Showing posts with label drama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drama. Show all posts

Monday, September 5, 2011

EVERYTHING MUST GO (2011) (a review)

EVERYTHING MUST GO (2011) (a review)

This is another of Will Ferrell's serious, only slightly comedic roles (ala STRANGER THAN FICTION). The movie was written and directed by Dan Rush.

The story: after losing his job, a man comes home to find he is locked out of the house and all his stuff is on the lawn. He has no money and his credit cards are declined, so he decides to stay there and have a 5-day yard sale to get rid of his stuff and figure out what to do.

Was it good?

No.

The movie was just too slow and if there was supposed to be something deep and powerful in it, it didn't come through at all. LOST IN TRANSLATION is slow, but it has some powerful emotional moments and a great ending. This one didn't.

There are a few weird choices. For instance the lead (Ferrell) is supposed to be an alcoholic who had a relapse and that's why his wife threw him out. Except we never meet his wife. We never see their relationship. He could have been a single guy getting thrown out of an apartment. Why make him married? Why bother if you aren't going to exploit it? I thought the idea of selling his stuff was a metaphore for moving on, but since we don't know the wife we have no idea what he is moving on from or why he would have trouble letting go. I mean, the only thing we know about her (at the beginning) is that she locks him out and tosses his stuff and destroys his credit cards and bank account...so she seems like a real b*tch! He's lucky to be rid of her! He shouldn't be sulking, he should be out celebrating that the witch is gone!

This is just such a fundamental problem and it's something I see all the time -- writers not setting up their stories properly. Often its because they move too fast, which is just as bad as moving too slow. In this case it guts the entire metaphore.

Now that can be fine if the focus of the movie is on something else. However here there really isn't anything else. There's no deep insight. No powerful relationship. And the main character isn't actively working toward anything.

The other angle is that he is an alcoholic. That's why he got fired and why his wife locked him out. And he spends a good amount of time drinking, and yet there really isn't anything in the movie that deals with alcoholism or anything like that. He might as well have just been bouncing a ball, because that's all they did with the alcoholism -- use it as a way to keep time.

Even the supporting characters don't have much. There's a kid who helps him who doesn't really have a story and a pregnant woman he befriends who doesn't really have a story...

I appreciate that this isn't just a typical Hollywood movie and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that the script made good use of the metaphore and maybe had some powerful moments, but they just didn't translate onto the screen.

This movie wasn't horrible, but there are plenty of character driven movies out there that are a lot better.

*** AVOID ***

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

THE BEAVER (2011) (a reivew)


This reteams Mel Gibson and Jodie Foster (who were in Maverick together). Jodie Foster also directed.

The story: Walter (Mel Gibson) is a chronically depressed man who is disconnected from his family and finally sick of it his wife (Jodie Foster) throws him out. Walter then finds a puppet that he puts on and begins to talk to him. He cedes control of his life to the puppet and the puppet begins to turn his life around. During this time his son, who has deep resentment toward him, begins a relationship with a girl who is the class valedictorian who is paying him to write her graduation speech. Everything gets better until people want him to put the puppet aside at which case the puppet decides it isn't going anywhere.

Was it good?

Um...yeah. It was good, but not great. It feels like a movie that wants to be a twisted AMERICAN BEAUTY, with a depressed, miserable family that finds a way to reinvent itself and find happiness. However, where A-B starts miserable, but gets happier and has moments of real honesty and a simple, powerful message -- if you are depressed just find someone to screw and you will be happy -- this movie keeps turning dark and obsessive and is lacking both the romantic optimism of A-B and those painfully honest moments that made that movie really connect with people.

There's still alot to like here. Mel Gibson gives a great performance. And for the first half most of the movie works. However, it's actually with the best moment of the second half (where the puppet claims to be alive!) that also signals when the movie becomes dark and violent that loses all the uplifting momentum it had built. The ending does find a positive moment, but it's too little too late. So while I wouldn't recommend it for theatrical, as a rental -- if you don't mind a movie that gets a little darker than most -- it's worth a watch.

**** RENTAL ****


Saturday, July 16, 2011

THE ROMANTICS (2010) (a review)





Based on the novel of the same name by the same guy who wrote the screenplay and directed the film. Kind of a modern day BIG CHILL but with a wedding at the center of it instead of a death. Stars: Anna Paquin, Katie Holmes, Josh Dumel, Adam Brody, Malin Akerman, Dianna Argon, Elijah Wood.


The story: a group of close friends (well, the girls are clase at least) gather for a wedding which is complicated by the groom and the maid-of-honor having been in love. After a rehersal dinner that goes badly, the bride to be goes to her bed and the rest of them get drunk. The groom goes missing and they pair off to find him. Lots of talking and some fun playing around.


Was it good?


Not really. It was pretty boring to be honest. These movies need one of two things -- shock or honesty and this movie didn't shock and the honesty just didn't work.


I can see why it would attact such a strong cast -- there was a lot of good to it. A great idea, lots of potentially funny set pieces, all the characters got to do interesting things, and it didn't have robots or anything stupid like that. And it did have some honest moments. The confrontation between the gilted maid of honor and the groom who gilted her and started dating her best friend had some nice stuff in it. So why didn't it work? Two reasons: the cast and the director.


The cast, up and down, is wrong. Everything seems forced for them. None of them have that real feeling, that live-and-breath connection to the charcters, so when they are trying to say those honest moments, those moments that are supposed to connect and just floor the audience...they come off as being meh. And it isn't that the cast isn't game for it, but that connection just isn't there.


Which brings us to the director, or in this case the writer, adaptor and director since he did all three. Clearly he has a lot of talent. Like I said there is a lot of good stuff here. But he just doesn't seem to get how to translate what works on a page into working in real life. There is a way we read and interpret things in our head when we are reading a book or script and it is just fundamentally different than the way we watch and listen when we are watching a movie. He picked the wrong cast (talented though they might be) and just didn't get them where they needed to to make the scenes that had to work work.


Still it wasn't horrible. There will be some people that connect to it and really like it. If I were younger I might even give it a borderline recommend (rental), but since I'm over 30, I'm going to have to...


**** AVOID ***

Friday, December 10, 2010

LOVE RANCH (a review)



A drama-ish movie starring Joe Pesci and Helen Mirren. The movie centers on a brothel, but it isn't sexy. And while it's kind of a comedy it isn't actually funny. Yep, it's an indy movie.

The story: a married couple runs a legal brothel in Nevada, but the husband wants to be more important so he sponsers a boxer thinking the boxer will help him become a big shot, but the wife and the boxer begin an affair and the boxer wants to get out of boxing and the wife is dying and runs away with the boxer, but the husband wants her back and...it goes on and on.

Was it good?

No. The married couple running a brother was okay, and the husband wanting to sponser the boxer was kind of interesting, but then the wife dying of cancer was weird and then her and the boxer running off and everything...it was like the movie started off on solid ground and then kept driving off a cliff again and again. I'm a fan of Mirren, but not for this movie.

*** AVOID ***

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans (a review)


Is this a sequel to the Harvey Keitel movie Bad Leautenant, or just a similar sounding movie with a drug addicted cop? Either way it was wacked out. Starring Nick Cage and Eva Mendes.

The story: a drug addicted cop gets into crazy trouble and has to do lots of bad stuff to get himself out of it and there's a kid who is a witness and...I don't know.

Was it good?

No.

(more coming)

*** AVOID ***