Podcast Brilliance

It's been a hell of a week for movies. There were four new releases, two independent films and two widely released films, and I recommended all of them. In a year where each week has usually produced a stinker, including huge movie event turds like Terminator: Salvation and X-Men Origins: Wolverine, it's a breath of fresh air to sit down in four instances and be entertained each time.

The new movies this week are The Hurt Locker, Moon, Brüno, and I Love You, Beth Cooper. Again, BDK of BDK's Movie Show fame and myself have recorded a podcast reviewing each new film. So click the link below and get to listening!

To read my reviews of each movie, you can click here, here, here and here, or simply navigate this blog. However, I reviewed Moon a month ago, so you'll have to do a little digging to find it. Click here to head to BDK's website and read his written reviews.

BDK and the Beard review July 10th new releases: The Hurt Locker, Moon, Brüno, and I Love You, Beth Cooper.

I'm Partially Fond of You, Beth Cooper

Sometimes, a movie comes along that you just have to be in a good mood to enjoy. All things considered, the movie is terrible, but on that particular day, at that particular time, something was clicking and you walked out pleasantly surprised. I Love You, Beth Cooper was one of those films for me. As silly and contrived as it is, it's also plain lighthearted fun, a fluff piece of entertainment that can easily kill an hour and a half without wasteful regret.

Paul Rust plays Denis, a graduating high school senior who is in love with Beth Cooper (natch), played by the gorgeous Hayden Panettiere. He's the valedictorian of his class and during his speech at the graduation ceremony, he confesses his feelings for her. Once the ceremony is over, Cooper confronts him and tells him that it was embarrassing, but also sort of sweet, so he invites her to his "party," which consists only of him and his nerdy best friend, Rich, played by Jack Carpenter. Unfortunately, Cooper's angry military boyfriend is on the way to his house to teach Denis a lesson. Cooper and her friends grab Denis and Rich, getting them out of harm's way, and go on an adventure together in this harmless rom-com.

At one point in the film, Denis and his father are having a talk where he is told to have fun because this is his last summer before college. He wants him to experience everything he hasn't yet had a chance to. Denis replies that the whole "coming of age thing is relatively new" for high school kids. Regrettably, the whole "coming of age thing" is hardly new in film and this clichéd picture certainly isn't going to reinvent the genre. In fact, there's a whole lot to not like about I Love You, Beth Cooper.

The material here is awful and on paper, none of the jokes are funny, consisting mostly of scatological humor and slapstick gags, the most lowbrow comedy there is. The main character, Denis, is kind of a creeper. Before he confessed his love to Cooper at graduation, he had never spoken a word to her, yet he knows everything about her, where she likes to go, what her favorite food is, etc. He even has a giant sized poster of her on his ceiling above his bed, and you can imagine why it might be placed at such a strategic position. Top onto this the cheesy ending with awful dialogue and the film just kind of runs out of steam.

Regardless of these problems, the actors in the film do a terrific job, doing the best they can with limited resources. Rust actually manages to make Denis a likable guy, despite his odd tendency to alarmingly obsess over a girl. He looked comfortable in front of the camera and had a certain amiable appeal as the loser nerd. And Panettiere is bubbly and fun, perfectly playing the beautiful wild child who sees herself only as a person men want to be with for one night rather than simply be with.

Despite its contrivances, its predictability, its poorly written script, its bland direction, and its stupid humor, the lively performances make I Love You, Beth Cooper kind of sweet. It's no prize winner, but then again, it's not trying to be. What the cast does is take a poorly devised comedy and make it tolerable enough that you'll walk out smiling. What more could you ask for?

I Love You, Beth Cooper receives 2.5/5

The Hurt Locker a Profound Piece of Art

If past numbers are to be trusted, movies set in the midst of violent and controversial wars in present day Iraq and Afghanistan tend to not do well at the box office. With a relatively minor budget of $25 million, Stop-Loss sank, making only a fraction of it back at just over $11 million. Combine the disappointing intakes of Rendition and In the Valley of Elah and you don't even match what Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen made in a single day (which is a sad statement on society, I might add). It's disheartening to see these interesting and insightful, albeit flawed, films get overlooked, but if there's one that may be able to break this poor streak, it's The Hurt Locker. To put it simply, it's one of the best films of the year.

The flick follows three soldiers, a bomb defusing team tasked with finding and defusing IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices). I would go further into the plot, but truth be told, there's not much else to it. Most stories have a beginning, middle, and an end, but The Hurt Locker only has a beginning. Once the credits start to roll, no real resolution is reached. In fact, the previous events all seem to begin again. It plays into the idea that war is a vicious cycle and has no end. In this case, lack of a conclusion works to its advantage.

That's not to say it doesn't have a point to make. Given the subject matter, one would rightfully assume a statement would be made, but it's not the one you might expect. In actuality, the film doesn't so much comment on the war as it does explore the effects it has on the soldiers who fight it. Republican, Democrat, or other, there's no arguing the mental anguish these soldiers go through during and after war. The movie, through its extensive study into its characters, really taps into the emotional turmoil many have to deal with. Some become increasingly angry, some find it hard to carry on normally with so much death surrounding them and others become so addicted to war that it becomes all that they know. The Hurt Locker is a non-partisan film that delves into an important topic, examining the health of our soldiers defending us from harm, and it's an excellent one at that.

Naturally, this study of real life problems soldiers have wouldn't mean much if the surrounding film lacked a visceral punch. Luckily, the film is well rounded, almost never at fault and is brilliantly directed by Kathryn Bigelow, who carries herself with aplomb, ratcheting up the camerawork when necessary, but allowing her actors and the natural suspense of diffusing a bomb carry most of the movie. There is real tension here, never manipulative or forced, rarely relying on frantic camera movements or overly loud music to bump up the action.

Even with the ample amount of suspense, it sometimes built up into nothing, but the strange thing is that it was never a disappointment. The film feels so natural and the circumstances so real that you don't want it to explode into violence. These characters are authentic, with the illusion of actual soldiers conveyed through several excellent performances, and I didn't want to see them in harm's way. In other movies, this build up with no payoff would be a problem. Here, it's a relief.

At times, I felt like I was in the field with these soldiers, not merely watching from my comfortable chair in a crowded theater, which is in large part due to the shaky cam technique Bigelow uses, similar to something like Cloverfield, but not nearly as excessive. In most movies, this style of filmmaking is unnecessary, but here it worked to the film's advantage. Along with the gritty look of the film, the shaky camera helped me immerse myself into what was going on, sweeping me away in this riveting and powerful drama.

If there's one knock against the film, it is its length. It's over two hours long and a scene or two could have been trimmed up a bit, including one that depicts a sniper battle between Iraqi insurgents and the American troops. Despite the gunfire and blood splatters, the main purpose of this scene was for one of the soldiers to have an emotional breakthrough, making the decision to gun down an enemy, presumably marking his first kill, but it took far too long for it happen. While it played to the reality of the situation, this is still a movie and tight editing and smooth transitioning is a must. This section in particular lacked both.

However, that's one minor quibble in what is otherwise an astonishing piece of art. Every performance is spot on, the tension is real, and the opening is one of the most breathtaking moments in film since the coin flip scene in No Country for Old Men. Everything about The Hurt Locker adds up to one exceptional experience that you won't soon forget and is one of the must see movies of 2009.

The Hurt Locker receives 5/5

Brüno Shockingly Hilarious

I'm one of those people who didn't buy into the hype of Borat back when it was released in 2006. Everywhere you went, it was praised as being one of the funniest and smartest films to be released in years. When such strong words were being used to describe a movie, I couldn't help but be a bit skeptical, but then I went and watched it, quickly jumping on the bandwagon, stroking its already inflated ego and speaking of its greatness to anybody who would listen. It even prompted me to go watch Da Ali G Show, where the character originated, and its big screen brother, Ali G Indahouse, a movie most people didn't seem to like, but I found to be cheerfully and hilariously stupid. I suppose I was destined to love Sacha Baron Cohen's newest film, Brüno, and I did. While it doesn't quite reach the same heights of Borat (more on that later), it is nevertheless one of the funniest films of the year and easily recommendable.

Similar to Borat, Brüno follows the titular character, a gay Austrian fashionista, in a mockumentary style film where he travels the globe offending as many people as possible in an hour and a half. After being fired from his Austrian fashion show, Funkyzeit, Brüno decides to travel to America to become a superstar, and he will do anything to achieve that goal. Along the way, he adopts a little black child, pitches a scandalous new show to a focus group, attempts to convert to a heterosexual, and more.

One can't help but applaud Sacha Baron Cohen's dedication to this role, one that is arguably more controversial than Borat. He walks around the world, in areas where he could literally be killed, dressing and acting like a gay man, performing outrageous stunts around unsuspecting people, and doing it all for the sake of entertainment. He takes what I considered the least effective character from his television show and reworks him into a lovable goof, a character I now extremely respect and wish for more of. The brief 82 minutes I spent with him was frankly not enough.

Brüno is funny. There's no doubt about that. The dilemma I've faced so far in attempting to detail why this movie is so good is that I don't want to give anything away, but how can I possibly explain a movie like this without spoiling certain parts? Part of the fun of the film is going into it unaware at what you are about to see. Revealing something as seemingly minor as the set-up will all but ruin many of the jokes. Therefore, my explanations will be brief. I may actually get into the negatives more than the positives, but don't take that, well, negatively. Brüno is one of the best times you're likely to have in a crowded theater this year.

One of the film's greatest strengths is that it is constantly funny, with not a single slow moment throughout. At certain points, it felt like certain scenes were going nowhere, with hardly a joke even tossed out, but by the end, there was always a payoff, including one scene where Brüno and his gay lover, who are chained together in a sexual contraption only Cohen's twisted mind could have thought of, walk past members of the Westboro Baptist Church, a religious group whose tactics include "preaching" the word of God through excessive gay bashing, carrying signs like "God Hates Fags" and "Fags Doom Nations." This is only a small scene, lasting a mere few seconds, but it's effective, it's funny and if you have any knowledge of the WBC, it's fulfilling in its own right to see such evil people be unknowingly ridiculed on a grand scale.

However, while both Brüno and Borat are equally funny in their own special, demented ways, Borat was more compelling because it provided a terrific social commentary on the ignorance of America. Despite our presence in foreign nations, we actually know very little about people overseas, and the film was quick to ridicule us because of it. People from Kazakhstan do not look or sound like Borat. In that film, Cohen actually spoke Hebrew and the lettering of certain so called "Kazakh" words were mostly nonsense letters tweaked to look like a foreign alphabet. That character, by simply existing and interacting with various people (including a few powerful politicians), worked in a way that satirized our naiveté. Brüno, on the other hand, merely plays off of already established stereotypes of gay men. While Borat spoofed us in an intelligent manner, Brüno basically spoofs himself. The debate on the nation's rampant homophobia was untouched throughout the first half of the film.

Fortunately, once Brüno goes to visit a priest, a so called "gay converter" (who compares homosexuals to terrorists), it finally begins to delve into this social taboo. Here, Brüno asks how he can spot a homosexual. The answer from the unsuspecting victim? They're very kind. Chances are if you're talking to an extremely nice man, he is gay. Whoa now, a courteous and polite person? Stay away from that one. By the end of the movie, his victims aren't simply in disgust at his actions; they're spewing verbal hatred and throwing chairs. The first half is a bit sluggish, but the back half eventually accomplishes the goal of exploring the hot topic of homophobia.

The film was a bit unfocused as well, attacking people that didn't necessarily need to be picked on. One scene shows Brüno as he interviews a handful of parents in auditions for their babies. He poses outlandish situations that would put their babies in danger, but they all go with the flow because they are desperate for their baby to land the part. One parent even agrees to put her baby on a diet, going so far as to agree to give it liposuction if it hadn't lost the weight by the desired time. Okay. What's the point? In a way, Cohen's making a statement about bad parenting, but that's not what this movie is about. It was shocking and disturbing, sure, but it wasn't relevant. That was the problem.

Still, the main purpose of the film is to be funny and it most certainly is. Brüno pushes the envelope about as far as it can go and in my desire to avoid spoilers, I haven't even scratched its surface. It's disappointing to see the obvious option for social commentary go to the wayside for much of the film, but you likely won't care because you'll be clutching your sides in uproarious laughter. Brüno is offensive. It's in bad taste. It's pure idiotic lunacy with ample amounts of gratuitous nudity and yeah, that means it's a must see.

Brüno receives 4.5/5

Podcast Awesomeness

For the last two weeks, I've been at the beach in North Carolina soaking in the rays, attempting to get a tan, but for some reason, my body likes to repel any source of attractiveness and is still drenched in pale whiteness. Maybe it's because I spent more time at the movie theater than I did at the beach (not really). But hey, it's my job and I'm here to please my 137,587 readers (arbitrary number).

Yes, I was able to take time away from getting drunk on the sands to go see the newest movie releases, Public Enemies and Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs, and I called in again to participate in my weekly podcasts with BDK of BDK's Movie Show fame (which you can listen to every Friday night from 7-10pm on 106.7 WJFK or stream live on wjfk.com!). Unfortunately, I am now home, so it's back to my normal routine of watching movies and being awesome. It's a tough life.

For now though, listen to the new podcast and don't forget to check out our written reviews of these films. Click here to go to BDK's web site and simply scroll through this blog to read mine (or click here and here).

BDK and the Beard review July 1st new movie releases: Public Enemies and Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs.

Public Enemies a Major Disappointment

What do you get when you combine the dream pairing of two terrific actors, Johnny Depp and Christian Bale, and Michael Mann, director of excellent films such as Heat and Manhunter? Apparently, you get a middling gangster movie that fails to live up to the high standards the talent involved has set for itself. Public Enemies takes a no fail formula and somehow mucks it up with a healthy dose of mediocrity and imbalanced performances. That’s not to say it’s bad, but with such an impressive pedigree backing it up, one can’t help but wonder what went wrong along the way.

Public Enemies begins in 1933, in the fourth year of the Great Depression. At a time when the country was suffering, John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) was prospering from his uncanny ability to rob banks, netting thousands of dollars in the process, and somehow evading police every time. After a string of successful robberies, and deemed a menace to society for making the police look foolish, Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) is given the task of bringing Dillinger to justice.

When you look at a film like Public Enemies and your expectations are justifiably high, with wishes that the incredible talent involved will produce a masterpiece, one tends to nitpick on the negatives rather than praise the positives. In fact, some of my criticisms could hardly be called “negatives” because they don’t necessarily feed off of the problems of the film, but rather my hopes and dreams that failed to come into fruition onscreen. I say this with the desire that you won’t take my excessive criticism too seriously, but understand that I merely respect these filmmakers so much that it’s disheartening to see them fail to live up to their potential. With that said, let’s get on with it, shall we?

The year 1933 is an interesting time period, one that could have given the film some context, but it fails to capitalize on the idea. It takes place during the Great Depression and many people in the country are struggling to get by while Dillinger lives the high life with wealth beyond anyone’s wildest imaginations. The movie could have used this as a way to contrast between the riches of Dillinger and the poverty of a seemingly dying nation, exploring how his actions robbing banks was effecting the overall economy, but no connection was made. In a film with such a fruitful historical background, this was a big missed opportunity.

Nevertheless, Johnny Depp is fascinating in his portrayal of Dillinger, a fearless, reckless outlaw uncaring of the pain he’s causing to others, as long as he gets his due, but even he can’t make up for the fact that his character is shamefully unexplored. At one point in the movie, Dillinger explains that as a child he made a stupid mistake, stealing from a kind man, only to be caught and sentenced to 10 years in prison, an outrageous sentencing for a seemingly minor 50 dollar theft. This could have been used as a means to provide a bit of character development, explaining why he turned out the way he did, but instead, it gets dropped almost immediately, turning into another disappointing exercise of pointlessness that the film seemed to revel in.

Public Enemies is directed by Michael Mann, the same guy who directed the excellent film, Heat and he attempts to use the same equation here that worked so well in that. He takes two stellar actors and separates them throughout most of the film, only to bring them together in one key scene, hoping it will have the same impact as the epic pairing of Robert De Niro and Al Pacino in that aforementioned film, but it simply doesn’t. While Bale is far from bad in his role as the special agent assigned to bring down Dillinger, he is mediocre in comparison to Depp’s terrific performance. In Heat, each actor was equally enthralling in their respective roles, but here, the jump between the riveting Depp overshadows the blander Bale scenes, so the eventual pairing of the two doesn’t pay off.

In addition to all of that, the writing could have been spruced up a little to convey a feeling of excitement because as the finished film stands, it’s a tad boring. The best dialogue driven films remain captivating because the exchanges between characters are interesting and well written. Here, it comes off as flat. The dialogue isn’t bad in an eye rolling, laughable way, but it’s not particularly interesting either.

Despite my incessant negativity towards the film in this review, I am going to recommend it, if only mildly so, because it does have some genuinely suspenseful moments, including a fantastic jail break scene, and the always reliable Depp in another home run performance. Regardless, this is one of the most disappointing movies to be released so far this year. It’s still worth your time; just be sure to keep your expectations in check.

Public Enemies receives 2.5/5

Ice Age 3 An Unimpressive Bore

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs is a lot like an annoying relative. It shows up uninvited, sticks around for too long and thinks it’s funny when it really isn’t. This third entry in the venerable franchise appears seemingly out of nowhere, resurrecting a series that many had long considered dead. If only it had stayed that way.

The film starts with Manny (Ray Romano) and Ellie (Queen Latifah) who are expecting a child, which means things are changing and the group is splitting up. Diego (Denis Leary) insists that things will be different because of the baby and decides to go off on his own while Sid (John Leguizamo) is upset at the notion of abandonment until he stumbles upon three eggs which he takes up as his own. Little does he know that they are dinosaur eggs and their mother is coming to find them, which puts Sid in considerable danger. After finding this out, the remainder of the group decides to find and help Sid, which hurls them into an incredible adventure with a creature named Buck (Simon Pegg), a self proclaimed dinosaur hunter, which takes them into an unknown underground world where dinosaurs roam.

I saw the first Ice Age back in 2002 and wasn’t particularly impressed, reserving only a faint remembrance of it in my mind. I never bothered with the second and therefore am not up to speed with its mythology. The reason I bring this up is because Dawn of the Dinosaurs does little to bring in new fans, which is essentially what I am, and instead opts to jump directly into the story, not so much introducing the characters as simply plopping them all together with the assumption that we already have a familiarity with them. That was its first big mistake.

Going into this film not privy to its existing characters and story arc was a daunting task in itself because it left me trying to piece together the personality puzzles that would explain why the characters acted the way they did. What didn’t help was the way it brought up plot points only to abandon them by the time the credits rolled. At the beginning of the movie, Diego is leaving the group due to what seems to be a number of reasons, including his failing eyesight and lack of stamina. It looked like this could be a crucial turning point in the film, detailing why Diego’s apparent depression is driving him away from the ones he loves, eventually working as a way for him to surmount his shortcomings, but that isn’t the case. In fact, his actual problem is never even explained. The error the film makes is assuming that the fact that these problems simply exist is enough to warrant a character breakthrough, but it’s not. Why is his eyesight failing and his stamina decreasing? Is it old age? Is he sick? It never explains.

One thing I’ve consistently said about voice acting is that it works best when the actors are unobtrusive, meaning that their voices shouldn’t be instantly recognizable because it creates a separation between reality and the fictional world in front of you. There are exceptions to the rule if the voice simply fits that specific character, like Seth Rogen as Bob in the recent Monsters Vs. Aliens, but most often than not, voice acting should be left to the unknowns. Unfortunately, Dawn of the Dinosaurs doesn’t follow this rule. Instead of hearing the characters, I usually heard their respective celebrity counterpart. The problem is that most of these voices contributed nothing to the characters. A thousand different voices could have been used for Romano’s wooly mammoth. He brings nothing that the plethora of other voice actors couldn’t have. His usage was unnecessary, as were the talents of Queen Latifah and Dennis Leary, who are both particularly uninspired.

One big reason this is so disappointing is because the voices don’t change. The actors don’t tweak their voices to fit the character and instead simply talk normally. The sole exceptions are John Leguizamo as Sid and an unrecognizable Simon Pegg as the dinosaur hunter, Buck. His character is the Puss in Boots of the Ice Age franchise, charming and funny with a perfectly fitting voice. He is one of the main reasons this movie was kept afloat instead of sinking under its own mediocre execution.

All of these problems could have been overlooked had the comedy worked. Children will undoubtedly love the slapstick humor and the silly visuals, but the whole ordeal is too silly for adults and eventually becomes a taxing event with embarrassingly unfunny jokes, including a parody on the jealous lover scenario where one depressingly watches his or her companion as he or she embraces someone else lovingly. The joke this time is that the jealous lover is a walnut, who has been abandoned by a squirrel in favor of another of his species. These jokes weren’t just bad, they were wretched.

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs aims high, but can’t reach the bar set by so many others before it. It’s not that it’s terrible; it’s just an unfortunate waste. There’s been no shortage of quality animated movies for the masses to ingest this year. Why waste your time with this one?

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs receives 1.5/5