John Turturro

‘Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen’ is Galaxies Away From its Predecessor

Ebeth — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:23:26 -0600

Rating: 1.5/5.0

CHICAGO – There are often many reasons sequels should not be made. “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” is one of them.

Seeking that “Allspark” exhilaration pumped into many of us from the original “Transformers,” moviegoers will flock to the sequel with anticipation. The first 20 minutes or so (skipping the ridiculous introduction) will feel like preparation for lift-off.

Mikaela Banes (Megan Fox, left) and Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf, right) are once again caught up in a battle between the Autobots and Decepticons in “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.”
Photo credit: Jaimie Trueblood, DW Studios, Paramount Pictures

Sam (Shia LaBeouf) and Bumblebee (voice by Mark Ryan) reappear in two familiar scenes, Mr. and Mrs. Witwicky (Kevin Dunn and Julie White) return with their well-executed bicker-banter and Mikaela (Megan Fox) remains with all the assets she brings to the screen.

We’re introduced to our first three Decepticons and they’re all impressive. From a ferocious tiger-looking beast to a beautiful and all-too-eager temptress (Isabel Lucas), the Decepticons are assembling a vicious team.

Then, before the audience even leaves the ground, alarms sound, the foundation shakes and this invigorating shuttle ride is cancelled. The audience is herded into what feels like a two-hour Segway tour, as we’re led where we don’t want to be and forced to wear goofy helmets of boredom.

The Autobot Optimus Prime once again does battle with the Decepticons in “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.”
Photo credit: DW Studios, Paramount Pictures

The plot is – sigh – difficult to piece out of this rubble.

While Sam is packing to leave for college, he discovers that a piece of “The Cube” (which was thrust into Megatron’s chest at the end of the previous film) is lodged in his well-worn sweatshirt. Coming into contact with this fragment transfers its energy into his brain and soon he’s spewing codes and symbols.

From a satellite-like set-up, the leader of the Decepticons (known as “The Fallen”) is watching and waiting. The Fallen has been on a mission since the Stone Age to take over the planet Earth and destroy its sun in order to energize his troops.

The codes locked in Sam’s brain are of an ancient Decepticon language and contain the secret location of a machine The Fallen needs to complete his mission. This machine is activated by a hidden key known as the “Matrix of Leadership” and the Autobot team is soon in competition with the Decepticons to locate both of these things.

Megan Fox in “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.”
Photo credit: Jaimie Trueblood, DW Studios, Paramount Pictures

This is where the “crash and burn” begins.

Recognizing that the very act of watching a sci-fi movie requires one to believe beyond reality, a major failure of this film is that it’s unbelievable within the universe it creates.

As moviegoers, we agree to join in to this world where large “transforming” vehicles exist and protect our planet. No problem. But when, for example, a large garbage disposal of a monster appears and sucks up everything in its sight (including vans, trees, etc.) yet two of our small human heroes are still standing, the audience begins to feel just a bit of disgust.

Sam’s team meets up with a Decepticon convert who is able to “beam them up” and into Egypt within seconds. It takes the entire army of Decepticons who are hunting Sam, though, almost 48 hours to catch up with him.

Not only are the action sequences plenty ridiculous (and endless) but the script (written by Ehren Kruger, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman) is riddled with disappointingly laughable lines. From references to Barack Obama to supposedly serious battle cries of “let’s win this like we always have with a coordinated military strategy,” one is tired simply from groaning by the end of the film.

The Autobot Optimus Prime returns to battle the Decepticons in “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”.
Photo credit: DW Studios, Paramount Pictures

Though Shia LaBeouf does what he can with the material he was given, Megan Fox’s performance will do little but get her a spot on Brett Michaels’ next season of “Rock of Love”. From the straddling of a motorcycle with her daisy-duke framed and exposed butt to the countless scenes in which Mikaela’s nothing more than a running, slow-motion, breast-bouncing bimbo, directors certainly took their cue from big-hair rock videos of the 1980s.

Those not offended by the obvious sexist tones in the film will surely feel offense from the blatant racism. New to the sequel are the Autobot “twins”: a pair of slang-slapping, “ghetto-fabulous” geek bots complete with gold “grills” and derived entirely from racial stigma. As if the target wasn’t obvious enough, when asked to translate symbols from their native language the twins exclaim (as though it should be obvious to those around them) “we can’t read!”.

Though not without its achievements in special effects, one knows there is a problem when something so colorful, complex and noisy leaves you slumped in your seat. Certain scenes – such as a Decepticon discussion on top of a skyscraper – are reminiscent of TV’s costumed “Power Rangers”. Most often, the creature at the end result of the “transformation” has too many parts to have come from its original form.

RELATED CONTENT
Read our interview with the “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” visual effects supervisor.

Read more film reviews from critic Elizabeth Oppriecht.

Comically, if adults still seek to aggravate themselves by purchasing a ticket to this film, here’s a survival tip: make the film into a drinking game and down one can of beer per testicular reference. Since the writers clearly turned to AC/DC’s “Big Balls” for inspiration each time they were blocked, one will leave with a pleasant buzz.

Galaxies away from its predecessor, “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” does nothing but taint positive memories from the original film. Utterly embarrassing to the sci-fi genre, seek out some episodes of “The Jetsons” instead as even the cartooned “Rosie” is a more intriguing and complicated robot character.

“Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” which stars Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox, Josh Duhamel, Rainn Wilson, John Turturro, the voice of Hugo Weaving, the voice of Peter Cullen and Tyrese Gibson, opened everywhere on June 24, 2009. The film is rated “PG-13” for intense sequences of sci-fi action violence, language, some crude and sexual material and brief drug material.

By ELIZABETH OPPRIECHT
HollywoodChicago.com
elizabeth@hollywoodchicago.com

Denzel Washington, John Travolta in Average ‘The Taking of Pelham 123’

BrianTT — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:26:04 -0600

Rating: 3.0/5.0

CHICAGO – Tony Scott’s remake of “The Taking of Pelham 123,” starring Denzel Washington and John Travolta, is likely to meet sun-drained audience expectations for a straight-forward, adult-driven action film this season but the overly stylized and not-so-thrilling train ride is ultimately merely average at best and will disappoint fans looking for anything more.

The opportunity to make something “just not bad” out of the very well-liked “The Taking of Pelham 123” was definitely missed but there are elements of the film - mostly in the performances of Washington and Travolta and some of the choices made by screenwriter Brian Helgeland (“L.A. Confidential”) - that undeniably do work and adults looking for non-sequel action are likely to be satisfied by what this train delivers.

Denzel Washington in Columbia Pictures’ action thriller THE TAKING OF PELHAM 123, also starring John Travolta.
Photo credit: Sony/Rico Torres

“The Taking of Pelham 123” is nearly presented in real-time and opens with the hijacking of a New York City subway train by a group of domestic terrorists led by the deadly Ryder (John Travolta). Ryder and his team clearly know how the rail system works, un-coupling the Pelham train at just the right point where snipers can’t get an easy shot and they can control communication.

Ryder phones in his demand of $10 million in an hour through dispatcher Walter Garber (Denzel Washington), a former executive who has been demoted while he’s being investigated for allegedly taking a bribe. Of course, Ryder and Garber develop a bond that allows for a lot of monologues, confessions, and revealed motives. Can the family man under a cloud of suspicion himself talk the deadly hostage-taker out of drastic action before it’s too late? James Gandolfini and John Tuturro co-star.

John Travolta in Columbia Pictures’ action thriller THE TAKING OF PELHAM 123, also starring Denzel Washington.
Photo credit: Sony/Stephen Vaughan

Updated for the late ’00s, Helgeland and Scott have altered a story that was originally merely concerned with increasing crime in major cities and made it more about our economic crisis. In the original, Garber was just an average guy, but this time he’s someone who may or may not have succumbed to the financial pressure of putting children through college and done something illegal. Even Ryder’s motivation has been tied to the recession.

The update is an interesting one in that Helgeland and Scott clearly recognize that subway train hostages don’t have the inherent power they did in the ’70s with the increase in urban crime and thought they needed to add another layer to the story.

The problem is that suspense is often more effective with less explanation. What’s scarier? A hijacker with no explainable motivation or one who likes to give monologues about why he’s taking innocent lives? And what’s more relatable? A dispatcher in the wrong place at the wrong time or someone knocked down a peg looking for redemption? They clearly thought that “The Taking of Pelham 123” was too simple a story for 2009 audiences but sometimes a simple story well-told is more effective.

Of course, Tony Scott doesn’t know the meaning of the word simple. Scott delivers such a stylized product that he’s simply the wrong fit for this material. His over-the-top style is great for action, but “The Taking of Pelham 123” is not an action movie. To be effective, it needs to be about tension and suspense, both of which are shockingly lacking in “The Taking of Pelham 123”. Each twist and turn is telegraphed from miles away.

Scott may be the wrong fit but Washington does everything he can to bring the train in on-time and most people who walk out of “The Taking of Pelham 123” satisfied will be so because of what Denzel brings to the piece. He’s genuine and believable in a film stuffed with too many bells, buzzers, and whistles. Travolta isn’t bad but he has some ridiculous “tough guy” dialogue that simply doesn’t work. Luis Guzman, James Gandolfini, and John Turturro are entertaining in small roles.

“The Taking of Pelham 123” may not be the white-knuckle thrill ride that it could have been in a different director’s hands but Washington and Travolta deliver interesting performances in a film that zips by without much boredom. Scott’s film never falls into the dull, intelligence-insulting category that often passes as summer entertainment, but it’s ultimately a more forgettable movie ride than it could have been in another director’s hands.

‘The Taking of Pelham 123’ stars Denzel Washington, John Travolta, James Gandolfini, John Turturro, and Luis Guzman. It was written by Brian Helgeland and directed by Tony Scott. It opens on June 12th, 2009. It is rated R.

By BRIAN TALLERICO
Content Director
HollywoodChicago.com
brian@hollywoodchicago.com

Robert De Niro, Director Barry Levinson Wade Through Hollywood’s Mud in ‘What Just Happened?’

HollywoodChicago.com — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:27:13 -0600

Rating: 4.0/5.0

CHICAGO – In his long and distinguished career, Robert De Niro has probably seen it all when it comes to Hollywood excesses and quagmires. Given that experience, he seems the perfect choice to portray an aging film producer and power broker whose influence is on the decline.

“What Just Happened?” teams De Niro with veteran director Barry Levinson (“Rain Man,” “Good Morning, Vietnam,” “The Natural”) in a provocative inside look at the current film business. De Niro is a producer named Ben whose latest film (starring Sean Penn) is in major trouble.

Bruce Willis in “What Just Happened?”.
Photo credit: Magnolia Pictures

His director (Michael Wincott) refuses to cut a scene that makes preview audiences squeamish.

Meanwhile, Ben’s other film (which is about to go into production) is also experiencing problems because star Bruce Willis (playing himself) is rejecting all the physical requirements necessary for the leading male role.

Ben is now a producer on the brink.

The drug-addled director requires constant reassurance, the studio executives are depending on his delivery of the latest Bruce Willis film and his estranged wife wants him in therapy so they can learn to live apart.

As an answer to the question of the movie’s title, it seems that everything can collapse to nothing in Tinseltown.

The film is based on a memoir by producer Art Linson (who also wrote the screenplay). Proving that truth is stranger than fiction, the farcical narrative delves into how egos essentially run Hollywood and how those egos are largely attached to dysfunctional human beings.

De Niro gives an organic and low-keyed performance. His Ben is a fighter who’s used to the problems and childish attitudes in his chosen profession. He just never counted on everything happening at once. There’s never the explosive De Niro we’re often used to.

Robert De Niro in “What Just Happened?”.
Photo credit: Magnolia Pictures

He’s just a man who’s calmly standing on the high ledge and wondering if he’s about to jump or be pushed. The supporting cast is hilarious and clearly relishes getting back at the industry with direct stabs. John Turturro is exceptional as Dick Bell (an agent who has more obstacles than answers).

RELATED IMAGE GALLERY
View our full “What Just Happened?” image gallery.

RELATED READING
Read more film reviews from critic Patrick McDonald.

Bruce Willis (playing a monstrous version of himself) shows off some great comic chops as he petulantly mouths off to every underling who dares to cross his “star”.

Can Willis get nominated for an Oscar for portraying Willis?

The only weakness is the redundancy of the conflict. The film clocks in at about 30 minutes too long (it’s 107 minutes in total) and has the same problems repeating themselves. “What Just Happened?” ends in a whimper – as real life tends to do – rather than a bang.

But for those who think Hollywood is a crumbling Babylon or (on the other side of the coin) a collaboration of “creative” souls, “What Just Happened?” is the ticket to the “show” of the business. Just add the six-buck tub of popcorn.

“What Just Happened?,” which is directed by Barry Levinson and features Robert De Niro, Stanley Tucci, John Turturro, Catherine Keener, Sean Penn, Robin Wright Penn, Michael Wincott and Bruce Willis, opened on Oct. 17, 2008.

By PATRICK McDONALD
Staff Writer
HollywoodChicago.com
pat@hollywoodchicago.com

Adam Sandler is White Ladies Man in Judd Apatow’s ‘You Don’t Mess With the Zohan’

HollywoodChicago.com — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:01:00 -0600

Rating: 3.5/5.0

CHICAGO – In the relatively anemic anthology of recent Adam Sandler flops, “You Don’t Mess with the Zohan” hangs above with comedic charm and a nonsensically amusing plotline. The story is divisively intermingled with racial and ethnic sensitivities between the Israelis and Palestinians.

At first, it even feels like a scribe sat down for a few weeks, slammed back a few brewskies and toked daily on the good ganja while attempting to ink a forcefully novel plot.

Emmanuelle Chriqui as Dalia in “You Don’t Mess with the Zohan”.
Photo credit: Columbia Pictures

Surprisingly, its idiosyncratic nature tends to work as you build esteem for the libidinous man Adam Sandler has transformed into.

While Sandler has played the full gamut of roles in recent memory, this time he’s actually a Thor who beckons women to his sexual mercy.

Sandler as Zohan is the white version of the legendary Tim Meadows character The Ladies Man from “Saturday Night Live” but with a thick Israeli accent.

Zohan is an Israeli counter-terrorist commando who fakes his own death in order to pursue his unlikely and embarrassing dream of becoming a hairstylist in New York.

To make matters more outlandishly canned, Zohan’s arch nemesis, Phantom (played by John Turturro), has a similarly humiliating reverie: selling shoes.

Lainie Kazan is welcome motherly relief – except when she’s revealed utterly nude from the rear and causes an eruptive audience gasp – and Rob Schneider, of course, can’t let an Adam Sandler flick make it to the big screen without joining him on it.

As well, you might have noticed Dave Matthews in the film, but I didn’t.

In “You Don’t Mess with the Zohan,” Adam Sandler stars as Zohan: an Israeli commando who fakes his own death in order to pursue his dream of becoming a hairstylist in New York.
Photo credit: Columbia Pictures

Hollywood hands Sandler a bone throughout the course of his reinvented, Jason Bourne-like ways and affords him the moves, styles and suave demeanor even Sandler in real life would envy.

Indeed, he epitomizes making love and not war and even isn’t shy about “making sticky” with women who had to be pushing 80. Whew.

The one woman he fancies the most and doesn’t return your stomach’s digestive matter is the beautiful and enormously unlikely love interest Sandler would never actually touch with a 100-foot stick: Emmanuelle Chriqui.

The Israeli Zohan begs the Palestinian siren to work for her in her New York hair salon.

RELATED IMAGE GALLERY
View our high-resolution “You Don’t Mess With the Zohan” image gallery.

RELATED READING
More film reviews from critic Adam Fendelman.

She quixotically accepts – because Sandler’s co-written script with the on-fire Judd Apatow told her to – despite his having zero experience and initially thinking Paul Mitchell himself would hire him.

Mitchell later is wasted with an unnecessary cameo where he absurdly calls Sandler to implore his employment.

Due to Zohan’s Hollywood-blessed ability to rack in the female clientele with his sexual deviance, Sandler denies what was once his ultimate fantasy in an ultimately scripted act of employer loyalty.

This script worked its magic best when you temporarily forgot it was trying ever-so delicately to roil you silly out of your seat but fell flat when its corniness unnaturally tried much too hard.

While one could respect the amped-up Hacky Sacking, Hacky Sacking a live and meowing cat? Now come on. That’s even more cruel than squirrel fishing.

“You Don’t Mess With the Zohan” opened everywhere on June 6, 2008.

By ADAM FENDELMAN
Editor-in-Chief
HollywoodChicago.com
adam@hollywoodchicago.com