Showing posts with label John Cusack. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Cusack. Show all posts

Saturday, September 1, 2012

The Thin Red Line

Directed by: Terrence Malick

Written by: James Jones (novel); Terrence Malick (screenplay)










It's not often that the words "beautiful" and "war film" go together.  But, if ever they were, it would be in regards to "The Thin Red Line."  Malick brings his unique visual style and vision to a genre which is rarely ground-breaking and is more often stale.

Although the movie loosely follows the American invasion of a pacific island during World War II, it's hard to point to any central plot beyond the general invasion.  There are recurring themes and inter-personal conflicts, but characters come and go in an almost arbitrary fashion.

Woody Harrelson's performance is absolutely fantastic and is worth noting here.  His part is small, but powerful.  It's also emblematic of the film as a whole - small and excellent parts which come together in a fantastic whole.

"The Thin Red Line" is not your typical war movie.  But Malick is not your typical director.

There's not a whole lot else I can say.  It's quite an experience to see a film like this, which stakes its own territory in the world of cinema and sets itself apart.

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Hot Tub Time Machine

Directed by: Steve Pink

Written by: Josh Heald, Sean Anders, John Morris










"Hot Tub Time Machine" - the title pretty much reveals the central plot point of the film, while also giving away the basic absurdity of the premise.  If you're not intrigued by the title, this movie probably isn't for you.  (And even if you are interested by the title, there's no guarantee you'll like the actual result.)

Essentially, the movie tells the story of four men who accidentally turn their hot tub into a time machine.  They're transported back to 1986 - specifically, to a night that served as a major turning point in all their lives.  As they try to figure out how to return themselves back to their normal time period, they also realize that they have an opportunity to change the course of their lives.

"Hot Tub Time Machine" could have gone in one of two directions: either a straight comedy, or an an absurdist comedy (as the title would suggest).  Unfortunately, it tried to be both at the same time, leading to an unevenness which scuttled the film.  Some of the actors (such as Cusack) played their characters like just about any other comedy, but others (such as Robinson) played their characters with a wink-and-nod style.  One or the other would have been fine, but with both it felt like the film couldn't decide which direction to take.

The 1980s element of the film added a bit of fun, and played off pretty well.  (Those who made "Take Me Home Tonight" should have taken notes.)  It may have only been important to the plot at a few points, but it was consistently used in the background to add to the atmosphere.

A special note should be made about Crispin Glover's performance as Phil, the ornery one-armed bell boy.  It was a small role, but it was played to perfection.  His presence elevated every scene he was in, and at some points I kept watching just in the hope that his character would pop up again (and I was not disappointed).

Overall, "Hot Tub Time Machine" wasn't great, but there were enough funny elements to make it worth seeing if you ever need to waste a couple of hours.

Sunday, June 12, 2011

2012

Directed by: Roland Emmerich
Written by: Roland Emmerich, Harald Kloser










With the Mayan calendar fast approaching its end in 2012, it was inevitable that the film industry would try to capitalize on people's fears of mortality. In this case, disaster film expert director Roland Emmerich was picked to put together perhaps the ultimate catastrophe movie.

The end of the world-as-we-know-it begins when a solar flare sets off some kind of chain reaction which will cause the earth's crust to shift dramatically. International governments (including the American president played by Danny Glover) decide not to tell, but instead begin a secret project to attempt to save the human race. Meanwhile, most normal people (including John Cusack cast, oddly enough, as a chauffeur) begin to notice that weather disasters, such as tornadoes and earthquakes, are happening more frequently and with more intensity. Eventually, the civilized world begins to crumble as a chosen few desperately try to reach the international safe-haven in China.

There is a lot that goes wrong in this movie (and I'm not talking about the disasters), but let's start with the good.

Woody Harrelson. Woody Harrelson plays a back-woods government-conspiracy fearing lunatic radio broadcaster who tips off John Cusack's character that there may be more going on than meets the eye. Harrelson's character is by far the most fun and interesting, and it's unfortunate that he ends up with so little screen time.

Now on to what's wrong with this film - everything else!

To begin, the movie is entirely too long. Coming in at over two and a half hours, the movie is unnecessarily bloated and drags on far to long at many points. Some suggestions on how to cut? Start with the absurdly large cast. There are too many characters that the film tries to follow, and by the end the audience doesn't really care about any of them. For example, the entire subplot about the Russian billionaire's mistress having an affair with his pilot could be cut - it adds nothing to the film whatsoever, but consumes at least ten minutes of screen time. The same with the subplot about the scientist from India - not sure what he's doing in the movie at all.

Now, usually, when one goes to see a disaster movie, they expect to see some whopping special effects. Usually. Apparently Emmerich (who otherwise has a pretty good track record) missed the memo on this one. The special effects were underwhelming and unimpressive, and, after a while, repetitive. There are only so many "giant earthquakes toppling skyscrapers" sequences that a person can see before they lose their meaning. (One highlight, though, was the scene in which Cusack's car is being chased by a collapsing LA freeway - instant classic moment!)

The movie seemed to overlap and repeat itself too many times. It's easy to lose track of how many times someone says "It's happening sooner than expected" (or something along those lines). And there are three - literally three - scenes at an airport in which a plane has to take off in the midst of disaster on the runway. Sure, they happened at different airports, but a little variety in the disaster drama might have gone a long way.

Typically, I enjoy these types of movies for what they are. But in this case, I'd just had enough by the end of the movie. I'd only recommend this movie if you can't see any of Emmerich's other epic disaster movies. For what they're worth, "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Independence Day" give a much better bang-to-buck return. Sorry "2012" - maybe you'll be more exciting next year, but I'm not holding my breath.

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Bullets Over Broadway













In this 1920's timepiece comedy by Woody Allen, David Shayne (John Cusack) is an up-and-coming playwright who wants to get his new play produced. But, when the money dries up, his producer turns to the mob - who agree to fund the play, on the condition that Olive (Jennifer Tilly) - the boss's girlfriend - gets to play the lead. Keeping Olive happy is no small feat, though, and so her bodyguard Cheech (Chazz Palmentari) starts to offer advice to make the play better. Cheech's tips are surprisingly good, and he takes on a larger role helping Shayne finish the play, even to the point of betraying his boss's wishes! (There's also a subplot about Shayne having an affair with another actress (played by Dianne Wiest) who is also jockeying for a better role in the play.)

As much as I like Woody Allen's work (such as "Annie Hall" (duh!) and "Manhattan"), this film took me a little while to dig in and enjoy. At first, the 1920's setting came off as a little too cartoonish or like a high school play. The costumes were just too clean and the sets almost simplistic. Once I got past these superficial issues, though - and the fact that John Cusack was playing the Woody Allen role - I was able to enjoy it.

Part of the reason it took me so long to get past those features was the fact that the movie spent so much time in exposition. The characters were so busy being characters - and fleshing out every detail of their personality - that it was nearly an hour before the plot started to move forward. Cheech is basically set furniture for the first half of the film, although he turns out to be one of the most dynamic and important characters. Once Cheech starts to speak up, though, things start to move along and the film takes on a great vibrancy.

Although the movie was technically a comedy, the comedy itself veered from Allen's typical high-wit with a hint of slapstick style. This humor was much more situational and character based, with most of the verbal jokes (such as Wiest's constant "No! No! Don't speak!" repetition) coming off with a dry mock-seriousness, to the point where I was not sure whether or not to laugh.

Despite all my complaints here, though, I want to make clear that the movie had an enjoyable, simple charm. I had fun watching this movie. It did not require me to push emotional buttons or think too deeply about symbolic meanings, but, at the same time, it was was not bland or boring. It threaded a tough needle that way.

I recommend this movie because of its charm and effect. Just make sure you drink some coffee to help you get through the slow opening.