Multi Paragraph Movie Review: Now You See Me

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

Seeing the cool premise for Now You See Me--it's a heist movie but with magicians--and the hugely talented cast, it seemed to me like this was an easy slam dunk. It did pretty well in its first week at the box office and got mixed to good reviews, but then faded pretty fast and people seemed to stop talking about it. The first point can be explained away by summer movie season, but the fact that there wasn't more buzz made me feel like there had to be something else going on here, some fatal flaws preventing it from being a critical hit. Having seen it, it was a fun, fast moving flick with an army of great actors and some truly brilliant action sequences, but no question there was a much better movie that could have been made. Speaking first to that cast, there isn't a weak link the bunch, as you've got Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Mark Ruffalo, Isla Fisher, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman all bringing the goods plus lesser-knowns like Melanie Laurent and Dave Franco delivering on the promise they've shown elsewhere. I had my doubts initially whether Eisenberg could pull off arrogant ladies man, but he found a way to not so much disguise or lose the socially awkward charm he generally displays as much as redirect it. Ruffalo gets saddled with arguably the weakest character, the bumbling FBI goober who seems to exist only to make the magicians look more clever, but he manages to make the routine entertaining, if a bit tired. Of course there's a joy to watching Caine and Freeman face off, and I do appreciate that director Louis Leterrier or somebody recognized the simple but brilliant idea of "Oh, Morgan Freeman is in our movie, we should have him do a voice over at some point."

The primary problem for me with Now You See Me is that after the first 15 minutes of introducing Eisenberg, Harrelson, Fisher and Franco's wonderfully compelling quartet of magical thieves, we get a year-time jump and they disappear like the proverbial bunny for three quarters of the screen time while the Ruffalo-led FBI team gets the lion's share of the attention. Ruffalo is game, as mentioned, and Laurent as his believer partner is winning, but their chemistry is only so so, and even at their best they can't distract me that I'd rather be seeing more of Eisenberg and Fisher's dynamic--they're former magician and assistant with underlying sexual tension--or Harrelson being quirky or Franco finding ways to use magic tricks as weapons in awesome fight scenes. On its own, this Mark Ruffalo FBI movie would be whatever, but it becomes almost irritating when you teased me with something much more tantalizing and then moved it just off to the side for nearly two hours.

I would imagine a lot of people also have trouble with the ending, which its hard to get too into without spoilers, but needless to say as you'd expect from a movie about sleight of hand, it's a big twist. I didn't see it coming, which is a good thing, but one the other hand, that's because it requires the audience to discard a lot of what they just watched quickly and without much explanation. If they went through Ocean's 11 styles and explained all the motivation and machinery, I think it could have won a lot of goodwill, but it feels like they start that and then cut it off with some hasty lines, maybe saving it for a potential sequel. There are a lot logic gaps I can surmise solutions to, but they should be right out the screen.

I can't really complain, because I don't think I was bored during too many of Now You Can See Me's 115 minutes and found the majority of them to be entertaining, but I do mourn a bit for the superior film that died somewhere along the way; that one could have been a real classic.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Epic

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

From far away, Epic is pretty, but once you get up close, you notice the cracks; this can double both as an assessment of the animation and of the movie overall. The widescreen aspects of work done by Blue Sky Studios' animators is gorgeous, as they create a well thought-out, meticulously constructed, inventive world that shimmers and shines from the outside. The action scenes, particularly the chase sequences, are packed with frenetic energy and the animation really nails the details. It's when the characters are standing still or conversing, when the action slows, that you notice the little things like facial expressions and figure movement don't hold up as well. Similarly, the grand premise of a hidden nature world where there's an ongoing war between the denizens of life and the avatars of "the rot"--seriously, it's Rotworld!--is cool, but it feels at times like the folks writing the script figured that skeleton was enough to hang the plot on and didn't really need to flesh their mythology out. The second half of the film is a lot stronger than the first, which really drags, but by then it's coasting on the forward momentum provided by action in lieu of a strong story or character development. The voice acting is of varying levels, as Amanda Seyfried and Josh Hutcherson are fine if a little flat in the leads, Colin Farrell puts an effort in as the aging hero of the piece, Christoph Waltz gets about half way there as the villain, and the trio of Aziz Ansari, Chris O'Dowd and Steven Tyler get to stand out because they're the comic relief and this is a PG-animated movie (the less said about Beyonce's performance as the queen of the forest, the better). I wouldn't trash Epic, as it's a perfectly fun piece with some really strong craftsmanship times, but in an era when animated films have hit a much higher level, it feels incomplete.

Paragraph Movie Review: Star Trek Into Darkness

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

I found this to be a decent movie; not great, not awful, just decent. I didn't regret seeing it, probably won't see it again. It had its good parts and its bad parts, as I'll discuss. I feel like that's about as neutral a first impression as I can give, but that's how I felt. I was a bit let down if only because I don't think it came close to measuring up against the 2009 Star Trek reboot; of course with rare exceptions sequels demonstrate diminishing returns, but I had hoped the four-year gap between films meant they really found a way to nail it. The greatest attribute of this franchise to my mind remains the brilliant casting, as there are no duds to be found in the ensemble, with Chris Pine and Zach Quinto as the standouts, plus Zoe Saldana getting a nice chance to step up more here than in the previous installment. Benedict Cumberbatch brought a great sense of command and menace to the antagonist of the piece, channeling Alan Rickman but with more physicality. Alice Eve slotted in nicely as well, holding her own against the aforementioned talents plus Karl Urban, etc. I found Peter Weller a bit over the top in his role, but that feels more down to the plotting than his work (and tough to discuss without hitting spoiler territory). I also think the script was tremendously strong when it came to dialogue; my favorite parts of the movie were the funny moments or emotional exchanges, and that has as much to do with the writing as the acting. It's also a visually stunning piece of work, no question, and the action sequences are top notch, so kudos to J.J. Abrams on that. There were two major negatives dragging in particular the second half down in my opinion, first and foremost being the handling of the story's villain. I feel like Abrams and company got a little too bogged down in trying to create mysteries and twists regarding the bad guy, and in the process muddied the motivations; by three quarters in, I was a bit lost on why certain characters were doing what and whether or not I should be rooting for or against them. My other issue would be what felt like diminishing stakes as the plot rolled out. In the beginning of the movie, I felt like major players were in very real danger, which was exciting, but there were so many close calls early on that by the mid-point I didn't get the sense of any true peril; I know it's tough to really ask for that in an action movie, but for whatever reason, it felt more glaring than usual here, whether it was what felt like a too deliberate "and this is how we'll save whoever needs to be saved later" smoking gun or the "it doesn't matter if people are dying as long as they're not the ones whose names we now" syndrome I've been noticing more and more in this type of film lately. I'd recommend you try this one for yourself, as I think it's very much a case of mileage varying by taste.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Pain & Gain

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

Coming out Pain & Gain, myself and the other guys I saw it with more or less agreed on two things: we liked it and we'd have a lot of trouble describing it to anybody who hadn't seen it. The short version would be to say it's a movie about fitness trainer Daniel Lugo getting a crew together to hold hostage and extort a rich client and what happens when the plan goes right and then wrong, but to do so would be a disservice to everything going on in this film. At various times it's a screwball comedy, a heist movie, a very dark comedy, and a thriller, with all four of those and several more genres frequently crashing or bleeding into one another pretty seamlessly. I'd say it has a very similar chaotic energy to To Die For (the Nicole Kidman one) or even Fight Club. Mark Wahlberg plays Lugo in a way that immediately called up for me Christian Bale's turn as Patrick Bateman in American Psycho; they're very different characters, but both characters call upon an ultra intensity and rapid fire delivery to bring earnestness to the ridiculous. Wahlberg is par for the course brilliant from his crazy voice overs to some really funny physical comedy. Great as Wahlberg is, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson matches and perhaps surpasses him as Paul Doyle, a born again ex-con and former cocaine addict who gets drawn into Lugo's plan. Johnson basically plays an array of characters over the course of the story: the repentant man of peace, the strung out crackhead, the intense criminal and various combinations therein and he's fantastic as all of them with his commanding presence, unmatched charisma, and brilliant comic timing. This should be the movie that propels Johnson past being a kids movie headliner or part of an action ensemble into a full-on leading man. Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely wrote the screenplay, based on a book by Pete Collins--oh, and this is all based on a true story, by the way--and their script is top notch; this movie is eminently quotable both from a "that was really funny" stance and a "that was really deep" one. Michael Bay directs, and even though there is at least one major explosion--and a lot of uncomfortably violent moments that pop up when you least expect them but do feel earned--he does a great job, using slo-mo cuts for great comedy, employing voice overs to really convey the story, and being smart with his effects. Beyond Wahlberg and Johnson, Tony Shalhoub is perfect as the sleazy jerk they kidnap and Anthony Mackie holds his own as best he can as the third member of the team (it's hard not to get a little lost in the shuffle considering his co-stars). The movie is somewhat bloated at 129 minutes; it could lose 40 of those and not suffer. There's also a distinct cut-off point where it feels like one act ends and another incongruous one churns up when Ed Harris' detective character--fine performance, but the character himself feels imported from another movie--enters and the pace slows down. There are certainly things Pain & Gain could have done better, but it already did enough right that I'm still thinking about it a day later and writing more than I usually would and still feeling like I barely scratched the surface.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Young Adult

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

From the director and writer of Juno with none of the charm of Juno. Admittedly, this is a very different movie from Juno, but given how it was sold on its creative pedigree, you go in expecting some of that film's quirky appeal and rat-a-tat dialogue and come up fairly empty. Rather than a high school student trying to navigate teen pregnancy, here we've got a 37-year-old Young Adult Fiction writer with clear maturity and stability issues coming back to her hometown hoping to reunite with her ex, a happily married new father. It's ostensibly a comedy, but it's not that funny, and as a drama it falls apart because none of the characters seem to have any real arc (they come close but always stop short). I guess the "appeal" is supposed to be how outrageously horrible Charlize Theron's lead is (that's how I recall the trailers and commercials being skewed), but the shock value approach dies out quickly. To Theron's credit, she's actually pretty good, fully committing to the bit, and tries to drag this thing to at least limited success on sheer force of will, but she's working without any support. The dynamic between her and Patton Oswalt as a nerd she ignored in high school is probably the most interesting subplot going, but he doesn't seem to buy in and thus doesn't come off believable. The dialogue isn't terrible, but it's flat, and the plot spins its wheels. Patrick Wilson and the rest of the cast are ciphers. Reitman seems game on one hand as the piece is beautifully shot with well-chosen cuts and close-ups, but I wish he'd spent as much time coaxing his cast. It's too short a movie to be torturous or anything, but I was definitely hoping for more.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Searching for Sugar Man

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

This documentary about Rodriguez, a relatively unknown would-be 70's rock star from Detroit, kicks off with a South African man talking about how this cipher is one of the best-selling and most influential musicians of all time in his homeland, but remains shrouded in mystery aside from rumors about how his career ended: with the artist lighting himself on fire and perishing during a live performance. With a hook like that, it's impossible not to immediately want to know more, and writer/director/producer Malik Bendjelloul does a great job peppering his work with cliffhangers and payoffs to keep the viewer riveted. The story of Rodriguez is a unique and incredible one, and, trying not to give too much away (though that's going to be tough) ends up being far more uplifting than the open would suggest. I will say that Watching for Sugar Man simply as a standalone piece I enjoyed it without much question, but after it won the Academy Award and was proclaimed the best documentary of the year, I did question a bit more about how good a job Bendjelloul and his collaborators really did and how much was just them getting compelling subject matter that did a lot of the work itself. The interviews Bendjelloul conducts are well-done and don't pull punches, but also seem to suggest that a lot of the leg work for the piece was done a decade earlier by South African fans and journalists, it's just being brought to light now; I certainly don't fault a filmmaker for happening upon great discoveries like that, but again, the success of the finished product opens it up to greater scrutiny. The graphics used for transitions and scene setting are a mixed bag, as some really caught my eye and stood out more than usual on a documentary, but on the flip side, others were distracting. If I find particular fault with anybody, I guess it would be cinematographer Camilla Skagerstrom, whose love for lengthy tracking shots of Detroit streets I don't share. I do think the whole thing was well-paced and, as I noted above, knows when to place the next hook, even if the focus can scatter. Also, it goes without saying that the soundtrack, taken completely from Rodriguez's catalog, is outstanding; the guy really was great. Even after applying the "did it deserve to be the best?" filter, I find I still really enjoyed Searching for Sugar Man; it's one thing to happen upon a great documentary subject, it's another to keep it compelling for even 86 minutes.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: 10 Years

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

10 Years is a movie produced by and starring Channing Tatum and written and directed by Jamie Linden (he wrote We Are Marshall and Dear John, neither of which I've seen); it chronicles the 10 year reunion of a high school class, ostensibly centered around Tatum's Jake seeing his old girlfriend Mary (Rosario Dawson) for the first time in nearly a decade, but actually really well-balanced with storylines for just about every member of the impressive ensemble cast given if not equal then respectable and appropriate weight. From what I understand, Tatum doubled as pseudo-casting director, getting his actual wife Jenna Dewan to play Jake's new girlfriend, Jess, and a bunch of his real life buddies to play his group of friends in the movie; all of it makes for great chemistry and a sense that this was genuinely fun and maybe a bit emotional to make, which translates into the story and end product feeling very natural. Honestly, everybody in the movie is good--just seeing the cast list at the end of the trailer is what got me interested in watching--and I could run down each one by one if it didn't violate the core mission statement of my "paragraph movie reviews" (which I already do by making each of them like nine sentences long and ignoring obvious breaks...but I digress). Chris Pratt is a standout as Cully, the "reformed" bully who spends the movie trying to convince his high school victims that he's grown up, but instead gets so drunk he makes everybody around him uncomfortable and thoroughly embarrasses his wife, a put-upon Ari Graynor; what makes Pratt's performance special is he's doing the same goofball, slapstick comedy he does on Parks and Rec and everywhere else, but while it starts off funny, by the end it's just tragic how obviously trapped this guy is and what a mess he's made of what seems on the surface to be a decent life. Oscar Isaac as Reeves, the classmate who became a famous musician, has the genuinely touching love story of the movie with Elise--the always underrated Kate Mara--the outsider girl he's been carrying a torch for since high school and ignores all the people who want his autograph to adorably flirt with all film. There's something for everybody whether you're looking for pathos, romance, comedy or whatever here, and it's all done within the framework of a story that feels real. The little things that bothered me early on to the last got resolved or had a turn that turned me around by the end. Justin Long and Max Minghella's buddy comedy ends up having a heartfelt twist; the weirdness between Jake and Mary that felt a bit overwrought gets totally redeemed by their final scene together; Scott Porter feels marginalized for the first two thirds of the movie as the friend who moved to Japan and seems to just be there to fill another seat in the car (and his character's name is Scott P), then has an awesomely Scott Porter scene and fantastic Scott Porter speech that you realize could only have been given by a character who had been somewhat on the fringe, and it all feels justified. This movie really won me over (as you can probably tell) on just about every level; you may enjoy it a bit more if you're approaching or past your own 10 year reunion (I'm a little over two years past), but I think anybody looking for a well done, entertaining little piece of entertainment with a brilliant, well-utilized cast will dig it.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: The Queen of Versailles

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

Near as I can tell, documentary maker Lauren Greenfield set out a few years ago to do a film about billionaires David and Jackie Siegel's attempt to build the largest house in America, but once the economic collapse hit, instead got the opportunity to tell a more complex and interesting story about the rich attempting to adjust and survive trying circumstances. If indeed this was not the movie Greenfield originally intended to make--and unless she's a financial wizard above and beyond anybody were on Wall Street in 2008 I don't see how it could have been--she did an incredible job course correcting, as this is a compelling, smoothly moving and well done documentary I don't think I could find much fault with if I tried (which I am doing). David and Jackie are fascinating subjects; initially you're tempted to roll your eyes at their excesses and revel a bit in their misfortune, and that seems to be the direction the piece is headed in, but as Greenfield introduces them through revealing and humanizing interviews, you find that they're actually pretty decent people and feel for their predicament. Yes, Jackie spends a ludicrous amount of money on seemingly trivial things, but it's wealth earned, both through David's hard work and her own determination (she's an engineer-turned-beauty queen who escaped an abusive first marriage). David comes off pompous and grumpy on one hand, but on the other genuinely seems to genuinely for the people he employs to the point where he becomes obsessive about saving his company even at the cost of his marriage. While the main narrative has enough twists to hold your attention, Greenfield effectively sets it against a wider backdrop by profiling tangential but important figures like David's son from a previous marriage who runs his company, the Greenfield nanny who is supporting grown children she hasn't seen in over two decades and more (at first I wasn't interested in Jackie returning to visit her old neighborhood in New York, but it has a payoff). Greenfield takes full advantage of the story dropped in her lap, capturing a microcosm of a much bigger American story and making a near flawless documentary in the process.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Ted

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

I admit that I laughed out loud a few times watching this movie, but not as many times as I feel like I should have. It's a pretty inventive premise--boy wishes for his stuffed animal to come to life, it does, but then both age together and by their mid-30's while they're still best friends the bear is a foul mouthed slacker somewhat hampering his buddy's progression into adulthood--written and directed by a very smart, talented dude in Seth MacFarlane, but the problem is it ultimately seems like he's writing as if it's a TV show and can't break free of that format's restrictions. With a half hour episode of Family Guy (or American Dad or The Cleveland Show), MacFarlane only needs to string together a bare bones plot, because as long as he nails three or four funny lines or visual gags, he can consider it a success given the genre; there's pretty much the same ratio here, where Ted says or does something hysterical every five to ten minutes and the dialogue is full of hilariously quotable lines, but at over an hour and a half, you find yourself wanting something more than an extended sitcom. To try and stretch his plot, MacFarlane digs into kids movie and romantic comedy tropes that you'd hope he'd subvert, but more often than not he sticks to what's expected. The actual living actors aren't given a lot of room to shine either, as the MacFarlane-voiced Ted is clearly the star--a funny one at that, but again, not capable of carrying a whole movie. I credit Mark Wahlberg with how willing he is to throw himself into comedy, but his man child John isn't much more than Ted's straight man. Mila Kunis is a cookie cutter love interest. Joel McHale seems like he's enjoying himself as her sleazy boss, but he's really just playing the same character he always does. Giovanni Ribisi is the only one who really gets to shine as a disturbingly creepy dad obsessed with Ted and wanting to acquire him for his son; he's enough of a weird caricature that he can stand out even in contrast to Ted. Matt Walsh, Patrick Warburton, Laura Vandervoort and others all seem to have supporting characters that could be interesting if they weren't jammed into background scenes and that's all. Again, Ted has flashes of brilliance and if you watch it I wager you'll have a good time and be quoting the best lines, but the more I think on it, the more I see its failings as a transition to film for a very talented TV guy.

Paragraph Movie Review: Safety Not Guaranteed

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

This is a movie where April from Parks & Recreation and Nick from New Girl work at a magazine in Washington state together--he's a writer, she's an intern--and go on a road trip with a third guy to do a story on Mark Duplass from The League, who put out a personal ad for a partner to accompany him on a time travel mission and may or may not be crazy. I used Aubrey Plaza and Jake Johnson's well-known character names above because they really aren't straying very far from them, but that's actually quite a good thing as they're both great at playing those characters and also shift them just enough degrees to the side that they've got something new to offer and can thrive in a feature length film as opposed to a half hour episode. Duplass on the other hand plays Kenneth, an intense and eccentric possible genius/possible madman who is nothing like Pete on The League and in the process shows the dramatic and emotional chops I pretty much knew he had because the guy's got mad indy cred, but had never seen on display before and was really impressed by. The story is divided up perfectly, with a heavy bulk focusing on Plaza's damaged Darius getting to know Kenneth under the pretense of working undercover on the story but in the process getting wrapped up in the purity of his out there beliefs, but another good chunk about Johnson's Jeff coming to terms with the fact that he's getting older with a sweet, kinda sad attempt to rekindle a teenage romance with his old girlfriend Liz--endearing Jenica Bergere--and then trying to get his other shy male intern laid. Even though Plaza's calculated jumps from cynicism to hopefulness and back coupled with Duplass' laser sharp performance carry the plot, I got the most joy out of the little touches Johnson put in, from the gleam of joy in his eye when he gets to go on a 15 mile per hour car chase to a depressed quick shot of him chugging a flash in a bumper car; they're all brilliant. The way writer Derek Connolly splits the script down the middle and jumps between two distinct storylines that interweave only through a couple shared characters reminded me of TV plotting, but did not feel out of place and made for a great, tight, under an hour and a half package. There are fun cameos from Mary Lynn Rajskub, Jeff Garlin and Kristen Bell, plus at least two great twists toward the end in a movie you think you've got figured out pretty early. I loved the heart, I loved the comedy, I loved how much fun everybody seemed to be having, and I loved that I was thinking a lot right up to the final shot; really well done all around.

Paragraph Movie Review: Silver Linings Playbook

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

While I've never come close to the experiences of somebody who suffers from bipolar disorder like Pat, the lead character of Silver Linings Playbook portrayed by Bradley Cooper, my track record with anxiety and panic meant this would be a movie that had the potential to hit me hard emotionally and also one I'd be discerning on when it came to its accuracy. It definitely got to me at some points, particularly the scenes where Pat has blow-ups with his parents or raves about how much he "hates the ugly sick part" of him, but if anything that enhanced my appreciation of the film rather than stunting my enjoyment. As far as the realism, that may have been more of a sticking point, but I'll come back to it. The story follows Pat after his release from a mental facility into his parents' custody as he tries to put his life back together with the long term and unlikely goal of reconciliation with the wife who cheated and then put out a restraining order on him after he nearly beat her lover to death during a bipolar episode. As Pat is readjusting, Tiffany, the recently widowed sister-in-law of his buddy who has her own mental hangups with her sexuality and social graces--her mental state is never officially classified other than that she's off--played by Jennifer Lawrence, enters his life and they form a bizarre, ultimately endearing bond. Cooper is pretty tremendous in allowing the movie to be emotionally raw while still entertaining through his character as he plays the quirkiness of Pat with slightly uncomfortable humor but never takes it so far that you don't feel for him during the serious and sad moments. Really the big accomplishment of Silver Linings Playbook for me, much of which I'd attribute to David O. Russell since he both wrote and directed it, is that it veers between addressing some really tough subject matter that I personally take very seriously head on and then having a laugh with it pretty seamlessly. Lawrence gives the type of explosive performance she's becoming known for and that make you wonder how the hell she's only 22 as she dominates scenes with Hollywood heavyweights seemingly without effort and has an uncanny weariness and knowledge in her eyes and the way she carries herself. The film has my favorite turn by Robert De Niro in years as Pat's OCD-suffering father who has tied up all his fortunes--financially and otherwise--in the success or failure of the Philadelphia Eagles and who struggles with guilt over never realizing there was something wrong with his son until it was too late (there's one scene between just the two of them that is heart wrenching). Jacki Weaver holds the family scenes together as Pat's mom while Chris Tucker steps into surprisingly mature shoes far removed from his classic characters as his buddy Danny from the hospital. Russell also does a great job on the directing end, staging every scene perfectly, making the right choices on shots (like focusing on Pat's nervous hands during a therapy session rather than he or his doctor talking). If the film slips--and I think it does--it's that after building up goodwill over the first two acts in creating the serious/funny balance I described earlier, the final half hour plus veers a bit too far into the surrealism of a romantic comedy; it stumbles in trying to tie up the story and the characters begin acting differently without explanation, the narrative suffering. Still, I would see this movie again and think it deserves consideration come awards season; you will likely either love it or hate it, but I dug it. Terrible title though.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Newlyweds

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

Newlyweds is a drama/faux documentary/possible comedy written and directed by as well as starring Ed Burns. The thrust is following a week or so in the life of Buzzy (Burns) and Katy, a recently married couple who boast about having a simple and drama-free relationship and watching it fall apart. The plot is framed by Buzzy's wild child younger half sister coming to town trying to recapture the guy whose proposal she turned down while disrupting their home life as well as Katy's older sister and brother-in-law--the former hates Buzzy, the latter set him and Katy up--coming to the end of their 18-year marriage. I didn't like a lot about this movie. First of all and prevalent throughout is the "unexplained documentary" aspect, a trope that sometimes works fine on sitcoms where absurdity is part of the package and you don't need full explanation, but trying to figure out why cameras are following this couple around, why they are sometimes acknowledged and sometimes not, and how they're clearly still present during private moments is annoying, particularly when you get the sense the answer is simply that it makes exposition easier. The relationship between Buzzy and Katy is banter-heavy to start, which made me think romantic comedy, but this movie is clearly not that, though it tries to mix in screwball stuff occasionally with awkward timing. Burns is a winning actor and I liked him here despite being bored by the film itself, his charm lending at least some ease to the spinning wheel; as a director, he's smart and daring, shooting the entire thing on a Canon 5D; as a writer, he can do much better. Speaking of falling short, I've enjoyed Kerry Bishe when I've seen her elsewhere (the underrated final season of Scrubs), but as screw up younger sister Linda she misses the mark completely with a forced accent and extreme mood swings, taking cues the script gave her and shooting past her mark. Caitlin Fitzgerald is fine as Katy; she has good chemistry with Burns, but not a lot to do and is better during the breezy segments than the heavier stuff (though again, I tend to blame the script). Marsha Dietlin and Dara Coleman are the acting MVPs as Katy's droopy-eyed judgmental older sister and pretentiously idiotic ex husband respectively; both are genuinely funny. I've always had a fondness for the concept of Ed Burns, because I enjoy him as an actor and he seems to have good sensibilities, but this makes me want to go back and re-examine some of his older work to figure out if he had an off day or if I was wrong. I don't recommend Newlyweds.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Game Change

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

My first thought after watching this docu-drama (Would this be classified a documentary? It was listed as one on my cable box, but can documentaries be dramatized almost in full?) about the 2008 presidential election focusing on the McCain campaign and specifically Sarah Palin's role wasn't whether it was good or whether it was bad, but whether or not it was accurate; ultimately, I could have enjoyed and appreciated it regardless, but I would no doubt view it differently if it was a hatchet job. Megan was equally curious and looked into it enough to know that Sarah Palin and John McCain refuse to see it and have denounced the book on which it was based as inaccurate, but pretty much everybody else depicted seems to say it was pretty spot on, so I'll choose to assume it was. With that out of the way, it's a riveting piece of work, with the screen play by Danny Strong (Jonathan from Buffy! He won an Emmy!) condensing several months into a two hour piece that doesn't feel like it glosses over any major events but moves briskly and keeps you engaged. It's really impressive work from Strong who obviously gets politics and the news cycle (there is fascinating insight into how modern media affects a campaign that I felt like I should have known but didn't) and avoids many of the traps documentary makers fall into falling too in love with particular moments and shafting others in the process. I was similarly impressed with director Jay Roach's approach to handling the real life interviews, debates and so on by combining archival footage of Barack Obama, Katie Couric and others with his actors, not detracting from the figures who were the focus of the film by stunt casting major cameos. As for those actors, it's a stacked deck from top to bottom with not a weak link in the principal cast. Julianne Moore has the heady challenge of playing a memorable public figure who had not only herself had extensive media exposure, but had already been memorably mimicked by the likes of Tina Fey; Moore rises to her performance, not making Palin one note or relying on her familiar mannerisms and catchphrases, but using those as the building blocks of a far more complex woman. Moore's Palin isn't just an idiot who makes us laugh, she's sympathetic as a public servant who wants to do good thrown in over her head, but then progressively alarming as a person who becomes drunk on her own overnight success and realization of how far she can go on charisma alone. Indeed the movie is in large part about how close rhetoric and being able to say the right thing the right way at the right moment--in short, putting on a good performance--can get a person to the top, and Moore's eerie performance as a woman who swings from complete control to almost childlike tantrums and back as she needs to underlines the point in a frankly terrifying way. Ed Harris is featured less, but equally compelling, showing John McCain as a good and moral man who is qualified to lead the country, but comes to realize that won't be enough to get him elected President; Harris portrays McCain with the genuine decency he possesses and his performance breaks your heart a little as you see the compromises he feels forced to make. Playing Republican strategist Steve Schmidt, Woody Harrelson has a somewhat different role, as he's not portraying a political layman would know, but he delivers a knockout emotional performance as well as serving up exposition that doesn't feel tacked on as far as explaining why Palin was chosen and what goes into other moves made by the McCain campaign as the movie progresses. The game supporting cast is led by Peter MacNicol as campaign manager Rick Davis--desperation in his eyes at every turn, great sigh of relief/stand up and cheer reactions every time something goes well--and Sarah Paulson as Nicolle Wallace, a Palin aide, doing fine work as an increasingly skeptical Palin booster who realizes what's going on before everybody else and gets two of the film's most memorable moments in my view. Coming full circle, whether Game Change is 100% or even 85% accurate is, I suppose, inconsequential, as it's a smart, well-written, well-directed and well-acted film with something to say about how the political process on all sides has been swallowed up by wanting to win trumping wanting to better the country in too many instances, and how seeming right can get you further than doing right.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Magic Mike

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

This was a movie with an intriguing premise, a fun movie, even an entertaining movie in large part, but it just couldn't pull it together enough to make its positives overcome the problems for me and be something I'd want to watch again or recommend. Channing Tatum delivers an amazing performance, there's no question about that; he's got a charisma that's both laid back and fun, he feels more natural here than in anything else I've seen him in and he carries his end of the workload, delivering with every line and every performance. Tatum is so strong here that it makes you root for the movie to be better because he deserves it. Steven Soderbergh seemed to give strong direction for the most part, as it's interestingly shot and the big performance numbers are well done. The problem is that the plot meanders; a lot of time is spent up front establishing the characters and their situation, but then it feels like the story doesn't know where to go, so it just treads water with dance numbers sprinkled in until it reaches its end abruptly and without delivering satisfaction. I enjoy Tatum's Mike and I'm interested in Matthew McConnaughey's Dallas--that's the other spot-on casting as he lives it up playing the sleazy showman papa bear of the group--but their arcs don't go anywhere surprising or riveting. The main romantic plot between Mike and Cody Horn's character typifies the problems with the movie, as they flirt with no seeming stakes for an hour and a half and then we're supposed to believe they have a connection and care about where they end up. Beyond the story stuff, I found Alex Pettyfer too angsty in his role as Mike's protege gone amok, and then you've got great actors like Matt Bomer and Joe Manganiello being criminally underutilized with maybe four lines between them; Olivia Munn and Kevin Nash get a little more to do, but not much. There are great parts to Magic Mike, mostly in the beginning, but it feels like the people putting it together got really excited about how well their first act was going and then just called it quits; disappointing.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Ruby Sparks

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

This movie is a bit all over the place, and when it's good it's very good, but when it goes off track, it's not so much bad as incongruous and weird. The central conceit of a writer falling in love with and unwittingly giving life to his own creation is a neat one as is the idea of exploring how he tackles the challenges and temptations of building and maintaining a relationship under those unique circumstances. Problems arise when the story feels like it gets bored of its initial premise and starts wandering into romantic comedy and even psychological thriller territory without sensible transitions; what I mean to say is while I enjoy the excursion to Calvin (the writer) and Ruby (the creation) visiting his kooky mom and her hippie new lover (Annette Bening and Antonio Banderas, who both absolutely kill it), it feels like a different--and potentially good--movie wedged into the existing one awkwardly and then not fully explored. Zoe Kazan--who is a revelation starring as Ruby, incredibly magnetic and able to nail a wide range of emotions--wrote a good script as far as the dialogue and the basic gist, but I think she overreached at times with her plot and wanted to add on too many additional story points. I also feel like Paul Dano, who plays Calvin, while a fine actor, comes off way more genuine during the parts where he's manic, which is fine, but also makes it tough to buy his performance during the all-important tender moments. Chris Messina holds the whole thing together as Calvin's older brother, managing to be both a condescending jerk and also a believably caring and intelligent brother--no easy feat--while Elliot Gould makes the most of a small role as Calvin's therapist; Steve Coogan doesn't do much for me as the sleazy would-be mentor type you'd expect Steve Koogan to play. I didn't really notice the directing, which is to say Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris did a good if not memorable job, but it's really Kazan's movie, so perhaps it was best for them to stay out of the way. I enjoyed this well enough, but I think I'd more heartily recommend it were it a half hour shorter and a measure more focused. I do expect great things to come from Zoe Kazan.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: The Five-Year Engagement

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

The first half hour of this movie is quite funny and charming, as are the final 15 minutes and various points in between, but unfortunately, there are a solid 75 additional minutes to account for, and they're not so good. All the funniest parts were in the trailer (aside from some great seemingly spontaneous bits from Brian Posehn, Dakota Johnson and Chris Pratt), which gave the impression there would be plenty of laughs here, but three quarters of the film are the monotonous unraveling of the relationship between the two main characters, and not only is there little fun to be had, no truly profound statements on them or the nature of love, marriage, etc. really pop in to fill the void, at least not to the degree I think Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller were hoping they would when putting this story together. The premise is that Segel and Emily Blunt play a happy couple who get engaged in the opening moments then struggle through moving across country for the sake of her career, him being initially supportive then miserable, the problems they experience, and whether or not they can overcome them; I know it seems like I'm spoiling a lot here, but every turn is so predictable that I don't feel I am. You've got some talented actors involved and the script is serviceable, but this is a story so mundane that it's not something I really want to explore through a movie, particularly one that still zigs toward the occasional comedic bit as almost a safety net, in the process killing any dramatic flow it hoped to have. I don't want to see Segel playing a sad sack; it's not that he's not capable of it, but I'm just not interested in that. Blunt is more winning, but she can't carry the movie. Pratt and Alison Brie are the movie's best weapons as his best friend and her little sister who also get together, but they're kept away for most of it. Rhys Ifans is so spot on as a lecherous professor that it makes me uncomfortable. Mindy Kaling, Kevin Hart, Chris Parnell and Posehn are all underutilized. The central conceit, that there's this wedding they keep putting off and it has more to do with Blunt's commitment issues than anything else (she's a psych professor and there's a whole subplot as well about how her experiments shape her view of people that fell flat for me), seems just jammed in when they remember it. This movie had loads of potential and a really great cast, but ultimately, it just wasn't something I wanted to see.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: The Expendables 2

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

This movie gave me exactly what I wanted from it and I left the theater a happy man having gotten my money's worth and then some. I enjoyed this sequel more than the original, but I do have to chock a lot of that up to the environment in and circumstances under which I experienced it; I saw the first Expendables on DVD at my apartment more or less by myself (Megan was in the room, but not paying attention), whereas I went to the theater with friends (and a more attentive Megan) to see this one alongside a raucous crowd. Expendables 2 is absolutely the kind of movie you have to see on the big screen and with people cheering, laughing and cringing around you to truly appreciate. As to why I dug it, if these actors took the script or the movie too seriously, it would be a train wreck, but they're completely self aware as they rifle off the corniest cliches ever and barrel through absurd action scenes, having a ball and also working their asses off physically. The humor shines through whether it's because the guy delivering the line has serious comedic chops (Jason Statham, Terry Crews) or is willing to have fun with their own image (Dolph Lundgren, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sly Stallone himself). The action scenes and production elements are poetry, choreographed and executed better than just about any modern shoot 'em up or fight flick I can think of because everybody behind and front of the camera knows exactly what they're doing. Jean-Claude Van Damme plays the douchiest villain of all-time and makes you wonder how he didn't get cast as the bad guy his whole career. Liam Hemsworth, who everybody (myself included) figured wouldn't fit in at all has a very specific role to play and does it to perfection. I'm seriously just in respectful awe at the ability of Stallone and his crew to design a script and film so perfectly constructed to excite and entertain in a perfect rhythm so that every time you catch your breath, Chuck Norris shows up or Arnold busts through a wall. My only complain: needed more Jet Li! Can't wait for the third installment.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Bachelorette

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

Ok movie, some really fun bits, some standout performances, but ultimately too uneven to be the classic it could have and should have been. The first half hour or so is fantastic with Kirsten Dunst, Isla Fisher and Lizzy Caplan doing the female version of The Hangover, having fun playing uniquely flawed characters (Rebel Wilson is a bit underutilized as the bride, but that's the nature of the plot). Fisher is hysterical as a comically exaggerated ditz, Kaplan holds the flow of the story together with her seamless handling of the dialogue and while Dunst was a bit bland for me to start, she comes on strong later as the alpha bitch with a heart. On the dude side of the equation, James Marsden similar to Dunst starts slow but amps it up as a choice sleazebag, Adam Scott scores on his Party Down-established chemistry with Kaplan, and Kurt Bornheimer is charming enough as the high school loser in love with Fisher. My problem arises when about halfway through the film, the fun screwball caper gets hijacked by three separate and inferior romantic comedies. Things are never as fun during the long sequence where the girls are separated and tons of plot holes and dangling threads arise seemingly because the movie is trying to pack in emotional layers it doesn't need. Ultimately, like I said, it's fun, there are a lot of laugh out loud moments and nobody phones in their performance, but I wish this movie had gone for it all out on the comedy and not worried about trying to tack on depth.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Jiro Dreams of Sushi

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

Regardless of how well-crafted they are, documentaries ultimately live and die by whether or not their primary subject is compelling. Jiro Ono, and 85 year old sushi chef who runs a small restaurant in a Tokyo subway station and through decades of dogged work ethic and single-minded focus has become perhaps the most respected and revered practitioner of his craft is eminently compelling. His sons--one of whom continues to serve as his father's second-in-command despite being in his 50's, the other whom has left to open his own restaurant--and their stories of living within the shadow of and under the strict rules of their rigid perfectionist father are compelling. The young men who struggle to come near Jiro's level and the day-to-day operations of the restaurant are compelling. The film itself is impeccably shot by director David Gelb; every frame is art with the tight focus on single pieces of sushi that present them as art, the slow motion sequences of the restaurant in action and even the moody shots of mundane scenes like Jiro riding the train are masterful. The interview subjects are well chosen from the expert food critic in awe of Jiro to the quirky fish market experts who seem like each have a movie's worth of material in their own stories. And yet, it's far from perfect. All the pieces are there and at most times the finished product is something to behold, but it all feels like it's meandering rather than making any real point. Gelb dances around the idea of Jiro's sons being shackled by their father's achievements even when they've assumed his day-to-day work without recognition being the through line, but backs away any time he comes close to making any real headway. There are interesting bits about how more commercial sushi ventures are destroying the aquatic resources, but again, Gelb doesn't dig deep enough. Even after spending nearly two hours with Jiro, I felt like I didn't truly get to know what makes him tick as much as that he's really good at what he does (they never show or even mention the boys' mother). A compelling film, to be sure, and one I recommend, but it had a chance to be even more and falls short.

Paragraph Movie Reviews: Project X

If you don't have plans to see this movie, you can check the spoilers here and then come back.

The problem with Project X--the main problem at least--is that it's too committed to its faux documentary gimmick to function as a traditional story, but there are enough storytelling elements jabbed in that you can't suspend your disbelief long enough to take it really seriously; it's not funny enough to be Superbad but it's also not real enough to be The Blair Witch Project (or insert another less dated reference). I didn't hate it and actually enjoyed large chunks, particularly the last half hour where it went from having any pretense of grounding to a game of "how far can we go" in terms of the party central to the "plot" raging beyond any imagining of control. I also thought despite my initial statement that a lot of the character dynamics--the main romantic subplot, the friendship bond--worked to a degree, but going back to that same initial point, they're echoes of relationships carefully crafted through writing and acting because they're trying too hard to seem "real" and coming off less so in the process. I thought Thomas Mann was winning as the sensitive guy protagonist, but Oliver Cooper was too "Jonah Hill lite" as his obnoxious buddy, trying to push the envelope to compensate for not having a character arc. I also loved the pre-pubescent security cards and little comedic flourishes like that, but ultimately, this is a movie you can enjoy one time for the spectacle, but won't hold up for repeat viewings or stick with you an hour later.