One of the most electric action-adventure films of the past decade, “Source Code” unites the rare combination of intelligence, originality and excitement to form one of the must-see movies of 2011. It is riveting from the opening few seconds until the haunting and perfectly pitched conclusion. It becomes an instant classic of its genre and will, without a shadow of doubt, end up in my 2011 Top Ten List.
Jake Gyllenhaal plays a soldier who wakes up on a train inside another man’s body. He sits opposite a beautiful woman, played by Michelle Monaghan, and surrounded by seemingly typical Chicago-bound morning commuters. 8 minutes later, the train explodes and he re-awakens inside a capsule of some sort. He suspects a military training simulation of some kind.
It turns out that he is part of a new program called “Source Code” — a method that allows the military to occupy the final few minutes of a deceased individual’s life. It is compared in the film to the afterglow of a dimmed bulb. Inside that afterglow, he is able to experience and investigate the timeline — which allows a full analysis of what, in this case, is a terrorist attack. He gets to re-live the 8 minutes as many times as necessary. His job is to find the bomb and identify the bomber before a larger scale attack occurs on downtown Chicago.
The flare and originality of the screenplay is the key to the film’s success. It never feels repetitive. It doesn’t ever feel implausible, despite the fantastical scientific element. “Source Code” delves into the complex nature of fate versus free will. It somehow finds time for a romantic thread and it rises above the level of mindless thriller with ease as it reaches for something loftier than mere entertainment. I cannot recommend a film of this kind any more. It ranks up there with the greats like, “Die Hard”, “Bourne Identity” & “Run Lola Run”.
The global financial crisis of past few years is far beyond most people’s comprehension. It is so endlessly complex and so vast in scope that wrapping your brain around it takes more time and research than the average Joe can muster. Unless you dedicate yourself to studying the subject, you are left with snippets on CNN, NBC, BBC, SKY and other “entertainment channels” to give you a very vague picture of what, why, when, where and how this all took place.
Along comes a documentary like “Inside Job” — a simply brilliant piece of cinematic journalism that manages to compress the information into a tight package that comes in at under two hours. The film doesn’t dumb down the situation for viewers — it merely clarifies the major players and the moves that those players made which led to the collapse of the economy. It holds to account the people who are responsible for the recession and points out the glaring fact that they are still in charge today despite pocketing hundreds of billions for their illegal activities.
I loved the precision and clarity of “Inside Job”. It is one of the finest documentaries I have ever seen — superbly quantifying the problem for those of us who are not as clued in as we would like to be. Matt Damon narrates as the film bounces from interview to interview and chart to chart. As the closing credits hit the screen, for the first time since the September 2008 debacle, I felt like I had formed a healthy understanding of the astonishing mess that Wall Street got us all into.
“Inside Job” is a must watch for anyone who lives in the modern world. It is an important film that will leave you simultaneously baffled and angry. It will also leave you depressed that even the Obama administration seems unable or unwilling to enforce the financial reform that will prevent this crisis from ever occurring again. Deregulation got us into this mess. Billions are spent every year by the wealthiest lobbyists in America to ensure that deregulation is not tampered with. Why do you think that is?
A well educated Harvard employee is asked a question late in the film — He knows what he wants to say, but cannot because he understands that the answer is ludicrous. He knows what he cannot say, because it would violate his entire argument. So he is left with only one response… “Ummmm”.
Sometimes, people just hope the questions go away before they get a chance to cash out.
Martin Scorsese is rightly considered one of the elite filmmakers of all time. The vast majority of his films are, even by the strictest standards, great ones. So it comes as a slight shock to say that “Shutter Island” falls far short of that mark. It is beautifully shot and brilliantly acted — but it doesn’t have the soul or originality of a Scorsese classic.
Leonardo DiCaprio teams up with the director for the umpteenth time in recent years – this time playing a detective sent to investigate the disappearance of an inmate at a large mental institution. Ben Kingsley plays the warden / head psychiatrist who is oddly mysterious and unhelpful. Mark Ruffalo and Michelle Williams round out a nice cast in supporting roles.
The sets, the cinematography, the style and tone… all sublime. It is a visual treat. Technically, this foray into genre filmmaking is a flawless effort. I don’t really fault Scorsese’s skill here. How could anyone ever fault him for that? Rather, “Shutter Island” misses the mark because the story is simply not that original or interesting. I feel as though I have seen this story before. I saw the twists coming very early in the movie.
It is a cold and damp film that will not lend itself to repeat viewings. The morose tone and dreary characters can’t possibly generate much empathy in an audience. “Shutter Island” is a skillful exercise and nothing more. It is depressing and far too long — a bad combination. Were it any other director, I may not be as forgiving with my rating… but Scorsese has earned the benefit of the doubt.
This small British thriller does a lot of things really well for the first half of its running length. Unfortunately, it is a little let down by some routine clichés in the final act.
I love the intricacy of the opening moments. It is a terrifyingly detailed start as we watch two men set up an elaborate plan to kidnap a young woman and hold her for ransom from her rich father. The virtually dialogue-free scenes are eerily intense as they purchase materials and build a makeshift prison for their prospective victim. One cannot help but feel chills as the two men edge closer to the actual crime.
Gemma Arterton is a fine young actress who is going to be a star for many years to come. She plays Alice Creed. Her terror is palpable. It is a courageous performance. Whether or not we believe her fear is paramount to the film’s success.
I have to admit that the movie goes to places I did not expect. I certainly didn’t see some of the twists coming. However, the final act felt more like a tire slowly losing air than a bursting balloon. “The Disappearance of Alice Creed” does all the groundwork and then simply peters out into the ether of mediocrity. It had a chance to be one of the great low-budget thrillers of all time. Instead it merely ranks as a good effort with a terrific central performance from Arterton.
The obscene miscarriage of justice that was the Republican administration under George “Dubya” Bush had many peaks and valleys of hideousness. One of the peaks was the sickening leak of Valerie Plame’s name while she was working as an undercover operative for the CIA. The depraved fucks like Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Robert Novak and, of course, Bush & Cheney, were all a part of the assassination of her stellar career. And it was done in the name of revenge.
Time has a way of smoothing over the outrage. However, “Fair Game” does a nice job of reminding the world what an unjust and vengeful episode it all was. It is a simple film in many ways. Histrionics are avoided in favor of a more measured approach. Naomi Watts and Sean Penn both deliver focused performances that capture the exasperation of a couple whose lives have been turned upside down.
I doubt anyone will love this movie. It is not that kind of story. Instead, I would imagine that virtually all who aren’t clouded by political allegiances to the loony religious right will be consistently interested in one of the more despicable acts of treason our government has ever engaged in. I highly recommend “Fair Game”. It plays more like docudrama than a standard movie, but it nevertheless manages to rile the emotions significantly.
This is a really fascinating documentary about an insane workaholic and an endlessly daring comedienne who has had a far more interesting life that I ever would have given her credit for. Joan Rivers is a classically insecure personality who, like virtually all stand-up comedians, found their way into the industry as a coping mechanism. She also masks that insecurity with her relentless work schedule which fills her time so intensely that she has little or no room for contemplation. As a final mask, it is clearly evident that her innumerable plastic surgeries and her botox addiction is one last method of avoiding the realities of life.
To be honest, it is hard to tell if Joan Rivers has lived her life surrounded by laughter or hidden behind it.
“A Piece of Work” is a relentlessly intriguing peek behind the curtain. We follow her as she takes red-eye flights to remote gigs, limos to book signings, sits in make-up chairs having her face painted, prepares backstage for her routines, schmoozes with celebrities. Her life is nothing if not busy. In fact, I don’t think I have ever encountered a person who works as hard as Rivers. It is jaw-dropping.
Whether you like her comedy or not, this documentary is absolutely worth watching. She is far more interesting than I ever would have imagined. She is ground-breaking. She is obsessive. She is funny. She is tragic. She is a piece of work.
