Pride and Glory

From the first trailer I saw for Pride and Glory, I knew this was a movie I would catch at the theater. Maybe it was the fact that Jon Voight, Colin Farrell and especially Edward Norton appeared as central characters. But it might have been that my curiousity was piqued by the suggestion that a family member might have to cross the Thin Blue Line against his own brother. The trailers gave this film an epic feel that played out the same way in totality. This film delivered everything I expected making it another great film for 2008.

Pride and Glory takes a name that plays on the pro-American Patriotic sensibilities of middle America. It is a very generic name that will probably keep movie goers away. That is unfortunate. A bit more creativity in naming this film might have done it more justice. Something that played off the family theme might have suggested the major elements of this film. It's amazing how much injustice a poorly named film can cause. I almost missed this film when looking up the new releases for the weekend by name. Once I clicked on the link, I immediately realized this was one that I wanted to see.



Pride and Glory tells the story of a police family. It is not uncommon for this profession to get handed down from one generation to the next. Jon Voight is a wheel in the Police Department...forty-one years given to the NYPD. His character, Francis Tierney Sr. has two sons who have followed in his footsteps. Franics Tierney Jr. (Noah Emmerich) is a Captain in the 31st Precinct. The other son, Ray Tierney (Edward Norton), has been voluntarily reassigned to the Missing Persons bureau where he has been hiding for two years since an incident involving police brutality which caused him to lie to the Internal Affairs Bureau. Tierney also has a daughter, Megan Egan (Lake Bell) who is married to one of Captain Tierney's Sergeants, Jimmy Egan (Colin Farrell). The 31st Precinct has gained a reputation for crime down and collars up...but the reputation in the community isn't as positive. Constant shake-downs and police corruption plague the community and have ired regular citizens as well as the criminal element. Francis Tierney Sr. talks his son ray into reassigning from Missing Persons to the Task Force investigating the homicide of four officers in the 31st Precinct. Guys that Ray once worked with. Ray reluctantly agrees and finds himself exorcising his own demons as he realizes that the homicide is pointing toward corruption within his brothers command. Unsure of the level to which this corruption reaches, Ray confronts his brother Franny, who lies to him. The tension in the family creates a family dynamic combined with the law enforcement concept of having each other's back. Ray finds himself in a quandry, trying to decide whether to take the easy way out or whether to follow his heart.

The writing in this film was excellent. There were a few scenes that required a bit of leeway in order to allow events to unfold in the manner that the writers wanted. One such scene has Ray clearing a building following shots fired. That just doesn't seem reasonable. However, the story as a whole delivered a great deal of credibility. The characters were believable and possessed an array of qualities that made them seem human. The human element was carefully crafted into this story which could easily have slipped completely into the police realm. The dialogue was interesting, combining enough police jargon with normal conversation to create a balance. The sub-plots worked together well to lead to an acceptable ending that didn't make you feel cheated. I remember thinking at one point that there was no way they could create a happy ending to the film. The ending wasn't necessarily a happy ending, but it tied up loose ends, which I liked. The combination of strong dialogue, interesting plot lines and character development demonstrated strong writing by Joe Carnahan and Gavin O'Connor.

Read More About Pride And Glory

Tideland

I saw several positive reviews for Tideland, some from writers who I hold in high regard. Although this movie sounded quirky in a not-so-positive way, I figured I would give it a go. In exchange for my curiosity and willingness to "stick it out" in hopes of improvement, I received nothing. Okay, maybe some of the cinematography was interesting and Jeff Bridges as a junkie was sort of interesting to watch. But for the most part, this film was a complete waste of two hours.

Tideland is a weird tale, sort of a fractured fairy tale, that starts with a young girl (Jeliza-Rose played by Jodelle Ferland) cooking heroine up for her junkie father Noah (Jeff Bridges). Shortly thereafter, her mother Queen Gunhilda (Jennifer Tilly) dies in her sleep. Jeliza-Rose does not get much attention from her addict parents and has developed an extensive dialogue with her doll-head companions. Much of the movie explores her internal conversations with her pretend friends. After traveling to her deceased grandmother's house on the plains, her father OD's on heroine, slowly decaying over a period of days. Jeliza befriends an odd family on a nearby farm, which adds a whole new dimension to the level of strange that this movie seeks to reach. It is hard to tell reality from fantasy in this film, which explores a wide range of taboo subjects. In fact, it seemed at times that this film was meant to shock and provoke dialogue with very little substance used as a vehicle to deliver it.

The writing in this film was tedious. There was a funny scene on the bus, where Noah's bodily functions serve as comic relief. However, it's pretty bad when the only comedy you can achieve it cheap potty humor. This was a very dark film that explored some touchy subjects in a way that was painful to watch. It was literally like watching a train wreck. The writers failed to touch the audience with the characters which were all entirely out of touch with anything most people can relate to. Even Jeliza-Rose, who was required to carry this film, lacks the depth to create much of a bond with the audience. The lack of character development, reality and dialogue was tedious. Jeliza-Rose has conversations with her pretend friends, using a falsetto voice when in character...making it very difficult to understand what she is saying. Using a child in a strange character to carry a film was a disastrous mistake.



The casting wasn't bad, but the best part of the cast didn't last long enough to do anything. Unless you count Jeff Bridges slowly decaying and watching his tongue eventually turn black counts as acting. Bridges was actually pretty good, the only bright spot, during his rather short existence in this film. Jennifer Tilly didn't last past the first ten minutes. Her character really didn't have time to get to know the audience, never mind connect. Ferland was cute and likeable, but her character limited her ability to win the audience over by force of her personality or innocence. With the voices in her head, she was really hard to watch at times. Brendan Fletcher was exceptional as an epileptic (Dickens) who had part of his brain removed. His performance and character was weird but believable...maybe just a hint overdone. His relationship with Jaliza-Rose is eerie. Janet McTeer plays Dickens sister Dell. She was just plain weird. I didn't like her in the least bit in this movie. The cast was mostly bad. Probably because of the writing...but they were all hard to watch at times.

Read More About Tideland

Before The Devil Knows You're Dead

I am a longtime fan of Philip Seymour Hoffman. My first recollection of his work was his portrayal of a Med School student in Patch Adams. Hoffman played an intense character under self-induced stress from his efforts to follow in his father’s footsteps. In this film, Hoffman’s relationship with his father is strained at best. However, the intensity and instability that he brings to his characters was artistically evident in Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead. Hoffman (as the lead character, Andy Hanson) easily carried this film with a tremendous performance.

Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead tells the story of a two brothers who don’t have the best relationship. The older brother (Hoffman) has an overbearing intense personality that he plies against the younger brother, Charles Hanson (Ethan Hawke). The chemistry between these two characters shows an imbalance that provides an early indicator or family dysfunction. This is confirmed when we discover Andy’s plan to rob their parents jewelry store. Andy delegates the dirty work to Charles, who seems incompetent in the simplest of tasks. Andy employs the assistance of a thuggish friend named Bobby Lasorda (Brian F. O’Byrne). Charles and Bobby undertake this task with amazing ineptitude leading to disastrous results. The fallout from this botched robbery peels back the layers of dysfunction in the family, revealing all of the ugly scars that have been hidden. The interaction of the characters reveals hidden secrets, grudges and the unraveling of whatever fabric was still holding the family tenuously together.



Kelly Masterson put together an exceptional screenplay. The success of the screenplay hinged on the Directing, which Sidney Lumet conducted flawlessly. The film reminded me a lot of something Quentin Tarantino would produce. The story begins with rough intercourse and nudity…just to get your attention. The movie then moves immediately to the point that would be the climax in most other movies. After providing details of the central incident in this film, we begin flashing back and picking up important pieces of the puzzle. We start with the what and then begin examining the why. This examination is conducted through a series of overlapping snippets. As the past catches up with a version of events we have already witnessed, the camera angle changes providing a different perspective on events we already know about. In this manner, the story evolves in a jerky manner. This technique could have been weak and distracting. Done right, it was fresh and interesting. The dialogue between the characters was strong and direct. The language provided credibility and provided the characters depth. Although dysfunctional, the characters oddly connected with the audience. That may be a product of good character development, providing a series of personality traits that made them human. Maybe even in the dysfunction, we can see a bit of ourselves in the characters. The plot was exceptional, providing an interesting take on criminal thinking and botched criminal activity. Overall, the writing was magnificent.

The writing was paralleled by an amazing performance by Philip Seymour Hoffman. There are many actors that could have been cast in this role and may have made the part work. However, this part seemed to be tailor made for Hoffman. The intensity that this character conveyed required an actor with an emotional palette that could convince the audience of his calculated instability. For me, this was Hoffman’s best performance. There was one scene where he destroyed things in his apartment…it wasn’t rage…it was sort of a controlled fit where he casually released his pent up anger in an eerie display of emotion. Ethan Hawke was required to project a quality of submissive instability and ineptitude that he convincingly managed. His character had the right balance of submissiveness to Hoffman’s off kilter power plays. The two worked great together, delivering a stunning performance. When you add the expertise of an old pro like Albert Finney, you get nothing less than what you would expect. I thought Albert Finney was exceptional in A Good Year. His portrayal of Andy and Charles’ father in this movie was solid. His depression, anger and loss gave way to vengeance in a riveting thought-provoking performance. Marie Tomei provided some sub-plot material, but it occurred to me that she might have been in this movie for his breasts, which were shown in abundance in this film. Not that it was necessarily a bad thing. Her performance wasn’t weak, but it seems she was undressed more than she was dressed in this movie. This covers the major players in the film, the rest of the cast was strong, with no performance standing out as particularly good or bad. As a whole, this movie was exceptionally well cast.

Read More About Before The Devil Knows You're Dead

The Perfect Witness AKA The Ungodly

The Perfect Witness is also known as The Ungodly. For some reason, this dark thriller didn’t make it to the big screen. Although far from being a blockbuster, I felt that The Perfect Witness was as good as many of the thrillers that have been in theaters lately. This movie probably would have had a niche audience and might have created a decent amount of revenue. Serial killers seem to be a popular thriller theme, with everything from Hannibal to the Showtime series Dexter delving into the subject.

Rather than simply pitting the police against a killer, we get insight from an amateur documentary producer (Mickey Gravatski…played by Wes Bentley) who has carefully tracked the killer with eerie precision. Gravatski studies the scenes where several of the killings happened, looking for evidence from nearby areas. He uses that information to lie in wait, capturing a killing on videotape. Gravatski uses this tape to strike a deal with the killer (James Lemac…played by Mark Borkowski) to produce a documentary. Lemac unwillingly agrees to the arrangement, videotaping insights into his background and charitable work. Lemac slowly pries information from Gravatski until he gets enough to turn the tables on his blackmailer. Gravatski ends up on the wrong side of the blackmail, but continues to uncover details regarding Lemac’s childhood and family. The juxtaposition of the characters and personal interactions provide tense situations that keep the audience guessing.

Click To Play

The Perfect Witness was well cast, with Borkowski presenting a riveting performance as a dark brooding emotionally scarred serial killer who hides his transgressions behind his charitable work with cancer stricken children. His tense edginess brings credibility to a character that has a little bit of depth. His chemistry with Bentley is interesting. The movie hinges on the performance and interaction of these two characters in a cat-and-mouse sort of way. Bentley is a recovering drug addict that ends up slipping back into his altered states as pressure mounts on him. The visible changes in behavior are a tribute to his excellent performance. Joanne Baron performs the role of Lemac’s sister Megan. Baron does a good job in her limited role, showing anguish and fear without overdoing it. Beth Grant had an extremely limited role as Lemac’s mother. She was okay, but didn’t have much to work with. The cast as a whole were solid, with the primary characters bringing a degree of plausibility to a rather difficult to accept premise.

The writing in The Perfect Witness was decent, primarily in the area of dialogue. The exchanges between the characters provided insight into their mental processes and often involved deep philosophical exchanges. The premise that provides the foundation of the story requires a good stretch of the imagination. But as a guy that enjoys the Dexter series, I guess I shouldn’t be pointing out the faults of believability. The plot is interesting because it takes a different tack on the serial killer thriller genre. The involvement of the characters provides an interesting backdrop for the story. My main problems with the writing were two-fold. First, the characters were slightly developed, but could have used a bit more latitude. Second, the ending left a lot to be desired. It wasn’t a bad ending and it certainly wasn’t predictable. But it sort of left a lot of loose ends hanging. I hate that feeling at the end of a movie. A bit more closure would have made this movie exceptional for me. As it stands, it was a decent script that was worth watching but nothing spectacular.

Read More About The Perfect Witness

City of Ember

Mixed reviews. You have to love them. You don’t know what you are getting yourself into when you go into a film that none of the critics can agree on. City of Ember wasn’t necessarily panned, it just hasn’t gotten exceptional reviews. I had not read a review raving about this film prior to taking my son to see it over the weekend. So I really did not have high expectations going in to this one.

I was pleasantly surprised at this film. It wasn’t one of those films that creates a lasting impression and it certainly will never go down as a classic. However, City of Ember was an entertaining take on Science Fiction from a child’s perspective. It is a film that was heavily marketed to younger viewers (my son claimed he had seen the trailer to this film several times, but I had never seen it…so it must have been on Nick or Disney Channel). The marketing must have worked, because the theater was crowded during the matinee showing. The crowd appeared to be around my sons age, ranging from seven or eight up to about twelve for the most part. Just a few years younger than the characters this film portrays.



City of Ember tells the story of an underground city built by “The Builders.” The builders planned the city to withstand unstated changes occurring in the world at a critical juncture in time. The sealed instructions for leaving the underground city in a metallic box designed to open in 200 years. The box is passed from one city Mayor to the other over a century and a half. One Mayor dies unexpectedly and the box lies dormant in his closet for the remaining half a century, opening unnoticed in the closet. We pick up the story at a tumultuous juncture, when the city is undergoing severe difficulties. Powered by a giant generator, the city is wholly reliant on its continued functioning in the absence of adequate parts and knowledge. Blackouts, food shortages and a corrupt Mayor indicate that things are unlikely to improve. It is illegal to venture outside the lighted areas of the city which means that there is no way to know if anything exists beyond the cavernous walls of the subterranean society. A couple of recently graduated students hold the future of the city in their hands. Their combined knowledge might hold the key to the world beyond their city. Finding that world is an adventure filled with minor sub-plots that are sometimes interesting and at times a distraction.

City of Ember is based on a 2003 book written by Jeanne Duprau and adapted to a screenplay by Caroline Thompson. I did not read the book and can offer no comparisons between the two. Duprau wrote a sequel called The People of Sparks which may find its way to the big screen if this movie manages to do well. The plot does not contain much complexity and is a bit predictable, which makes it age appropriate. The characters are interesting in a Who-ville sort of way. The sub-plots are shallow and seem to be intended to provide details related to the overall story. I found the storyline to be engaging and the characters developed enough for my liking.

Read More About City of Ember

Nightwatch

It has been years since I watched Nightwatch. I watched again last night and remembered why this film appealed to me. The plot was a bit predictable, but still had enough twists to keep you guessing. This film was interesting and at times riveting. With just a bit of tweaking this could have been a memorable film. The all star cast and interesting script made for two hours well spent.

Nightwatch tells the story of a law school student, Martin Bells (Ewan McGregor), in his final year (hopefully) of school. To help offset his bills he takes a job as a nightwatchman at the County Morgue. The midnight shift to make things interesting. His best friend James (Josh Brolin) is an odd character who feels like his youth is wasting away. He seems jut a bit off balance...but is he off balance enough to kill prostitutes after making them "play dead?" That is the question that begins to arise and threatens their friendship. Martin becomes the prime suspect in the search for a serial killer. The lead investigator (Nick Nolte) lets Martin know he doesn't believe Martin to be the killer...that he may be getting set up in order to release the real serial killer from suspicion. Wierd things begin happening during the night shift that have Martin crying "wolf" one too many times. As the investigation comes to a head, the characters begin unraveling the truth as their paths cross at inconvenient times.

This film was written and directed by Ole Bornedal whose credits include a dozen foreign films and television programs. His ability to create characters with depth and credible quirks made this movie interesting. Quirks create doubt, which can build suspense or keep you guessing which way the plot is going to break. The quirks that Bornedal injects his characters with are sometimes subtle but sometimes a bit more flagrant. These traits infuse believability into a script that tests the boundaries of plauisibility. The dialogue was interesting. The interactions between the characters seemed natural except in circumstances where the dialogue was intended to foster doubt or cause tension. I cared enough about the characters to remain interested and found most of the characters to be well developed and interesting.

The addition of a star-studded cast certainly made Nightwatch much more interesting. Watching Josh Brolin eleven or twelve years younger was amusing. I probably didn't even know who he was when I first saw this film. Nick Nolte on the other hand, has always been one of my favorites. Nolte delivered his typical solid tough guy performance with a little bit of an edge...something that seems to come natural for him. His performance along with Josh Brolin's were enough to keep me just enough off balance to be unsure of where teh plot was headed. Ewan McGregor carried this film and delivered a performance that was quirky enough to be odd but had an innocence that never really made me doubt his character. Patricia Arquette plays his girlfriend/fiance Katherine and did an excellent job of selling a wide range of emotions. Arquette had a smaller role but was exceptional in that role. Brad Dourif was a bit of distraction as a Duty Doctor who believes Martin is undermedicated and could use some help from the "Zine Family." Thorazine. Dourif didn't have many lines, but his appearance was interesting and certainly quirky.

Read More About Nightwatch

Dirty Love

Dirty Love was heavily panned on its release in 2005. I watched this movie with great trepidation figuring it would be a complete waste of time. I was pleasantly surprised to see that this film had some great comical qualities that were sometimes overdone. Some of the excess was to the point of nausea. There was one scene in particular I could have done without. With that considered, I felt that the humorous elements in this film outweighed the excess to the point where I could actually find myself moderately recommending this film. But I won’t go quite that far.

Jenny McCarthy wrote and starred in this comedy, which tells the story of a heart-broken photographer who wants to try and win back the affection of her male model boyfriend of two years. The film starts out on Hollywood Boulevard, which was interesting, since I recently returned from a trip to that location. McCarthy’s character (Rebecca) visits a fortune teller on that road…I don’t know if it’s the same location, but I remember seeing a fortune teller store front on Hollywood during my recent visit. Rebecca learns from the fortune teller that she will find true love if she is watching for her white pony…a play on words that ultimately leads her to understand where her opportunity for true love lies. Her friends are odd and one-dimensional, especially Carmen Electra, who plays a ghetto talking body waxer. Her friends set her up on various dates in an attempt to make her boyfriend jealous. Instead we get puke down the blouse and plenty of other bodily functions, but especially butt fetishes. Weird…but oddly funny.

The screenplay provided a rather weak and extremely formulaic plot that really offered nothing new to this genre. The characters were so laughably flat that they completely lacked any credibility. The dialogue was tedious at times, due in large part to the characteristics assigned to the players. The only strong point in the writing was the comic elements, which were sometimes refreshing. The comic situations set up in the script often involved toilet humor, which is sophomoric, but also lends to cheap laughs. Although tawdry, I actually got some pretty good laughs from it. There is a grocery store scene that involves another bodily function that was so disgusting I almost turned the movie off. In effect, the only redeeming quality in the writing was the guffaw inducing comedy that occasionally hit. Some of the comic elements fell flat.

Jenny McCarthy was actually very funny. I know she won the Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Actress in this film, but I disagree. Her facial expressions and delivery have the capacity for inducing laughter. Although she was not entirely funny, I thought that she took a rather weak script and managed to keep it interesting (even if she is to blame for the script, too). Her character had a little bit of dimension, but not much. I was intrigued by her character in spite of the fact that she was very predictable. Carmen Electra justifiably won Worst Supporting Actress for this film. She was horrid. In totality, the cast was moderately good, but didn’t have a lot to work with here.

Read More About Dirty Love