Dear John

Title: Dear John
Year: 2010
Director: Lasse Hallström
Writer: Jamie Linden, adapting from the Nicholas Sparks novel
Starring: Amanda Seyfried, Channing Tatum, Henry Thomas, Scott Porter, Richard Jenkins
MPAA Rating: PG-13, some sensuality and violence
Runtime: 105 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 5.5
Rotten Tomatoes: 28%

I’m a sucker for Amanda Seyfriend, she’s one of my favorite young actresses, I’m also a sucker for a good romance, and as such a fan of Nicholas Spark’s novels, I’m not, however, a sucker for the film adaptation of his Dear John novel. The bad thing about it is that it relies too much on the framework that worked so well on The Notebook, but because of a performance that I found uneven by Tatum and an all-over-the-place direction from Hallström.

We know how Nicholas Sparks’ adaptations work, they are the ultimate love stories, and the guy actually has some real talent as far crafting love stories, we know that there’ll be tears, tears fueled by the story of two really great characters, and we know once it’s all over there’ll be a bittersweet taste left in our palads.

Channing Tatum is the titular John, John Tyree, an army-man back home for two weeks on leave. Amanda Seyfried, looking every so lovely, is Savannah who’s purse once falls off a pier, John then dives to rescue it, and then they fall in love, though, as I said, John’s time there in South Carolina has an expiration date.

We get to see those two fall in love during the days they are together, we get to meet John’s father, played by Richard Jenkins, who, as Savannah observes, probably has a mild case of autism, something that creates an argument between the lovers. And then we get to the part where John has to leave, he says he’ll back in a year, and then they can resume their love for each other and live happily ever after.

But not so fast, this is a Nicholas Sparks story, if that happened we would close the novel, or in this case leave the theater, with a huge smile on our faces, Sparks always aims for the sadder smile, wet from the tears that have traveled to our lips, and that’s what he gets in this one, because 9/11 happens, and John re-enlists, and then Savannah finds a new love, a really good man, someone who John, who re-enlists yet again, is told about in the letter that gives title to the film, a man who John can accept to take care of the woman he loves.

This isn’t a great Sparks adaptation, it’s really not, but its a solid one that could have been just as good as The Notebook had it had a tighter direction and a better male lead. It may sound like I’m pounding on Tatum a bit too harshly, and maybe I am, he’s really not bad at all, in fact it’s his likability, along with Seyfried’s, that make this one work on the level that it does, but ugh, I don’t know, there’s just something about his performance that sadly didn’t do it for me.

As a stand-alone film maybe this one does work, but as an adaptation I’m not so sure, I’m not in love with adaptations that change the ending of the source material like this one does. But nevertheless as romantic entertainment for you to go see on a date this one works, it provides that sort of heartache you sometimes seek when you go to the movies, you just have to wonder how much better this could have had those two errors I’ve pointed out been adjusted.

Grade: C+

When in Rome

Title: When in Rome
Year: 2010
Director: Mark Steven Johnson
Writer: Mark Steven Johnson, David Diamond, David Weissman
Starring: Kristen Bell, Josh Duhamel, Will Arnett, Jon Heder, Dax Shepard, Danny DeVito, Anjelica Huston
MPAA Rating: PG-13, suggestive content
Runtime: 91 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 5.3
Rotten Tomatoes: 17%

If I say this film is bearable it’s just because I really really like Kristen Bell, but even in my most extreme moments of fandom I will never say this is a good film, or even an okay film, because the truth is that When in Rome is completely bad, it relies on a series of really unfunny gags and even though Bell and her male co-star Josh Duhamel, are both quite likeable they are put through too many stupid situations for us to care for them for a whole film.

Yes, they are in typical rom-com, these are the most predictable types of films, we know the two will end up together, I’ve learned to lower my expectations with rom-coms, there are only a couple of really good ones released every year, and that’s if it’s a good year, but still, even with my lowered expectations I need the required obstacles the couple must endure to be funny, and in When in Rome they are painfully ridiculous.

And not only are the physical-comedy gags horrible, but the seriously weak attempts at being witty (because all rom-com writers now think they can emulate the Apatow clan) are just as abysmal, which is a shame when you have an actress like Kristen Bell who proved in Veronica Mars she can deliver them witty lines like the best of ’em.

The supporting cast is equally uninspired, Jon Heder is fine but he should be more than fine, Will Arnett is badly used, Dax Shepard really sucks, and Danny DeVito is the worst of them, that guy should just stick to his über-funny role in It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia since everything he does in film as of late has been pretty horrid, he should thank his lucky stars this film somehow doesn’t appear on his IMDb acting credits.

But meh, I won’t even dig into the plot of this film, just go look at the trailer if you want to know that, and if you do watch the trailer you don’t even have to go see the film, the blanks are stupidly easy to fill in, as is the case with this genre so often, I’m giving this one a barely passing grade, but that’s just because I want a Veronica Mars movie.

Grade: C-

Edge of Darkness

Title: Edge of Darkness
Year: 2010
Director: Martin Campbell
Writer: William Monahan, Andrew Bovell
Starring: Mel Gibson, Ray Winstone, Danny Huston, Bojana Novakovic, Jay O. Sanders
MPAA Rating: R, strong bloody violence and language
Runtime: 117 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 6.9
Rotten Tomatoes: 55%

Edge of Darkness was a film I was really looking forward to, not because I thought it would be great, and not exactly because I wanted to see the return of Mel Gibson. I say not exactly because it was because of it, but I didn’t want his return to be a good one in order to make Edge of Darkness shine, but rather because a solid return would be a good sign that The Beaver, his next project which I’ve been psyched about since forever, would be more than competent.

And a solid return it was, Gibson, who hadn’t had a starring role since 2002’s Signs, seemed like his old self, and that’s more than enough considering all that has transpired around him since said film. Revenge thrillers are something Gibson has done before, and in this one he is yet again a really convincing action hero that will make this film entertain audiences they way he used to.

I love the fact that Gibson could overpower what has gone on behind the screen and become a likeable lead as he plays Craven, a Boston cop who’s daughter, Emma, is the love of his life and who comes to visit him at home once. Then a man knocks at the door, Emma answers, a hooded man shouts “Craven!” and shoots poor Emma dead.

It is thought that Craven himself was the target, though Craven isn’t entirely sure and focusses his attention on the company Emma worked for, Northmoor, who’s chairman is played by Danny Huston, who also played an evil company man in The Constant Gardener.

Northmoor is obviously super evil and Craven is of course the typical hero in these sort of films, a really kick-ass cop who’s out to get revenge and who has absolutely nothing left to lose, in that sense Edge of Darkness brings absolutely nothing new to the table, but it has Gibson back in top form and a terrific Ray Winstone in the role that was originally supposed to go to Robert DeNiro before he dropped out a few days into shooting and just because of that I celebrate this film, and I continue to think Beaver will kick ass.

Grade: B-

Creation

Title: Creation
Year: 2009
Director: Jon Amiel
Writer: John Collee
Starring: Paul Bettany, Jennifer Connelly, Jeremy Northam, Toby Jones, Benedict Cumberbatch
MPAA Rating: PG-13, some intense thematic material
Runtime: 108 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 6.8
Rotten Tomatoes: 46%

Creation has real-life spouses Bettany and Connelly play husband and wife on-screen as they tackle the roles of Charles and Emma Darwin, and even though Amiel’s directing eye is splendid, and Bettany’s performance is nothing short of spectacular the film as a whole lacks the fire one needs from these biopics for them to really stand out.

I’m not crazy about this film, were it not for Bettany’s performance I would have probably ended up saying kind of bad things about it. But alas, Bettany is there, I love this guy’s work, go on to read every review I’ve ever done about a movie he’s been in and you’ll find praise for his performance even if the film sucked, and in Creation it’s no different.

He plays Charles Darwin, perhaps the most important scientist in history, he who created the theory of natural selection, effectively defining evolution and changing the way the world thought. At the time he had his fair share of challengers, it was, after all, the middle of the 19th century and the Church had a huge say in things, and offering the theory Darwin offered would obviously get you an opponent or two.

Emma, his wife, was one of those people that was with the church, she thought God had created men, and didn’t believe what her own husband was proposing. The film exposes how Darwin’s discoveries challenged his marriage, a marriage which lasted over five decades and spawned ten children.

I quite like biopics, but the problem with them, especially when it deals with such a heavy subject matter, is that it goes all Hollywood on them and dramatizes an element to draw in audiences and looses the essence of the story. In Creation it dramatizes the romantic side of it all and loses the scientific part, I’m no science geek and I quite like my romance, but still, it robs the film of something.

I like though how the film portrayed the inner battles Darwin had upon considering going public with his findings, delaying its publication so as to avoid the turmoil it would cause, but finally opting to reveal it because the world had to know what he knew, Amiel tackles this side of the story beautifully, with enough depth so that we can feel for him, but showing some restraint so that we don’t get caught up in it all and can pay attention to the other side of the story, problem is the other side of the story isn’t that well developed.

Creation in the end fails to illustrate the life of Darwin as we wanted it to be shown, it’s not an entirely illuminating portrait of the man, it is a decent drama about a conflicting man and his wife but it fails to shine a light on the deep history that lies behind it, and I want biopics to do that. But nevertheless, it boasts a solid direction and a tremendous performance, and that makes it more than bearable.

Grade: C+

Tooth Fairy

Title: Tooth Fairy
Year: 2010
Director: Michael Lembeck
Writers: Lowell Ganz, Babaloo Mandel, Randi Mayem Singer, Joshua Sternin, Jeffrey Ventimilia
Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Ashley Judd, Julie Andrews, Billy Crystal, Brandon T. Jackson, Ryan Sheckler, Stephen Merchant
MPAA Rating: PG, mild language some rude humor and sports action
Runtime: 101 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 4.5
Rotten Tomatoes: 15%

Dwayne Johnson has become a really reliable guy for Disney, even in this one, which is down-right horrible as far as script and direction go, he still brings a helluva lot of charm to the table, in the end that’s not enough for us the more adult portion of the audience but I do think the portion of the audience that still believes in the tooth fairy will probably enjoy it. And it has Stephen Merchant in it, so that helps.

The film proposes a whole work force of fairies, commanded by Julie Andrews, who sentence Johnson’s character, a hockey player called Derek, to a term in Fairy Land because he nearly killed a child’s illusion on the fairy. Dwayne Johnson, as I said, is a really solid actor for this type of Disney fare, he no great actor, but he’s solid, funny and charming which is all Disney needs to entertain the kids.

But the thing is that I’m kinda getting tired about that being it, mostly because many kiddie films are now at least trying to get in the adult vote as well, and this one just doesn’t, sure, it has Stephen Merchant as I noted before, and he’s nifty as hell, as he always is, but he’s not the main focus of the film. It also has Julie Andrews and Billy Crystal, who are fun, but who don’t really stretch that much into their roles, roles they probably only took for a nice paycheck, nothing wrong with that, just making an observation.

Sure, Tooth Fairy harms no one, and it’s not completely horrible to watch, and I guess some kids will get a kick out of it, but the thing is that it was boring as hell, at least for me, and I’ve had it with dull films so I give this one no letter of recommendation whatsoever and a low grade, which would be a tad lower were it not for Merchant.

Grade: D+

Legion

Title: Legion
Year: 2010
Director: Scott Stewart
Writers: Peter Schink and Scott Stewart
Starring: Paul Bettany, Lucas Black, Tyrese Gibson, Adrianne Palicki, Charles S. Dutton, Jon Tenney, Kevin Durand, Willa Holland, Kate Walsh, Dennis Quaid
MPAA Rating: R, strong bloody violence and language
Runtime: 100 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 5.1
Rotten Tomatoes: 20%

Blegh, what a horrid disappointment Legion was, I remember when I first heard and saw the sneak peek of it, I though I would be in for a thrill ride when I finally got around to seeing it, but instead what I got was a really uneven flick that even though does provide a great cast and does indeed give us some thrills is, for the most part, over-thinking and over-estimating itself, thinking it can try to be smart by confusing its plot, when in the end it just makes it all a mess, and thinking it can be more than it is by filling the film with completely unnecessary dialogue instead of more cool action scenes, and I don’t mean that in the good Tarantinoesque excessive-dialogue way, I mean it in the bad Legionesque excessive-dialogue way.

The film throws in a couple of really cool references to movies it attempts to emulate in one way or another, Terminator, Evil Dead and Aliens were the referenced films I took notice of, though I reckon there are plenty more. The film has that whole apocalyptic vibe, although in this one angels have descended upon us and all hell breaks loose (like the divine pun there?), its us against the angels as we have a group of humans trapped in the diner where the girl who apparently bears that child that will save us all is located.

See? That’s what I mean, this could have been a fucking cool action film with more than a few thrills in the middle of it all, but instead the horrible script made it be a film where more than a few good actors go to waste, even though Bettany is actually quite okay, but then again he always is, and fill this one in with way too much stupid dialogue. Yes, there are some moments that are pretty fun to watch, and it’s not totally bad, but the thing is that it could have been really good, but it thought of itself more than it should have. A real shame.

Grade: C

Extraordinary Measures

Title: Extraordinary Measures
Year: 2010
Director: Tom Vaughan
Writer: Robert Nelson Jacobs, adapting from the book by Geeta Anand
Starring: Brendan Fraser, Harrison Ford, Keri Russell
MPAA Rating: PG, thematic material, language and a mild suggestive moment
Runtime: 105 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 6.3
Rotten Tomatoes: 29%

Extraordinary Measures is the first feature released by CBS Films and, quite honestly, it’s one that should have been better suited as a special in the network’s TV station because, even though Fraser and Ford are both really well-known actors, and Keri Russell is a sweetheart to many, including yours truly, and even though the story is quite compelling (and actually happened), the film itself delivers what a good TV movie sets out to deliver, but as a motion picture it falls way too short.

Two kids have a rare genetic disease that won’t grant them over a year to continue living but then their dad goes on to contact this daredevil scientist who may just have a possible cure. This is a story we have no doubt seen before, more than once even, but still, it’s a story that if executed correctly can make for a decent enough film.

Unfortunately, even though it has Fraser as the dad and Russell as the mother, the story doesn’t go anywhere close to where it could and to where it ought, with such fine actors as those two their relationship could have fueled the story into a moving film, but instead they connect only about the utmost necessary stuff, and we never get to see as deeply inside of them as we need to in order to genuinely feel for these characters. Sure, their kids are really sick, and for that we feel for them, but we feel for them as movie characters, not as real people.

Ford plays the doctor who has the cure, and who Fraser’s character flies out to seek,  in the real story the doctor is a guy who worked at Duke and was Asian, Ford probably had the character then molded to fit him, and to make it seem cooler because the doctor acted as though he didn’t care, like some sort of TV-movie Gregory House, and completely lost the essence of the real story, its these sort of things that fuck this one up, the film had plenty opportunities to be good, but it ended up being mediocre at its best, and utterly bad for the most part.

The reason I’m pissed at this film, and am giving it the low grade I’m giving it, is because it has Keri Russell and lets her go to waste, and I hate people I adore go to waste. So yeah, if you’re told this is a really emotional movie based on a true story about devoted parents, à la Lorenzo’s Oil, then ignore those comments, don’t see this one unless you are the type of person who loves Lifetime movies, and even then, only see it if it actually ever airs on Lifetime, buying an admission ticket for it just isn’t worth it.

Grade: D+

The Spy Next Door

Title: The Spy Next Door
Year: 2010
Director: Brian Levant
Writer: Jonathan Bernstein, James Greer and Gregory Poirier
Starring: Jackie Chan, Amber Valletta, Billy Ray Cyrus, George Lopez
MPAA Rating: PG, Sequences of action violence and some mild rude humor
Runtime: 94 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 5.3
Rotten Tomatoes: 12%

At the time I’m writing this, on March 29th at about 10 p.m., I have seen 42 films with a 2010 release date, and this one, The Spy Next Door, is, by a rather wide margin, the most horrible out of them all. Jackie Chan is an aging man, we know that, but the guy was cool years ago, so he could probably still carry a kiddie film like this with his stunts and charm, I don’t necessarily mean he could carry it really greatly, but he could carry it decently enough, but again, he’s an aging man, so the stunts aren’t as awesome as they were, and the script for this film, which somehow took three guys to write, is completely idiotic, so no chance of that charm coming through, as a result, the film fails miserably.

Mr. Chan plays a spy working for China and the CIA who falls for an American widow with three kids, he retires to be with them, the widow’s father turns ill so she has to leave for a while and he is left to watch over the kids, but then, logically, the Russian mob comes to town and Jackie and the three kids are being chased by baddies in fuckin’ malls. Not even kidding.

The film is the very definition of the word ‘predictable’, a read at that plot summary I just gave you and you won’t really need to go see the actual film because that’s really all there is to it, you can fill in the blanks quite easily if you’ve seen a handful of other similarly-themed kiddie films: the kids learn how to kick ass, the girl baddie dresses in black leather, three kids and a chinese man can out-do the Russian mob and so on and so forth.

I guess some kids will like this one, but for the sake of future generations I hope that doesn’t necessarily apply to all kids who see it, I mean, Jackie Chan is on the wrong side of 50, watching his films used to be fun if only because you knew the guy actually did his own stunts, now it’s all CGI and whatnot, he does nothing, and even the fights are badly choreographed. Seriously, just do yourselves a favor and don’t give this one even the slightest of chances, it’s a disaster of a film.

Grade: D-

The Book of Eli

Title: The Book of Eli
Year: 2010
Director: Albert Hughes & Allen Hughes
Writer: Gary Whitta
Starring: Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman, Mila Kunis, Ray Stevenson, Jennifer Beals, Michael Gambon, Tom Waits
MPAA Rating: R, brutal violence and language
Runtime: 118 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 7.1
Rotten Tomatoes: 45%

This is the first film the Hughes brothers have released since From Hell, which was released nine years ago, and even though The Book of Eli is far from perfect, and bites more than it can chew, it is still a really fun movie directed by brothers who know how to inject a shitload of energy into anything they do, and for that reason alone it is worth the price of admission, it is fun, it presents completely ridiculous and impossible moments throughout, one after the other, but many movies do that nowadays, and at least this one makes it fun.

Denzel Washington is Eli, who has been walking the post-apocalyptic Earth for three decades, on his way to the sea. Eli is a lone wanderer in world that, being now left in destruction and ruins, is commanded by different gangs who roam on motorcycles. But alone or not, Eli can kick some serious ass, and the fight scenes are actually pretty awesome, especially when you find out that Mr. Washington actually performed all his hand-to-hand stunts, skills he learned from Dan Inosanto, Bruce Lee’s protegé.

The film looks really great, something we already knew the Hughes brothers could achieve, it was filmed in deserted wastelands, and it looks dry from all the sun that shines upon Eli, and the absent water he seeks throughout the film. Then we meet Carnegie, the villain, the Gary Oldman character, and Gary Oldman can really play the guy. Carnegie is a true sonuvvabitch, he abuses his wife, played by Jennifer Beals, and has his daughter, played by the lovely Mila Kunis, work as a whore in his bar.

The film, especially the final part of it (though not the ending), acts a really cool modern-take on a western, and there’s even a character which continually whistles the Once Upon a Time in America theme, and the film turns out to be a refreshing affair, a film that I don’t think could have been done any better than it was, maybe the only chance of it being better would have been if my future wife Kristen Stewart had landed the Mila Kunis role like she was once rumored to, but still, Kunis does a real fine job and the Hughes brothers create a really good-looking film, sure, the ending sucks big-time, but the ride there is pretty fuckin’ neat.

Grade: B-

Youth in Revolt

Title: Youth in Revolt
Year: 2009
Director: Miguel Arteta
Writer: Gustin Nash, adapting from the C.D. Payne novel
Starring: Michael Cera, Portia Doubleday, Jean Smart, Mary Kay Place, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Long, Ray Liotta, Steve Buscemi
MPAA Rating: R, sexual content, language and drug use
Runtime: 90 min
Major Awards: –
IMDb Rating: 7.0
Rotten Tomatoes: 68%

Youth in Revolt is a film I completely adored upon watching it, I really did, it wasn’t a masterpiece, not by any length, and it wasn’t completely loyal to the source material either, but it was a really charming film, one that allowed its star, Michael Cera, to stretch out a bit, and one that discovered Portia Doubleday, an actress I hope we get to see more of sooner rather than later.

I’m a huge Michael Cera fan, mostly because I’ve had many people tell me that I make them think of him, and vice versa, and I would be stupid to knock on someone who makes people think of me, and I’m okay with people thinking that, even though I’m not quite convinced of it myself, he has, after all, starred in one of the funniest TV shows of all time in Arrested Development, and had terrific star roles in Juno, Superbad and Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist.

He always seems to play pretty much the same character, a geek, with a laid-back attitude and who seems to be quietly bursting with desire, in this one he is given room to stretch out a bit more, not because of his character, which is essentially that same character he always plays, but because of his character’s alter ego. More on that later.

Mr. Cera plays Nick, yes I do realize that’s the second time his character has been a Nick, a virgin with divorced parents who then meets Sheeni, the Portia Doubleday character, while on a family vacation. First of all, how insanely cool is the name Portia Doubleday? Secondly, how insanely cool is Portia Doubleday? This is her first big role, and she’s pitch perfect as Sheeni.

His desire to meet Sheeni again is what sets off the movie, and sets off the alter ego I was talking about, Francois Dillinger.  As I said, its nice to see Mr. Cera stretch himself a bit with the Francois personna, he still plays him in the same tone he plays his characters, but this character is suave and has a wispy mustache, two things usually not associated with Cera, I thought he did really well.

The rest of the story I won’t delve in, suffice it to say that Youth in Revolt is a truly good film, with two fantastic leads and a huge amount of equally terrific performances from the supporting cast which has some truly outstanding comedic talent. The tale is one we have, in one different form or another, heard before, but what’s really great about the film is how its told, and to truly convey that in writing I can only urge you to go see it.

Grade: A-