Early Review of The Town

I saw The Town at an early screening tonight. And I urge everyone to go see it when it comes out this Friday.

It must be said: Ben Affleck, all is forgiven. I don't care what you think of Ben Affleck as a major film star/actor, what you think of his image in the spotlight, or the whole "Bennifer" thing, he is one hell of a Director.

He made his Directorial debut with "Gone Baby Gone," a crime movie about an abducted child starring his younger brother, Casey Affleck. I mistakenly avoided it for several years as I had fallen into the public's general dismissal of Ben, only to sit through it on a lonely summer night and hate myself for judging a book by it's cover. Gone Baby Gone was one of the best crime films in recent memory, and placed Affleck back on my radar. So when I began to see previews of his next crime thriller, The Town, I had high hopes.

The Town follows Affleck as a Charlestown bank robber. His crew, including Jeremy Renner, pull a bank heist in which they take a hostage (Rebecca Hall). Affleck continues to tail her in order to pick up any loose string, but begins to fall in love with her. Meanwhile, a tenacious FBI Agent (Jon Hamm) pursues his gang, who prepare for their next heist.

I'd like to get the bad stuff out of the way, because I want to end this on a positive note. A big problem with the movie is it's paralels to Michael Mann's Heat. It has the same romantic set up, same cop and robber beats, only it's all condensed to under 2 hours. To be honest, the love story between Affleck and Hall is largely forgettable, as are most of the characters, whose names I cannot even remember. No one is winning any awards, nor is anyone going to be remembered as these characters. However, each actor does their job well, providing a comfortable atmosphere for the movie to move around in.

Now, it must be said, the heist scenes in The Town are some of the best since Heat itself. The opening scene alone makes the movie worth seeing, and it all builds to a huge shootout in a baseball stadium that flows into the streets. Each action scene has great flow, with numerous changes in tone as well as rythym. Everything is tightly edited and keeps you on the edge of your seat. Also, great sound design with the guns. Each one has its own sound and unique reverberation depending on the environment. We don't get that in enough movies. I'm sure Mann himself would be proud.

Also of note is the humor. Not too many crime films would be willing to fit in this much comedy within their stories. Affleck clearly wants laughter, and a lot of it is quite good. It's nice and calming to know that the film doesn't want to take itself too seriously, especially when some of the more melodramatic scenes work their way in. It's weird to say this without being sarcastic but, this serious crime thriller is funnier than most comedies that have come out this year. And I say that with utmost respect.

All in all, The Town is not as great an achievement as Gone Baby Gone, but is still a great crime thriller all it's own. The action scenes must be seen to be believed. Affleck certainly has a gift when it comes to crime thrillers, and I eagerly await for word of his next project.

Production Value: 7/10
Entertainment Value: 9/10

Overall Value: 8/10

Review of Machete

I didn't like Grindhouse. Yeah, it was a really cool project with two of the best "indie" directors in the business working together for two movies. But the problem was I just didn't really get it, or rather, I didn't get half of it. Rodriguez's side of Grindhouse worked really well for me. It was a mess of absurd fun and ridiculous violence (still not cool with the kid shooting himself, though). And I thought it pulled off the entire idea behind the project almost singlehandedly. Then Taranino's half began and it just never seemed to end. Seriously, it's just an hour and a half of Tarantino's WORST characters ever talking about absolutely nothing interesting and then being killed all in one big car crash (well, there are actually two sets of main characters, so halfway through you get to meet more uninteresting people). My point is, I felt that Rodriguez's half was the only part worth watching.

Now we have Machete, which is based off of one of the fake B-movie trailers in Grindhouse (which I found to be the most fun) and Rodriguez shows us once again that he's still top-dog when it comes to A-movie Direction with a B-movie concept. The film follows the title character, Machete (played by long time second-fiddle Danny Trejo) who was a legendary federale until his family were murdered by a Mexican druglord (strangely played by Steven Seagal). He seeks refuge across the border, looking for simple jobs to make ends meet. Then one day he is hired to assasinate a racist Texas Senator (Robert De Niro) who is pushing for stronger emmigration enforcement. However, Machete is double crossed in a high level political conspiracy to gain the voters approval of stricter emmigration laws. Unfortunately for said conspirators, "they just fucked with the wrong Mexican."

Yep, this is a supposedly mindless action movie based around a current hot-button issue. Let me reassure you, Machete has definitely got some things to say and some viewpoints to express (racism, scapegoating, vigilantism, immigration, etc.) but none of that takes hold of the movie. If you want to turn your brain off and just enjoy it, the film will certainly still work for you. Sure it's got messages and ideas, but we're never asked to take it too serieously. However, I'd say it's worth listening a bit to what it has to tell.

I have to say the acting is a mixed bag, unfortunately. I understand that part of the feel of these types of films is the off-color acting (looking at you Alba and Lohan) but I'd rather have good actors giving "bad" performances on purpose (Jeff Fahey) than bad actors giving bad performances (Seagal) because that's just what they do. There's a fine line between emulating a bad job and simply doing a bad job. It's really hit-or-miss with the supporting cast: Cheech Marin, Jeff Fahey, Don Johnson, and of course Robert De Niro are all spot-on; but Jessica Alba, Lindsay Lohan, and Steven Seagal are (predictably) not up to the task. And then there's Michelle Rodriguez, who seems to think that to be a strong female role model she has to act like a man (but have a vagina) and continues her recent career path of doing neither a good job or a bad job.  Fortunately, the crucial performance of the film is fantastic. Danny Trejo truly embodies the role of Machete. You sense the dangerous abilities of his character right off the bat and is genuinly intimidating (possibly even more so if you are aware of Trejo's early-in-life criminal background). This is the role Trejo has been waiting his entire career to play, and it's a shame that he's had to wait so long.

Rodriguez has once again flawlessly pulled off the look and feel of classic exploitation films. But a lot of the success comes from the absurdity. There's tongue-in-cheek humour abound throughout the film: from over the top performances (look out for Jeff Fahey) to cartoonish violence. The violence is incredibly over the top in basic Rodriguez fashion, but one scene in particular is going to stick with audiences as one of the best kills in movie history. Hint: you'll never guess what Machete uses to repel from one window to another.

However, one of my disappointments with the film is that it doesn't maintain it's level of absurdity. Like with the violence: that window jumping scene is pretty early in the film, and that's about as good as it gets. There are pleny of opportunities to do more obsurd things in just as graphic of detail, but it doesn't follow through. For the last half of the film we mostly just get a lot of gunshot deaths and typical stabbing deaths. And once we get to the final showdown between Trejo and Seagal we are given a half-assed duel between two lumbering thugs (partially due to the fact that Seagal has REALLY let himself go). You need escalation in a movie like this, and you need an epic death for the final badguy: maybe cut open Seagal's gut and let the stomach acids burn him alive; or kick him so hard in the belly he craps out his intestines; or slice out Seagal's guts and make him eat his own stomach. Are you getting the message: Steven Seagal is REALLY fat.
But no, in the end Seagal just gives up and performs seppuku... as in he haphazardly disembowels himself. That just sucks, a hero like Machete deserves his awesome one-liner before the epic finish.

Also, because the entire film was made around the trailer in Grindhouse (and re-uses some of the footage) there's more than a handful of small continuity errors and non-sequitor scenes. For example, Cheech Marin's shotgun-wielding Catholic Priest character observes a group of armed men entering his church. He begins the scene inside the church, but then it cuts to him outside pulling out his two shotguns, dispatching a single henchman (with one of my favorite action movie one-liners ever) and then non-chalantly goes back inside the church for the rest of the scene.

Still, an excellent job has been done with this film. Machete will make you laugh, cheer, and stare in awe. Get out there and watch it.

Production Value: 8/10
Entertainment Value: 8/10

Overall Value: 8/10

Doctor Who (Pros and) Cons

I first started watching the new series of Doctor Who at the beginning of the 4th season. I was hooked and immediately went back and watched the first three seasons so I could be caught up before the BIG season 4 finale. I didn't think it was the pinnacle of modern television, but it was certainly fun and had a lot of big ideas floating around.

That being said, I became even more excited about the 5th season when it was announced that Stephen Moffat, a writer who wrote literally all my favorite episodes in the first 4 seasons, would be replacing Russel T. Davies as head writer and Executive Producer. While I must give Russel T. Davies the credit for literally reviving the series, I can't bring myself to genuinely like the episodes he wrote, nor the aesthetic decisions he controlled as Ex. Producer. I am constantly finding things that don't quite make sense (beyond the science aspect) and thinking of things I wish he would have done instead.

It really hit me as I was rewatching the 2nd season finale earlier tonight (and It's why I'm writing this). I had numerous complaints about how it was wrapped up (even more so because I now know what has happened in the series since).

My first critical eyebrow twitch came at an exchange of dialogue between the two main enemies of the episode: the Cybermen and the Daleks. The exchange is as follows:

Cyberman: Our technology is compatiable; although your design is less elegant.  
Dalek: Daleks have no concept of elegance!  
Cyberman: This is obvious.

Is it just me, or does this sound like two drag queens trading insults of their outfits? It seems that way to me for two reasons: 1, I don't think such hostile species like Cybermen or Daleks would bother trading insults in the first place; 2, Russel T. Davies is known to be a very liberal homosexual who sometimes tries a little too hard to slip in his opinions into a children's television show.

Davies has continually tried to slip in his liberal (and in some ways, very weird) views into both Doctor Who and the spin-off called Torchwood (much more so in the latter). One thing that is very easy to notice is that nearly every romantic pairing is either mixed race or something other than a heterosexual relationship. Davies had commented on this saying that he wanted the show to be more progressive in it's portrayal of human relations. But personally, I think the way he does it actually makes these ideas cheaper and is actually more harmful than he thinks. I believe when you have to consciously decide "there must more racial diversity" you're really only adding to the problem. It's best to hire the people who are right for the job, race and ethnicity should be an afterthought (or not even a thought at all) as it only strengthens the idea that we are different and that those differences can be exploited.

Relationships like the one between Rose (white girl) and Mickey (black guy) is never given any reason for being. Once the Doctor comes along Rose completely forgets about him. Donna Noble is shown to be in two relationships in the course of the series, both to black men. Now I could understand that if it were a character trait ("she has a thing for dark meat") But in the back of my mind I'm always thinking "she doesn't really seem to like either of the men she dates: she's simply infatuated with the first and is actually quite demanding and critical of the second." What makes this idea even more damning is when it shows what happens to companion Martha Jones in the finale of the 4 season special episode "The End of Time." Earlier in season 4 (and even season 3 of Torchwood) Martha is said to be engaged to a man named Thomas Milligan (who is never shown onscreen) but she is shown in "The End of Time" to have randomly married Mickey. What are the odds that the only two significant black characters (who have never been shown to have met) would end up together? I don't know, but it seems truly pointless. It could have been said that they were merely business partners in alien hunting and Martha was married to Thomas. This nonsensical pairing actually seems to suggest that "black people should stick to marrying other black people... just because."

Davies also seems to be convinced that everybody can be turned into a homosexual. While this idea doesn't really come up in Doctor Who (other than a brief joke about Shakespeare's sexuality) it runs rampant in the spin-off Torchwood. Every main character in that series has some kind of homosexual experience at one point. While two are straight characters who wind up in these circumstances completely by accident and with little choice to the contrary, two other characters literally change their sexual orientation at some point. A character named Tosh becomes a lesbian after being seduced by a female alien (I don't care that it was an alien, they had sex involving two female bodies). Then another character (Ianto) transforms from a whiney emo who (literally) never stops thinking about his dead girlfriend into a gay man who takes every chance he has to get it on with the 5th main character Jack Harkness (who is an "omnisexual" man from the 51st century). This seems to suggest that being homosexual or heterosexual is a choice that we all make at some point. I have a problem with this because it lends credence to those jackass religious zealots who say they can "reprogram" your gay children to be straight.

But back to the episode I was originally speaking about: Doomsday. The ending involves the Doctor sending the Daleks and Cybermen into the Void between dimensions with Rose, Jackie (her mother), and Mickey ending up in an alternate universe in which Rose's dad (Pete) is still alive and seems to be the secret ruler/protector of the world. A major plotpoint of the two part episode is Rose narrating the beginning with the teaser: "This is the story of how I died." Even when I first saw these episodes I didn't believe she was going to die. "They'll find some way around it so they can keep the character in the back catalogue in case they ever need her again." And what do you know, I was right.

While I didn't really want Rose to die (although she is my least favorite companion) I thought it would have been an incredibly powerful moment for the series as well as for the Doctor himself if she had. If you've seen the episode, think back to when Rose almost fell into the Void with the Daleks and Cybermen. The Doctor continually refers to it as Hell. Now, think back even further to when The Doctor tries to explain how the other Universes exist. He says "Each decision we make creates a completely new reality," meaning every little choice we make can have huge consequences not just for us, but the entire world/Universe. Now, think back to when Jackie is reunited with her husband Pete from the other Universe (the one she knew had died before Rose was born). It's a sweet reunion until they all make the move to teleport to the other Universe for safety (knowing that they can never use the teleport technology as it is ripping holes in the two Universes) and Rose decides to stay behind in our Universe while Jackie is stopped by Pete from going after her. Jackie breaks down in tears at the idea of her family being forever destroyed simply because Rose decided to go back to the Doctor. Now bring all that information together with the idea that Rose actually falls into the Void, into Hell with the Daleks and Cybermen. Jackie is forever stranded in the alternate Universe with a man she may or may not really love. And the Doctor is forced to reflect upon his responsibilities for his companions. ALL because of simple choices that you wouldn't have thought could have had such an impact at the time. His carelessness and Rose's dependency on him got her sent to "Hell." Personally I think this could have given much more substance to how the Doctor treats his companions, whom he always seems to think will be perfectly fine no matter what manner of dangerous situation they're in.

Plus, with the 4th series we were always teased with the idea of Rose coming back. She showed up in the background of several episodes until the series finale... in which she does basically nothing. She just shows up on the scene with a big ass laser gun (seriously, what is it with sci-fi weapons being so big and cumbersome you'd need to be the Incredible Hulk to properly aim them?) and then basically stands around for the entire final episode.

Don't even get me started on the escalation of the first 4 season finales, but in brief:
1. Daleks want to conquer the Universe... okay, good start
2. Daleks/Cybermen want to conquer Earth... seems like a step backwards...
3. The Master wants to conquer Earth... not a step forward, but hey, a new enemy
4. Daleks want to destroy Existence itself... okay, that's pretty big, but what's the point?

All in all, I'm quite happy that the newest series is in the control of Steven Moffat for the forseeable future. You know you truly love something when you can enjoy it but poke fun at it as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do-wDPoC6GM

Review of Scott Pilgrim

Okay, straight to the point. If you are a twenty-something pop culture geek who has grown up on video games since the NES, then GO SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!!!!!!

It's hard for me to not be a little bit biased with this film. I knew I was going to love it the moment the Universal logo came up (I mean that literally, once you see it you'll know what I mean). I always try to be objective with reviews, but then again, you can never be completely objective with "art." Video games, music, and general pop culture bounce all over the place in this film. So much so that you may need to watch it several times to get everything. Good things it's one of the most purely enjoyable films of the year.

Scott Pilgrim is an average twenty-something loser Bass player in an average indie band called Sex Bob-omb (Mario references, yay!) who proceeds to make a mess of his personal life. He is currently dating a high-schooler but quickly falls for the girl of his dreams (literally) Ramona Flowers. They begin dating, but Ramona comes with a bit of a catch: she has 7 evil exes(!?) who plan to kill Scott. He must fight and defeat all seven of them if he hopes to continue his relationship with Ramona.

I've always hated quirky, indie romantic comedies mostly because they often carry a sense of superiority over the audience's head. Pretending they'll be the next big thing once the audience catches a glimpse of their genius, without really knowing their audience. Scott Pilgrim is infinitely smarter than that, keeping the target audience in on the jokes, but aware that they won't really care if some things aren't explained. Why is everyone basically a superpowered anime/video game character? Who cares, it's just more fun that way.

All of the actors have done bang-up jobs in the film. Everyone is funny, everyone understands their character, and no one is trying to upstage anyone else. Even Michael Cera, who I have despised for years and years, was absolutely hysterical in the film. The trailers might say otherwise, but he isn't doing a copy/paste job of ALL his other performances (well, not really, anyway). The scene-stealers, however, are Brandon Routh and Jason Schwartzman as two of the evil exes. We haven't seen too much of Brandon Routh since Superman Returns, but I get the feeling every now and again that he should do more comedy, seeing as he has probably the best comedic timing of anyone in the film (and that's saying a lot). Jason Schwartzman does a fantastic job as the final evil ex, pulling all strings and generally being a pretentious asshole, performing a great balancing act being genuinely intimidating while also being extremely light-hearted.

Now, with all that being said, the person who is truly pulling all the strings is Edgar Wright. Mr. Wright has the personal distinction to me of having Directed my favorite film of all time (Hot Fuzz!), so yeah, I'm a little biased to like him. But I think I can honestly say that Edgar Wright might be the greatest comedy director of all time. Now I know what you're thinking: "You just think that because you REALLY like his movies." Well yeah, but think about this: how many comedies have you seen where you can instantly remember who directed it? How many comedy directors really have their own visual style? How many comedy directors aren't willing to leave the power of the film solely in the hands of the performers? I'm not talking about Directors who have dabbled in both comedy and drama like the Coen Brothers or Dramadies like Wes Anderson, I mean Directors who have only ever worked in straight up comedy (as Edgar Wright has). Seriously, comedy directors have been taking a backseat to the star performers since before the Marx Brothers. Apatow does it, Reitman does it, and John Landis did it. Edgar Wright knew that he had an opportunity to go completely nuts with this film, and it shows. This film simply could not have been put in the hands of a different director. Edgar Wright has had his own distinct style ever since he was doing Spaced (a TV series of all things) and is now instantly recognizable.

Oh, and it's based on a comic book by Bryan Lee O'Malley. Yeah, I actually read the entire series before I saw this film, and while I loved the comics, I honestly feel the story works a whole lot better as a film (at least an Edgar Wright film). The comic seemed to drag on and on, and while you do get to know the characters a whole lot better in the comics, the truth is there isn't a whole lot to them. You know who they are the moment they say their first line. That's not to say that they are shallow characters, but a lot is shown simply through the performances. They're all still a lot of fun to watch.

Unfortunately, I don't think this film is for everyone. It has a very particular audience in mind, so much so that most people over the age of 40 (and possibly, under the age of maybe 15) may forever be a little alienated. A lot of the movie draws upon nostalgia to create a new, unique experience. But if you didn't live the right childhood, you might be out of the loop.

Still, it's a supremely well made film, and everyone in on it will be along for the ride.

Production Value: 9.5
Entertainment Value: 10

Overall: 9.75

Why am I here?

Honestly, I don't really expect anyone to read this stuff... but just in case, I plan to post certain personal writings such as: simple topics on which I want to organize my thoughts; original story ideas and outlines; and movie reviews. If anyone, for whatever reason, is reading my stuff and enjoys it, feel free to spread the word.