't be a sequel without him. Though the women are all but ignored, it's nice to see Jamie Chung in a 2011 film that doesn't COMPLETELY suck (I'm looking at you, Zack Snyder), and she makes a better leading female than Heather Graham ever did. Acclaimed director Ang Lee's son Mason manages his first major role well, though the role of an over-parented wiz-kid son is hardly anything but a cliched role for an Asian teen. Justin Bartha has a slightly larger role in this sequel but doesn't really get to be a part of the main story, and with his mainly uninteresting character that's okay. Finally, villain Ken Jeong returns as an ally to the Wolfpack in Bangkok. Though most find his broken-English speaking criminal offensive, I thought he was the second-funniest part of the entire film. Throw in award-winning performer Paul Giamatti as a an American "business man" and the cast is talented enough to avoid completely embarrassing themselves with the juvenile dialogue and cliched scenarios.

"Oh, WHAT will I do until Due Date 2 comes out??"

One of the worst things I can say about The Hangover Part II is... it's not particularly funny. For the amount of hype and attention the film got, you would expect wall-to-wall laughs, especially considering the material used. Despite the filmmakers' efforts to make everything so much crazier and zanier, the humor largely falls flat, and some sequences are more awkward than anything else. Sure, I got some fun out of watching part deux, but as I was at a midnight release event, I can probably attribute some of that brief gaiety to dehydration (the air conditioners in the theater were offline), exhaustion and sleep deprivation as much as anything on the screen. Sure, the first Hangover struck both box office and critical gold, but if more of the same is all we can look forward to in its sequels, then we should all hope this latest night out is the finale.

Vay-Cay-Shun!

Okay, there are no vistas THAT nice near where I am, but I'm still going to take this week off from the reviews and recharge my batteries, which have been run dry by a number of factors over the past few weeks. Look for Hello, Mr. Anderson to return Monday June 6, when I'll be back with reviews of The Hangover Part 2, X-Men First Class and more. See you then!

Bang Your Head

San Diego's Comic-Con International is naturally a big deal for fans of comic books. Heck, the whole thing began because comic fans wanted to get together and meet big names in the industry. That's what fandom is, and few conventions have expanded as much as Comic-Con since it's inception in 1970. For years, new television shows have also had an impact, as many potential fans learn of shows like Heroes and The Walking Dead first through the previews and panels at Comic-Con. It was only natural progression for the film industry to get in on the act, and many major releases over the years have appeared there. At 2010's Comic-Con ALONE, there were announcements for forthcoming films Captain America, Green Lantern and 2012's The Avengers, and preview trailers for Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Tron: Legacy and Machete, among others. One that might have flown under a few radars (but not under mine) was the recently-released Hesher, produced by Natalie Portman and starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Though it's heavy-metal influence wouldn't seem to fit with the comic book crowd (and to be fair, it really didn't), the transformation of Gordon-Levitt into a chain-smoking, crude malcontent seemed too off the wall to discredit, and the strength of the scene previewed for attendees was surprisingly good thanks to his stellar acting. A year later, Hesher finally made its way into theaters. Though it came out nearly two weeks ago, I had pushed it down my list of must-sees, behind more popular fare Bridesmaids, Priest and Everything Must Go. With very few visitors to see this film however, I knew I had to make room for it in my schedule before it was booted from theaters, and so I caught a recent showing (with a larger than expected audience; no theater will ever be as empty as my showing of The Warrior's Way) with no expectations other than a great performance from the leading man. I just didn't know if that would be enough.

Seriously, that's the kid from 3'rd Rock from the Sun. Fear him.

After his mother dies in a car accident, T.J. Forney (Devin Brochu) is deeply depressed and plain sick of the world. He and his father Paul (RainnWilson) now live with Paul's mother Madeline (Piper Laurie) and go to grief counseling, but don't seem to be making any progress. T.J. develops a crush on a supermarket checkout clerk named Nicole (Portman) after she rescues him from a bully, but isn't sure how to approach her. That changes when T.J. meets Hesher (Gordon-Levitt), a homeless, troubled and mean-spirited youth who ends up living in the family's garage, with T.J. and his father so depressed they are unwilling to remove him. Hesher soon becomes an integral part of their lives, helping (in his own way) with their various issues and putting them down the road to recovery.

Hesher manages to keep his shirt on a total of about ten minutes

This film basically lives and breathes on the basis of Gordon-Levitt's performance. Having made a name for himself playing non-violent, almost nerdy characters, his performance here is nothing short of miraculous, only cementing his incredible talents as an actor. Hesher is rude, crude and foul-mouthed, and everything that he says is comical carnage, laying out an entire theater with laughter. Even in the film's later stages, when the script forces him to be more sensitive and honest, he's still a comic hoot, and I never expected to laugh so much during this film. Gordon-Levitt simply becomes so entrenched in the character that he completely melts into the role. Hesher is the number one reason to see this film, bar none. Since the story is told from T.J.'s perspective, Brochu needed to be a solid talent to handle the film's narrative, and he vaults this low bar easily enough. Having to play against Hesher's mouth, T.J. is a much more silent character, having to express much of his dialogue through unspoken emotions. Though there are a few obvious crocodile tears involved, he manages that part of the job okay. It's the few chances he gets to speak where Brochu really shines through, especially in arguments with Gordon-Levitt or Wilson. Wilson at first doesn't do a lot as Paul, T.J.'s father, but sit around on the couch and look depressed; he does such a good job doing it that you really connect when he starts to snap out of it in the film's later acts. Wilson is like many actors who are best suited to these types of secondary roles, and a strong post-Office career seems secure in that vein. Portman plays the only "normal" character in the film, her role a good bounce-off for T.J.'s silent depression and Hesher's insanity. Sadly, that's all the purpose Nicole has, as she doesn't have much to do with the film's long-term implications. Finally, Piper Laurie is second only to Hesher in laughs department as T.J.'s senile grandmother who adapts best to Hesher's appearance in her home. Some of the best scenes feature both Hesher and Madeline, especially at the family dinners.

Yes, Natalie Portman is in YET another 2011 film... not that I'm complaining

The script is hilarious, but it does run into some problems. Written by director Spencer Susser, the film spends far too much time not doing anything while reveling in its silliness. The film's first half almost seems to be a Hesher tutorial to get you acclimated with the few details you NEED to know while supplying laughs to the audience in abundance. The second half ramps up the purpose, but also ramps up the cheese and melodramatics to a point that is almost painful to take in. Everybody reconciles with everybody else and Hesher unsurprisingly is the reason for all of that, but I would have liked a less traditional storytelling formula used for such unique characters. Also, Hesher's character often goes bat-shit crazy, almost scaring of the fans that he'd cultivated to that point. Thankfully the humor never lets up; the dialogue and Hesher's ability to appear seemingly from thin air drive the film to be so much more than the sum of its parts.

This is pretty much the mentality we should all have

I really didn't know what to expect from Hesher, which is why I put it off seeing it for so long. I'm glad I did finally see it, however, as the insane humor, great characters and good if not great story were more than I could have ever imagined from a novice director and a metal soundtrack that might not be my preferred musical genre. Hesher comes in at #9 for 2011; it's not P.C., its not polite and your parents might look at you funny for liking it, but it's still a lot of fun if you just sit back and allow the talents present to take you to places you didn't think you'd ever appreciate.

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.

Yard Retail Therapy

Anyone who has seen 2003's Lost in Translation remembers the sheer power of Bill Murray's performance. Rightfully nominated for an Academy Award for his portrayal of aging actor Bob Harris (and arguably more deserving than Mystic River's Sean Penn, who took home the prize), Murray's work was remarkable not only for its total brilliance but by the audacity of the man who played it for laughs in Ghostbusters and Caddyshack to take on such a serious role. Such seems completely out of place in that regard, but Murray is far from the first comedian to tackle such a part. Robin Williams, for instance, received acclaim for Good Will Hunting and One Hour Photo, while Dan Ackroyd received praise and an Academy Award nom for his role in Driving Miss Daisy. Murray might be the best of the bunch however, and recent years have seen a good number of copycat comedians in fiery dramatic roles, from Adam Sandler (Punch Drunk Love) to Steve Carrell (Little Miss Sunshine) to Ben Stiller (Greenberg) to Maya Rudolph (Away We Go) to Murray again (Broken Flowers), all trying to capture that same level of drama to be taken seriously in the big leagues, and not just dismissed as "comedic" performers. At first glance, that seems to be the impetus behind Everything Must Go, the rated R drama written and directed by newcomer Dan Rush based on the story story Why Don't You Dance by Raymond Carver and starring funny man Will Ferrell as a depressed alcoholic. Let the Oscar talk begin? Let's see.

Don't everybody rush in or anything...

Arizona resident Nick Halsey (Ferrell) is having a bad day. In fact, calling it a "bad day" is selling it short by a few magnitudes. After several months sober, the recovering alcoholic suffered a relapse while on a Denver business trip. This relapse, of which Nick has no significant memory, resulted in not only his job termination but, upon arriving at his home, finding that his wife has left, changed the locks and dumped all of his possessions on the front lawn. Unable to even enter his own house, Nick lives on the lawn among his prized belongings, but when he finally decides for a change, he sells off everything he has for a fresh start, helped by a young boy (Christopher Jordan Wallace) and the new neighbor Samantha (Rebecca Hall), who is waiting for her own spouse to arrive from New York for his new job.

Indie film requirement "cute kid": met

A far cry from the usual Farrell vehicle, Everything Must Go doesn't feature any outlandish hijinks, crazy characters, or stupid jokes that have made modern classics of films Anchorman, The Other Guys and Old School. The recipient of a generous dose of heart and sincerity, this film remains at all time in a state of realism, especially in its portrayal of the modern Scottsdale suburb and the people who live there. There is a bit of dark humor present, but there are no wooden pistols or "Sex Panther" to draw cheap laughs or otherwise marginalize the seriousness of the story. It would be difficult to find too much humor in unemployment, narcotic dependency and divorce, and while I don't doubt Farrell would give it a shot were he offered a chance, the film we have instead is sweet and smart, its emotional struggles the film's most obvious storytelling strength.

Trying to find a polite way to get out of this particular review

It may feel odd to imagine Ferrell in this kind of role; the former Saturday Night Live star an unusual inclusion in so subtly told a film. However, Ferrell outdoes many of his contemporaries and proves that he can actually ACT, as opposed to merely playing convincing caricatures. Farrell's schlubby looks have often been used in the past as a self-deprecating measure, but here they allow him to actually melt into his damaged persona. That's not to say I think that Ferrell looks like a long-time alcoholic, just that he resembles one more than Brad Pitt. That's only half the story, however; Ferrell manages to tell so much of the film's story through his expressions and mannerisms that you have to ask yourself: "Where did THAT come from??" We all love his impressions of former President George Bush or Alex Trebek, but never did we think he had it in him to so convincingly play Nick, a REAL person going through REAL shit. He's simply a treat to watch, and easily the best part of the film. Secondary characters do all right as well, especially Christopher Jordan Wallace as a young boy who looks up to Nick as a pseudo father figure. Rebecca Hall is okay (though not as good as she had been in 2010's The Town) as Nick's new pregnant neighbor who ends up being his biggest ally. Stephen Root, Michael Pena and Laura Dern play relatively big parts, but don't end up doing too much and are mostly forgettable fillers despite their generally higher talent levels.

No, we pretty much just see the suburbs... I KNOW

That's the problem with Everything Must Go as a whole. There's a lot presented to consider, but the film gets a little too inside itself to really let the audience in. This can mostly be heaped on Rush, as the writer/director obviously doesn't have the experience to know when enough is enough. I'll compare it to the 2009 Hollywood darling Precious, which was a tumultuous, emotional and sobering film... until the story just got so ridiculous that it completely jumped the shark and lost my investment as a viewer. Everything Must Go might not be that extreme, but so much of the film is seeing Nick sink deeper and deeper until he finally hits rock bottom, by which point we've been waiting since forever for the film's final act to rear its head. To tell the truth, the story's formula might have worked better as a made-for-TV film or miniseries, as there simply isn't enough to pad into a complete full-length film. The ideas are there; they just couldn't be pulled off by this particular helmsman in Rush.

The first step is to admit that you have a problem...

When all is said and done, Everything Must Go is a mediocre film with a few interesting ideas and an unexpectedly outstanding performance by its leading man. Is Ferrell's performance on par with that of Murray? No, it's not even close, but that's a fairly high bar to reach in any rate. Ferrell does outpace many of his predecessors, and I wouldn't be surprised to see his name bandied about come award season, though he's unlikely to bring anything home (also, watch in disdain as the Golden Globes plug him in the comedy/musical category). I don't recommend that you see this film in the theaters, but you might reward yourself in a few months when the rental comes out. Will Ferrell will keep.

Overdue for Confession

Last year, in Hello Mr. Anderson's (at the time still called The Latest Issue) first annual Worst Films competition, the ultimate winner was a small sci-fi horror film many won't remember since it was overshadowed by juggernaut Avatar. Legion came in second at the box office on its opening weekend in January, but was nowhere close to the quality of the film it failed to out-gross. Marred by a flimsy plot, lousy storytelling, poor camerawork and a complete mismanagement of a legitimate big-name cast, the film was a disaster in the making, and hardly a strong start to the directorial career of Scott Charles Stewart, a jack of all film trades who specialized in visual effects before creating this particular trash. Normally, when a film is this bad, no studio is clamoring for a director with this particular lack of talent to rush to make more movies, let along give him a little more rope with which to perhaps hang himself. But with a positive audience draw (who actually paid money to see this in the theater?), the film made enough money to confuse someone into paying him to adapt the relatively unknown Korean graphic novel Priest into a full-blown film. Endowed with an even bigger budget, Stewart proceeded to make a film that sure looked pretty in the trailers (and in ho-hum 3D, no less), but with the lingering taste of Legion on my tongue, I could hardly state that I was excited in the least when it came out this past weekend.

Bettany got tired of those "pull my finger" vampire jokes quickly

For untold centuries, there has been war between normal humans and the animalistic vampires, who are ruthless killing machines but thankfully are kept in check by the sun. That is, there WAS a war, until the human side somehow developed Priests, holy warriors, out of seemingly nowhere. Gifted with supernatural strength and skills, Priests turned the tide of the war and ended the vampire threat, supposedly once and for all. Years later, the vampires seem to have returned, and one unnamed Priest (Paul Bettany) has a personal vendetta when they attack his brother's farm and kidnap his niece Lucy (Lily Collins). Despite the ruling of the Church (who govern the few human cities left) that there is no real vampire menace, Priest gathers what few allies he has and gives chase to stop a new human/vampire war before it can begin anew.

That's a big gun; compensating for something, are we?

Of course, we see precious little of the actual war. What we do see, besides an early half-remembered dream of one Priest vs. Vamp mash-up, is displayed using terrible animation as a precursor history to the film's story. I can't help but wish they had come up with a better way, as the imagery is brutish and ugly; while that might have been what Stewart was going for, it doesn't paint a good first impression for those who paid for their tickets. Actually, none of the special effects are particularly effective; while some of the visuals are undeniably pretty, very little else looks remotely realistic. The supposedly-dangerous vampires LOOK like CGI entities instead of flesh-and-blood monsters, and many of the slow-motion camerawork meant to make the fight scenes more comprehensible instead draw the eyes to the film's faults. These are even more exacerbated by the producers' apparent insistence on converting the film to 3D, technology which had already become stale by the end of 2010. The worst thing about the 3D that I can think to say is that you don't even NOTICE it by the halfway mark, and there doesn't seem to be anything so special that it ever benefits from the "enhancement."

Attack of the one-legged she-wolves, anyone?

Of course, that half-assed approach to the visuals permeates into the rest of the filmmaking process as well. You'd never think Stewart knew what he was doing with all the storytelling foibles that are packed into a film that runs only an hour and a half. Scenes feel half-finished and don't blend into the next; it's almost as if the entire film was chopped down from an unbelievably longer cut; nothing seems to gel, and too much is in fact too little, with silly little things like "character development" and "plot" swept under a rug, never to be seen again. What results is film that instead of transporting us to a new universe does us the disservice of stranding us in the desert with only a broken compass and a thumbtack to survive.

The newest Disney ride has a few kinks to work out...

Paul Bettany returns as Stewart's leading man (he also headlined Legion), and while it's good to see him treated as the star he should be, I wish he could be cast as such in a good film. Rightfully praised for his support work in films like A Beautiful Mind and Master and Commander, Bettany definitely has the talent to be a star. But, Paul, I'm begging you: step away from the edge, man! It's fine if you want to do more action-oriented sci-fi films; I'm actually of the opinion that there aren't nearly enough of that genre made these days. But Stewart is simply mishandling Bettany's talents, wasting horrid dialogue on Bettany's voice, who had a deeper role as the artificial intelligence J.A.R.V.I.S. in the Iron Man films. The supporting cast is maligned as well, mostly talented performers delivering rote lines and grim humorless expressions. Probably the best is Collins, whose small role as Priest's niece has the broadest range of all the characters involved. Karl Urban is another underloved talent, like so many from the Earth's Oceanic region. It's a shame when your best-known role was made famous by another actor, and Urban's Dr. Bones McCoy will probably be long overshadowed by DeForest Kelley, even if his performance was well and truly spot-on. As the film's vampiric villain Urban does his best but is hamstrung by his character being one-dimensional and uninteresting. Cam Gigandet is okay as a small-town sheriff who joins Priest, but like everybody else plays a cliched role. I don't even know if I'm supposed to be impressed by Maggie Q; the closest thing the US has to a modern action starlet outside of Angelina Jolie does action okay but is again struck by a complete inability to show emotion. Stephen Moyer, Christopher Plummer and Brad Dourif are similarly unmotivated, playing typical roles meant for unknowns in need of a paycheck, not established actors. That's the problem with Priest, however, as one can't imagine what was presented to the actors to make them take these roles in the first place. You never get the impression that anyone is having FUN on the set, and that's a sobering experience.

Cheery fellow, isn't he?

And that's really what Priest is; a film that didn't need to be made. While Dylan Dog suffered through a lousy opening weekend, at least that could be blamed on lack of a push from the studios, as the similarly-supernatural title failed to make an impact because nobody heard about it. Priest got all kinds of attention, not to mention a shiny 3D conversion to drive up ticket sales, and will probably be remembered as a bust when it finally exits theaters. So why is this? The easy answer is that it's simply a bad movie, but to be fair, the sci-fi genre doesn't often get a big show of support from even die-hard fans, and the big hits are often descended from popular comics or books that developed followings from decades past. That still doesn't excuse Stewart from making yet another contender for the year's Worst Film list, and one has to wonder why he's being given another chance, adapting Cassandra Clare's popular Mortal Instruments book series into a scheduled 2012 release. He's already shown that he doesn't have what it takes, and if he continues to eek a career out of this level of shoddiness, I'm sure I can expect to hate his upcoming work for years to come.