Guy Pearce

‘Iron Man 3’ Starts Summer with a Mechanized Bang

BrianTT — Thu, 02 May 2013 10:39:05 -0400

Rating: 4.0/5.0

CHICAGO – Critics and viewers fell in rapturous adoration of the legend of The Dark Knight when Christopher Nolan and his team took the risk of making character-driven superhero movies. To kick off the second phase of the Marvel Universe of films with this weekend’s “Iron Man 3,” Shane Black and the team behind this guaranteed blockbuster have done the same – presenting us with the most human Marvel flick since “Spider-Man 2.” Also, the best in this series and one of the best Marvel films overall. The quick wit and crisp pacing brought to the Marvel Universe by Joss Whedon remains intact despite a new director (Shane Black). Let’s hope the trend continues through the “Thor” and “Captain America” sequels upcoming.

How character-driven is the start of “Marvel 2.0”? “Iron Man 3” is a comic book movie about PTSD. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr., giving his best performance since “Tropic Thunder”) is still dealing with the trauma inflicted by what happened in New York in “The Avengers” (and I love the continuity from that beloved film instead of just pretending that it didn’t happen as comic book movies so often used to do). He’s suffering anxiety attacks and spends most days in his lab trying to perfect the newest version of his Iron Man suit, one that comes when called and forms to Tony’s body like magnets thrown at a fridge. With all business mountains climbed and his alcoholic, philandering past behind him, Stark’s main love in life is pure – Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), his guide and inspiration. Like a lot of great superhero flicks, “Iron Man 3” will find our hero’s relationship with his gal tested but Black and co-writer Drew Pearce find a way to turn storytelling expectations on their head at every turn, providing the narrative twists that have been missing from this franchise to date.

Iron Man 3
Photo credit: Disney

A vaguely Osama-esque villain looms in the international consciousness as The Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) takes responsibility for a series of explosions around the world. As he gets closer and closer to his end game, President Ellis (William Sadler) calls on Colonel James Rhodes aka War Machine aka Iron Patriot (Don Cheadle) to help keep the country safe. When a scientist from Tony and Pepper’s past named Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce) appears in their office with a heavy named Savin (James Badge Dale) by his side, it becomes clear rather quickly that Killian has a connection to the Mandarin. Killian has developed a technology that allows the body to regenerate, heal, and essentially become invincible. Small problem – it’s not exactly stable. Working with another figure from Tony’s past, a beautiful scientist named Maya Hansen (Rebecca Hall), Killian has discovered something that could change the future and decided to use it for personal gain.

If it sounds like a dull plot, don’t worry. First, Kingsley and Pearce make an incredibly engaging team of bad guys, something that’s been noticeably missing from the “Iron Man” movies. For the first time in this franchise, it feels like there’s a notable threat to not just Stark but the world which he inhabits. Most of the first “Iron Man” was devoid of a serious villain as it was origin story and the second film simply dropped the ball in that department (Mickey Rourke on the race track was more bizarre than terrifying). There’s a sense of danger here that Black brings to the piece that most Marvel movies have lacked. He knows how to turn the intensity knob in just the right way, particularly in the action choreography of the final act. There’s a scene that will heretofore be referred to as “Barrel of Monkeys” that may be the best single action scene in a Marvel film. It’s not only perfectly staged and executed but indicative of the hero model of this universe in its structure. A hero doesn’t just perform the physical acts we cannot, he approaches a challenge from a way that the villain has not conceived, thereby overcoming him.

Iron Man 3
Photo credit: Disney

“Iron Man 3” pulses in ways that the other two movies simply did not. Don’t get me wrong. I liked the first film but it was carried on the strength of its remarkably charismatic star. Now, that charisma remains, and has actually deepened through actual character development and romance, but we also have villains that matter, action that feels intense, and supporting characters that crackle right along with their lead. Small roles, like those occupied by Hall, Dale, the always-great Cheadle, and a charming young performance from Ty Simpkins as a kid who befriend and helps his hero in a moment of need, really connect. The Simpkins character is another one who works not only as a piece of blockbuster entertainment but thematically within this world. The kids who love Iron Man don’t just want to be him, they want to help him. He is a role model more than the traditional role for a caped crusader – the icon.

“Iron Man 3” isn’t perfect. It takes too long to get going, hits a few too many beats repeatedly, and could have been trimmed by 10-15 minutes. However, there was never an entire sequence, character development, or plot twist that felt wrong (as there has been in every other non-“Avengers” movie). And, most enjoyably, the movie takes narrative twists that you don’t see coming (most Marvel movies have been stunningly predictable). Black, Pearce, and the team chosen to kick off the post-“Avengers” world have succeeded by refusing to play it completely safe, giving fans a film that fits within the universe they know but also deepens it and makes it more rewarding. The most remarkable thing about “Iron Man 3” may be how it makes me more excited for “Captain America 2” and “Thor 2.” That’s downright heroic.

“Iron Man 3” stars Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce, Rebecca Hall, Jon Favreau, Ben Kingsley, James Badge Dale, and the voice of Paul Bettany. It was written by Drew Pearce and Shane Black and directed by Black. It opens on May 3, 2013 and is rated PG-13.

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

Tom Hardy Leads Great Cast in Disappointing ‘Lawless’

BrianTT — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 11:35:16 -0400

Rating: 1.5/5.0

CHICAGO – John Hillcoat’s “Lawless,” based on Matt Bondurant’s “The Wettest County in the World,” is one of the most high profile disappointments of 2012, a film with an amazing cast that suffocates under the weight of an inconsistent script, a boring lead, and a complete lack of narrative drive. Who would have ever guessed that a movie with so many charismatic actors and actresses could ever be so shockingly dull? It’s nearly an accomplishment.

Tom Hardy, Gary Oldman, Guy Pearce, Jessica Chastain, Mia Wasikowska – any one of these wonderful actors typically makes a film better and one could easily assume that having all five of them in one ensemble would lead to dramatic gold. And yet even this level of acting talent can’t save “Lawless.” None of them do anything particularly wrong (although Pearce makes some odd choices) but they can’t save a haphazard script that doesn’t understand basic requirements of storytelling such as presenting the viewer with consistent characters instead of mere cliché. We’ve seen “Lawless” done before and done significantly better. Even with the A-list cast, it’s little more than forgettable.

Lawless
Photo credit: The Weinstein Company

It’s 1931 in Franklin County, Virginia, known in some circles as “The Wettest County in the World” due to its abundance of illegal alcohol operations at the height of Prohibition. Crooked cops are paid to look the other way as families of bootleggers keep their families fed by getting other ones drunk. An important figurehead of this community is Forrest Bondurant (a mumbling-but-charismatic Tom Hardy), who rises to moonshine prominence with his brothers – Howard (Jason Clarke) and Jack (Shia LaBeouf). Jack may seem the least interesting of the three as he’s the youngest and so the one often in need of rescue but he’s made the narrator here in one of many storytelling mistakes we’ll get to later.

Jack works to gain the respect of his older brothers and become as important a Bondurant as his more famous siblings. He works with a friend named Cricket (Dane DeHaan) who might as well be wearing a “Star Trek” red shirt and be named “Inevitable Victim” and he woos a local church-going girl named Bertha (Mia Wasikowska). While Jack is coming-of-age, times are getting more dangerous in Franklin County thanks to the arrival of Special Deputy Charley Rakes (Guy Pearce), a unique character sent from Chicago to clean things up. Meanwhile, notorious gangster Floyd Banner (Gary Oldman) crosses paths with the Bondurants and Forrest falls in love with the lovely new barmaid Maggie (Jessica Chastain).

Lawless
Photo credit: The Weinstein Company

If it sounds like a cluttered, inconsistent screenplay, you have no idea just how unfocused this mess can be. First, it never should have been Jack’s story. Forrest is a more interesting character by far or there should have been an attempt to tell all three brother’s stories. Instead, we see the activity through the least interesting character in the action. It’s unclear if Nick Cave’s script got muddled when a star like LaBeouf was cast as the lead but it feels like his work is being pulled between the ensemble piece that it should have been and a star vehicle for the “Transformers” star.

Even after getting past the misguided focus in terms of character, “Lawless” is a mess on a plot level as well. Hillcoat’s film jumps around from love scenes to local politics to bloody shoot-outs and there are times where it feels like you’re watching a much longer film with missing scenes. Gary Oldman pops up, chews some scenery, and disappears for most of the movie. LaBeouf and Wasikowska have absolutely no chemistry as potential suitors (but it’s hard to blame the actors because nearly everything in “Lawless” feels surface level) in poorly written courting scenes. And we never get to know poor Howard, a brother who seems to be little more than set dressing. Overall, there’s no heat, no passion, no honest danger and that’s even with typically scathing actors like Hardy and Chastain doing their absolute best (the only worthwhile scenes in the movie involve one or the both of them…it’s disaster when left to LaBeouf.)

To be fair, the production values in “Lawless” are strong. The film looks good in terms of costume design, art direction, etc. The fatal flaw here has nothing to with the technical elements. It’s much simpler than that – there’s just no reason to care. It’s as if no one asked the important questions about “Lawless” – What story are we trying to tell? Why should we care about the Bondurant family? Whose story is this? By never digging into the true story of the Bondurants, John Hillcoat never found the depth on a character level that was simply required for his film to work. “Lawless” is remarkable proof that you can have the most notable cast of the year but it means nothing if you don’t give them something notable to do.

“Lawless” stars Tom Hardy, Shia LaBeouf, Jason Clarke, Guy Pearce, Jessica Chastain, Mia Wasikowska, and Dane DeHaan. It was written by Nick Cave and directed by John Hillcoat. It is rated R and opens on August 29, 2012.

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

Fascinating Journey to ‘Prometheus’ Makes For Bumpy Ride

BrianTT — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:39:20 -0400

Rating: 4.0/5.0

CHICAGO – Ridley Scott’s “Prometheus” rides a wave of expectation, anticipation, hype, and an already-building backlash into theaters this weekend and all I have to say is something that most critics hesitate to do – you need to see this for yourself and make up your own mind. Is it the perfect blend of adult, intellectual science fiction and summer action that I was hoping for at the beginning of the season? No, it’s a flawed film. But not only does the film do enough right to warrant a recommendation, even where it goes wrong is in ways that can stimulate thought and provoke interesting conversation. The film’s not even out and I’ve already discussed it more than any other released this year. When’s the last time you could say that about a summer blockbuster? Isn’t that reason alone to see it?

Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) believe that a series of cave paintings around the world from vastly different civilizations point to the same solar system and possibly to man’s creator. At its very core, “Prometheus” is a film about going to meet God or whatever version of the divine deity in which you believe. Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce) finances the long journey and a crew is assembled.

Prometheus
Photo credit: Fox Pictures

Flash forward to a few years later as the human team lies in stasis on the interplanetary journey and android David (Michael Fassbender) passes the time playing basketball and watching Peter O’Toole movies to mimic his mannerisms. He also watches Elizabeth’s dreams. The team reaches their destination and their leader, Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron), is the first to wake from deep sleep. Cold, calculated, and possibly even an android herself, Vickers is there to keep everyone on task.

Just what is that task? Well, here’s where the narrative gets muddled and where a critic has a tough time continuing without something that could be considered a spoiler by the overly sensitive. The crew of the Prometheus reaches its destination to find what is clearly a structure created by a sentient being. Is it the being that created man? Is that being still alive? Is something else alive as well? Why haven’t they made contact before? A crew investigates, things get crazy, and plot points start flying around like a mid-third season episode of “Lost.”

The reference to the ABC show is not unwarranted as that program’s creator Damon Lindelof co-wrote “Prometheus” (with Jon Spaihts) and the film definitely has his fingerprints on it as someone more interested in questions than their answers. Themes are raised and then discarded. Characters respond to situations in ways that feel far more necessary for the plot than the way anyone would naturally respond. A character returns seemingly just for a random action sequence with no real meaning. Big picture questions are raised and then seemingly forgotten. Is it all a thematic piece designed to raise discussion points instead of giving answers? More “2001” or “Solaris” than what audiences might expect? Or is it lazy writing? This is the core of the debate about “Prometheus” and it will get heated in coffee shops and bars for weeks and months to come.

Prometheus
Photo credit: Fox Pictures

If none of this sounds like “Alien,” you’re right. The film bears very little resemblance to the work to which it is, sorry if this is a spoiler, a very direct prequel. Whereas that film was about a creature and the people who fought it, it is not coincidental that this film is named after a ship and a Greek God. The people of “Prometheus” get lost in the storytelling and that’s the film’s biggest flaw. There’s no Ripley. The protagonist, Rapace’s poorly-drawn (and poorly-performed) Shaw, is the film’s fourth or fifth most interesting character. And I think most of the people who are turned off by “Prometheus” will be so because of its lack of humanity. It’s a movie David, Ash, and Bishop would love.

The cold, android feel of “Prometheus” is amplified by the fact that Fassbender gives easily the most interesting performance in the film. He’s perfect as an android who seemingly wants to help prove that, like an android, man has a creator. What would that say about the chain of humanity and what would it say about androids? Fassbender completely embraces this interesting thematic material and delivers in every way. I imagine even people that hate “Prometheus” won’t be able to find fault in what one of our best working actors does in the film. Theron is very good but under-utilized and Elba finally shows a bit of that small screen charisma that he’s been tough to translate to the big one.

As flawless as Fassbender’s performance is every element of the design of Scott’s meticulously crafted film. “Prometheus” looks absolutely amazing. Cinematographer Darius Wolski (“Dark City,” “Sweeney Todd”) does an award-worthy job of finding the shadows and light on the other end of the universe. His cinematography has a beautiful, majestic tone, the polar opposite of “Alien,” but something that works perfectly here. The art direction, the score, the editing – it’s all of a consistent vision and elevates the film to one that is arguably worth seeing just for its technical accomplishments (and, of course, Ridley Scott deserves credit for directing these elements to a coherent whole). It’s the best looking film so far this season (and arguably this year).

Prometheus
Photo credit: Fox Pictures

There was one press screening of “Prometheus” here in Chicago and I really wish I had the chance to see it again before passing judgment. It is the kind of film that inspires heated debates (I’ve already been in a few) and I think it will play very differently a second time, away from expectation and hype. It’s not a perfect film as too many of the themes with which Lindelof and Spaihts are playing feel half-baked and the overall film is missing that grit, that humanity that would have made it more relatable. However, I think time and repeated viewing may change my opinion of “Prometheus”…for better or worse.

I’ll leave you with a few quotes that sound like they could be pulled from this review:

“There is very little involvement with the characters themselves…” – Variety

“ An overblown B-movie… technically impressive but awfully portentous and as difficult to sit through as a Black Mass sung in Latin.” – The L.A. Herald Examiner

“ The roles might have been written by a computer.” – The New York Times

Every one of those quotes is about “Alien” and was written back in 1979. Whether or not time will be as kind to “Prometheus” is open for debate but it’s a conversation of which you’re going to want to be a part. Drown out the hype, ignore the backlash, and decide for yourself.

“Prometheus” stars Noomi Rapace, Logan Marshall-Green, Michael Fassbender, Charlize Theron, Idris Elba, and Guy Pearce. It was written by Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof and directed by Ridley Scott. It opens on June 8, 2012.

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

Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace in Annoying, Awful ‘Lockout’

BrianTT — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 14:01:43 -0400

Rating: 1.0/5.0

CHICAGO – The annoying and boring “Lockout” is a pile of aggressive junk masquerading as a good time. Some critics and viewers will pretend that this is a “fun B-movie” just because it has a few over-the-top sequences (that look completely cartoonish), an absolutely ridiculous premise, and a scenery-chewing performance from the great Guy Pearce. Don’t believe them. They’re making excuses for a movie that’s totally bereft of creative storytelling and has a screenplay that most straight-to-video directors would say needs a rewrite.

“Lockout” starts promisingly in concept and the casting of its leading man. Lest you think I’m some pretentious film critic who can’t get into a well-made B-movie, the idea of an “Escape From New York” in space with the underrated Guy Pearce in the Snake Plissken role seemed like a slam dunk. How do you screw that up? Watch “Lockout” and find out.

Lockout
Photo credit: Open Road

Honestly, “Lockout” never again finds the fun of its opening credits (it’s all downhill), as our tough guy hero Snow (Pearce) is introduced in a clever way – delivering barbs between punches in an interrogation room. Set in a cardboard-looking 2079, Snow has been captured by a slimy government agent named Langral (Peter Stormare) who is interrogating him with the help of another agent named Shaw (Lennie James). It turns out that Snow was just involved in a shootout involving government secrets being transferred in a metal briefcase. Someone was killed, a chase that resembled a video game cut scene ensued, there were a lot of explosions, and the case was hidden thanks to the help of a Snow compatriot named Mace (Tim Plester). Where’s the case? Did Snow kill his contact?

Meanwhile, the President’s daughter, Emilie Warnock (Maggie Grace) is visiting the landmark space prison M.S. One, a block of crazy convicts floating above Earth. Most of the convicts have been placed in a frozen state and Warnock is convinced that the rumors that they’re being experimented on are true. She goes there on a humanitarian mission. It doesn’t go well. Before you can say, it’s probably not a good idea to house unstable people in such an unstable environment (we later learn that there’s ONE guy on board who can basically keep the thing in orbit), the prisoners have escaped and taken Warnock hostage, led By Alex (Vincent Regan) and his crazy brother Hydell (Joseph Gilgun). For reasons that never really make sense, Snow is chosen as the one who will go to space and save her (and maybe even get the mysterious case since Mace has been quickly shuttled to the prison). Apparently, it’s about as easy to get back and forth to the prison as taking the red line downtown.

Lockout
Photo credit: Open Road

Not a bad set-up, right? A prison full of madmen holding a humanitarian innocent hostage and the one tough guy who can get her back. Sign me up. Which is what makes it all the more baffling as “Lockout” goes along that it ended up so dull, boring, and bereft of personality. It’s not Guy Pearce’s fault. He’s trying his damnedest to make Snow interesting and he’s EASILY the best thing about the movie. The problem is that the truly horrendous script by Stephen St. Leger & James Mather & Luc Besson gives him less and less character as the film goes along. Rarely have I cared less about the outcome of a major action film. And the final action scene, which involves the most ridiculous sky jump in movie history (yes, more than “Point Break”) is so lazily produced, anti-climactic, and stupid that one feels like the people who made the movie actually got less interested as it went along as well. Oh, well, we have to end this thing, don’t we?

“Lockout” is proof that concept and casting are not enough without execution. Guy Pearce rules. He’s consistently one of our most interesting actors in big parts (“Memento,” “The Proposition,” “Mildred Pierce”) and small (“The King’s Speech,” “The Hurt Locker”). It would be great to see him in a major action success. He’s better than “Lockout” ever deserved. And the fact is that if someone lesser had gotten the part, this junk would never even have made it to theaters. It reeks of straight-to-video in production value, supporting cast, and storytelling. Swap out Guy Pearce for Wesley Snipes and the exact same movie is premiering on Netflix.

Perhaps that’s what makes me angrier about “Lockout” than most bad movies. It should have worked (although making it PG-13 instead of R was a huge mistake as it drains the piece of most of its potential tension by neutralizing any actual danger). Great idea, great lead actor – I was with it for the first act. And then it starts to dawn on you that it’s just not going anywhere creative. The action, the characters, the dialogue – none of it entertains. It’s boring. And it takes a special skill to make a film about a prison riot in outer space this boring. In that sense, “Lockout” is actually quite an accomplishment. But only in that sense.

“Lockout” stars Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Peter Stormare, Lennie James, Joseph Gilgun, and Vincent Regan. It was directed by James Mather & Stephen St. Leger. It is rated PG-13 and opens on April 13, 2012.

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

Nicolas Cage, Guy Pearce Find Boredom While They’re ‘Seeking Justice’

BrianTT — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:25:39 -0400

Rating: 1.5/5.0

CHICAGO – “Seeking Justice” must have been such a juicy proposition on paper. Director Roger Donaldson is coming off his most interesting film in years (“The Bank Job”), Nicolas Cage is overdue for a quality drama, Guy Pearce is one of our most interesting actors, and the supporting cast includes a number of interesting actors with recent TV hits – Jennifer Carpenter (“Dexter”), Harold Perrineau Jr. (“Lost”), and January Jones (“Mad Men”). The only thing you’ll be wondering during this inert alleged thriller is where it all went wrong.

The premise of “Seeking Justice” is actually a decent one for this increasingly dangerous world. A man’s wife is raped. Another man comes to him and tells him that he can give him the justice he seeks. He claims to be the leader of a group of vigilantes and he wants to help, asking only a future favor in exchange. It’s a classic Faustian conundrum for the favor is unclear and will almost certainly be at a greater cost than the man first considers. It’s a solid pitch for a thriller and the one that probably got “Seeking Justice” made. It’s where “Justice” goes from there and how incredibly boring the final script ended up that kills all of the potential for thrills in this dull affair.

Seeking Justice
Photo credit: Anchor Bay

The man is Will Gerard (Nicholas Cage), the wife is named Laura (January Jones), and the vengeance specialist is a mysterious fellow named Simon (Guy Pearce). She’s brutally assaulted and, as she lies in her hospital bed, a deal for revenge is offered in the waiting room. How many men would take it? Your wife lies in pain after being raped and her attacker could get what he deserves while keeping your hands clean? All that’s asked is a favor somewhere down the road? In one of MANY flaws in Robert Tannen’s screenplay, we see the rapist being killed by another man who makes clear that he’s a former “client” of Simon. In other words, we now know that it’s only a matter of time before Will becomes the executor for someone else seeking justice.

Before any tension can build or any realism between the trauma that should be haunting Will and Laura, Simon returns with a mark for our boring hero. He’s tells Will that he’s a pedophile and that Will has to do what needs to be done. Our protagonist refuses. He’s not a killer. But denial is not an option. Simon and his crew of thugs continue to pressure Will, even threatening his wife. What is Will going to do? How can he get out of this? Or will he have to kill because he sought justice?

“Seeking Justice” gets far more complicated from here but somehow still never develops the tension it needs. Even Cage doesn’t get to chew scenery like he has so expertly in recent junk like “Trespass.” He looks bored half the time. But it’s more the fault of Tannen and Donaldson, who can’t find the tension in this piece. And Jones is as ineffective an actress as there is working in major films today. She’s just awful here, never once coming off as believable. Carpenter and Perrineau are alright in incredibly limited roles but they’re not around to make an impact. It’s Cage’s film – he’s in nearly every scene – and the movie only slightly comes to life at all when he’s interacting with Pearce, a great actor even in dreck like this.

Seeking Justice
Photo credit: Anchor Bay

And make no mistake, this is dreck. It’s just boring. Donaldson and Tannen set the film in New Orleans but don’t know how to use the city well – hitting major marks like Bourbon Street and the Superdome like tourists but not turning it into the character it could have been (and ending, of all places, in an abandoned mall). And they completely fumble the pace. When the movie needs to be turning up the tension in the middle act, it turns into an attempt at a ‘70s thriller – a film in which a man investigates a conspiracy when he really should just be running for his life and trying to protect his wife. And the final act twist is STUPID.

A talented cast, a Faustian concept, a great location – “Seeking Justice” is just a weird failure. Maybe Nicolas Cage is cursed. (“Trespass” also had a talented cast and strong concept but ended up even less effective than this nearly-straight-to-DVD movie.) Cage long ago became a target of ridicule because of his over-acting. At least in those films that became YouTube fodder, we had some scenery chewing to look forward to. At that time, most critics lamented how they missed the serious Nicolas Cage. I’m starting to miss the wacky one.

“Seeking Justice” stars Nicolas Cage, January Jones, Guy Pearce, Harold Perrineau Jr., and Jennifer Carpenter. It was written by Robert Tannen and directed by Roger Donaldson. It was released on March 16th, 2012 and is rated R.

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

Ineffective ‘Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark’ From Producer Guillermo Del Toro

BrianTT — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 10:03:11 -0400

Rating: 2.5/5.0

CHICAGO – Echoing elements of masterful works by Producer Guillermo Del Toro (most notably “The Devil’s Backbone,” “Pan’s Labyrinth”), “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” is an incredibly frustrating remake, a film that reminds one of scary movies instead of actually producing scares itself. There are gothic elements that work, but the story simply isn’t strong enough to support a remake and lackluster direction fails to iron out the flaws in this potential horror hit.

Most haunted house films suffer from a common flaw – why the Hell won’t they just leave the house? “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” may be the most egregious offender of this regular problem ever. The film is constantly shattering suspension of disbelief, which prevents it from ever becoming honestly scary. When everyone in the audience would merely turn and run from the fictional situation at hand, it stops the fictional fear cold. “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” is a story about a child being tormented by violent creatures. After increasingly terrifying attacks, the idea that she would spend another minute (much less actually SLEEP) in the house where these creatures live is just too much to take. “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” is illogical on every level and that lack of logic also leads to a lack of honest scares.

Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark
Photo credit: Miramax Films

Much like “Pan’s,” “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” is another tale of a young girl arriving at a history-filled estate with a stepparent to add to the drama inherent in something new. The best elements of Del Toro and Matthew Robbins’ screenplay play off classic fairy tale elements – the creatures under the bed, the evil stepmother, the haunted house. These elements are woven around the story of a smart, precocious girl (Bailee Madison), her often-preoccupied father (Guy Pearce), and her new stepmother (Katie Holmes). The trio moves into an old estate with the intention of renovating it for the cover of Architectural Digest.

Of course, it’s not long before our heroine is exploring the previously-sealed basement and hearing the whispering voices of something asking her to come and play. Rather than run fleeing, the lonely girl investigates and sets free dozens of ugly little beasts who proceed to terrorize her. Del Toro and Robbins develop a somewhat-nifty mythology around these creatures (that stepmom has to leave the house to learn at the most inopportune time) as they are part Tooth Fairy, part Gremlin, and part demon. They want your children’s teeth but they can’t come into the light. A Polaroid camera serves as a nifty weapon in the final act.

Sorta. Debut director Troy Nixey doesn’t have the eye for a challenging piece like “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark.” When the Polaroid is introduced, savvy viewers naturally assume that it will lead to at least one strong visual – a creature of the darkness caught in the flash of the bulb. It does happen on a plot level but isn’t accompanied by a scary, memorable visual. In fact, the piece is almost entirely devoid of memorable visuals save for perhaps a few shadows rising up shower curtains in a scene so traumatic that the fact that the rest of the film doesn’t consist of the poor terrorized girl merely screaming and crying is purely ridiculous. Horror needs to work as visual storytelling and “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” isn’t visually memorable.

Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark
Photo credit: Miramax Films

And it isn’t thematically intriguing either. To be blunt, I was never invested in these characters to the point where I was overly concerned what happened to them. Their behavior feels so scripted at every turn that they are nothing more than devices – they are as real as the creatures who crawl from the Earth to steal their teeth.

To be fair, Pearce and Holmes find some nice moments – typically the ones away from the horror arc of the film. The story of a younger stepmother trying to get closer to her hesitant stepdaughter is actually more interesting than the horror one. When mom’s dress is found in tatters (one assumes the creatures were bored waiting for their prey to go to bed and needed something to do), the ensuing scenes of domestic turmoil are far more interesting than the action of the piece. Pearce is one of our best working actors and Holmes has long been underrated. One hopes she finds a part to prove that again soon.

Ultimately, “Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” is far from a disaster. Del Toro is too talented a filmmaker even when he’s not directing to let the work fall completely on its face. And, oddly, it feels like a love letter to the original, a widely-berated TV movie that Del Toro has claimed helped spawn his love for horror. The remake is unlikely to do the same for future generations of filmmakers.

“Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark” stars Bailee Madison, Katie Holmes, and Guy Pearce. It was written by Guillermo Del Toro and Matthew Robbins and directed by Troy Nixey. It opens nationwide on August 26th, 2011.

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

Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush Star in Confident ‘The King’s Speech’

BrianTT — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 10:08:55 -0500

Rating: 3.5/5.0

CHICAGO – Tom Hooper’s “The King’s Speech” has been barreling through the awards season with a number of significant nominations, including six from the Chicago Film Critics Association just today. I understand why. The film does nothing wrong. It features confident production values and good performances but never reaches the peak of excellence for this critic. “The King’s Speech” is a good film that’s been inflated by some viewers to great even if it doesn’t quite deserve the throne.

The words I think of in conjunction with “The King’s Speech” are all relatively positive. It’s a nice film. It’s well-made. And its ensemble is flawless. At the same time, it’s nothing that you have not seen before. It’s not very ambitious. And it’s surprisingly cold — not the kind of film that sticks in the memory, especially in a season with so many strong contenders for your favorite films of 2010. The film is comparable to a nicely-grilled piece of chicken. It’s good and there’s nothing notably wrong with it but you’ve tasted it before and won’t truly cherish the meal as time goes by.

The King’s Speech
Photo credit: The Weinstein Company

The best thing about “The King’s Speech” is the likely Oscar-winning performance by Colin Firth, who stars as Prince Albert, Duke of York, the eventual King George VI, a man we meet when he’s still Prince (to Michael Gambon’s King) and who assumes that the royal throne will be occupied by his brother (Guy Pearce). Despite being a few seats from his reign, ‘Bertie’ still maintains an important enough role in royal society that his stuttering has made him something of a joke. He’s seen a number of doctors to try to cure his speech impediment but the lifelong malady continues to rule his existence.

Prince Albert’s wife Elizabeth (a wonderfully understated Helena Bonham-Carter) finds an aspiring actor who also happens to be an eccentric speech therapist named Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) and the doctor and the future King begin an unusual relationship. Lionel is undettered by Albert’s royal title and refuses to coddle his sometimes-immature behavior. He confronts Bertie and teaches him to stand up for himself and speak.

It’s obviously a nice story. And Firth, Rush, and Carter (along with Pearce, Gambon, Derek Jacobi, and Timothy Spall in smaller roles) all deliver nice performances in it. In particular, Firth sells the complexities of what it must have been like to be a man forced by lineage into a position of power who never really felt comfortable being there. As the war approaches and it becomes clearer that the country is going to need a confident speaker to guide them through some dark times, the burden of the responsibility both weighs on Albert and pulls him up to do what needs to be done. Firth sells these complex scenes perfectly. Rush and Carter are nice balances but the film belongs to Firth.

The King’s Speech
Photo credit: The Weinstein Company

Perhaps it’s because we’ve come through a year with such remarkably ambitious films as David Fincher’s “The Social Network,” Darren Aronofsky’s “Black Swan,” and Christopher Nolan’s “Inception” that I’m somewhat non-plussed by elements of “The King’s Speech” but Hooper’s film simply isn’t creative or original enough to stand as one of my best of the year. Most of us have read books that we enjoyed but we put down and never thought about again. “The King’s Speech” is the equivalent.

“The King’s Speech,” still a likely multiple Oscar nominee despite a bit of air being leaked out of its campaign by the Fincher juggernaut, is absolutely worth seeing, particularly for the performances. And it’s somewhat rare to see a movie that does nothing notably wrong, but merely doing nothing wrong is not the same thing as doing something great. We should demand more from the movies that have been knighted as the most artistically important of the year.

‘The King’s Speech’ stars Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, Helena Bonham Carter, Timothy Spall, Michael Gambon, Guy Pearce, and Derek Jacobi. It was written by David Seidler and directed by Tom Hooper. It opens in Chicago on December 17th, 2010. It is rated R and runs 118 minutes.

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

Guy Pearce Delves Into Corruption in Riveting 'Animal Kingdom'

PatrickMcD — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 07:58:14 -0400

Rating: 4.0/5.0

CHICAGO – The thin line between anarchy and social peace is shriveling into a microscopic blur as sentencing and incarceration become increasingly less effective as a deterrent. The human side of this perspective is explored with an artistic elegance, featuring Guy Pearce in writer/director David Michôd’s “Animal Kingdom.”

Set in the Melbourne (Australia) criminal underworld and the environments of the rival law enforcement, the Kingdom involves “Pope” Cody (Ben Mendelsohn), a armed robber in exile because of a betrayal involving corrupt cops. His gang is also in a downslide, as his main business partner Baz (Joel Edgerton) wants out, and his brothers Craig (Sullivan Stapleton) and Darren (Luke Ford) are muddling through with other pursuits.

To this coterie comes a 19 year old nephew, nicknamed “J” (James Frencheville), who comes to live with the family after his mother dies. He is immediately put under the wing of the family’s matriarch, Janine “Smurf” Cody (Jacki Weaver). Smurf is more than a “smother mother,” she literally holds the family together through sheer will and bizarre passive aggression.

James Frecheville as ‘J’ Cody and Guy Pearce as Det. Leckie in ‘Animal Kingdom’
Photo Credit: Tony Mott for © Sony Pictures Classic

To capture and prosecute the Pope, Melbourne Detective Nathan Leckie (Guy Pearce) infiltrates the family through J. The police officer offers the boy witness protection, after a caper goes wrong and other cops are killed. Pope begins to threaten family members, including J’s girlfriend (Laura Wheelwright). While Leckie tries to hold J on the law and order side of his world, his grandmother, uncles and their criminal ties seek to exploit him.

This is a crazy quilt of dysfunctional family dynamics, led by a “mother” role that joins the great ones of cinema history. Jacki Weaver fashions the Smurf character as a master manipulator, not only of her own relations but that of the nasty police, legal system and mass media. It is truly a performance to behold, made more increasingly uncomfortable as each of her infiltrative master strokes are revealed. Weaver understands the character completely, and adds a strange allure to the persona that shakes the foundation of motherhood to the core.

David Michôd’s script is a fascinating combination of heroic obsession – Guy Pearce as Detective Leckie – and well-intentioned actions crushed by the wrong decisions. The cops and robbers are equal opportunity corrupters, as the lure of money and power turn law enforcers towards the criminal elements and turns the robbers into viable “citizens’ who hide behind their well-paid legal representatives. In a sense this is a microcosm of society, in which behind every fortune is a great crime, and subsequently lawyers on retainers to prevent that crime from being discovered.

Guy Pearce, so memorable in his roles in “L.A. Confidential,” “Memento” and “The Hurt Locker” seems to be making a transition as Leckie. He isn’t as facially angular in this middle age role and imbues Leckie with a world weary desperation. His pursuit borders on the excessive, in his intent to bring the Cody family down. He tries everything with J to garner his confidence, but his body language and state-of-being seems to understand that his actions are futile. He is a heroic anti-hero, willing to expose his humanity within a dark and ugly circumstance.

Dear Old Mom: Sullivan Stapleton as Craig Cody and Jacki Weaver as Janine ‘Smurf’ Cody in ‘Animal Kingdom’
Photo Credit: John Tsiavis for © Sony Pictures Classic

All the character development is top drawer, especially Ben Mendelsohn as Pope Cody. His role interpretations create chilling mistrust from his first appearance on. James Frecheville as J projects innocence and moral frigidity at the same time, hoping to indulge in the criminality while selfishly playing footsie with the law. The maturity of playing out this dilemma belie the actor’s youth. There is a great scene with one of his uncles after he doesn’t wash his hands in the bathroom. He is dressed down like a boy, and has the sheepish expression of one who doesn’t know any better. This same expression comes through when he is asked to partake in a crime.

And speaking of great scenes, there is another in a grocery store encounter between Leckie and Mother Smurf. They have played the game to a draw at that point, and the tension between them is palpable. Michôd’s script lets Jackie Weaver use her motherly instincts to passionate perfection and the cop/mother exchange blazes like fireworks shot off all at once.

The title Animal Kingdom refers to the law of the jungle. The innocents are eaten and the predators feast. In an increasingly complex societal structure, as illustrated in the film, it is the predators that keep coming back and asking for more, while the rest of society blithely accepts whatever scraps are left behind.

”Animal Kingdom” continues its limited release nationwide in Chicago on August 20th. Check local listings for show times and locations. Featuring Guy Pearce, Ben Mendelsohn, Joel Edgerton, Laura Wheelwright, Luke Ford, James Frecheville and Jacki Weaver. Written and Directed by David Michôd. Click here for the HollywoodChicago.com interview of David Michôd.

YOU MIGHT LIKE
Rent out the complete Guy Pearce back catalogue today at LOVEFiLM. Head over to LOVEFiLM to see all the latest DVD releases and old classics.

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

Riveting, Must-See ‘The Hurt Locker’ is Flawless Filmmaking

BrianTT — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:26:38 -0400

Rating: 5.0/5.0

CHICAGO – Filmmaking simply doesn’t get much more riveting than Kathryn Bigelow’s incredible “The Hurt Locker,” a cinematic experience unlike any other that you will have this year. Building and releasing tension better than her peers have in a long time, Bigelow has made not only the best Iraq War movie to date but the best film of 2009 at just over the halfway point.

With “The Hurt Locker,” Bigelow takes viewers to the other side of the world to bring into relatable perspective a daily grind that most of us couldn’t even imagine. The leads in “The Hurt Locker” are soldiers in Iraq who diffuse bombs for a living, often in range of sniper fire and often with materials and equipment tragically unable to protect them should something go wrong.

(Left to right) Jeremy Renner and Anthony Mackie star in The Hurt Locker.
Photo credit: Jonathan Olley

“The Hurt Locker” is a visceral, daring, adrenalin-pumping experience that brings a profession that would seem nearly impossible to identify with into relatable, genuine context. It could be your friend, your son, your neighbor, or even you thrown into the nightmare of “The Hurt Locker”.

Jeremy Renner stars in The Hurt Locker.
Photo credit: Courtesy of Summit Entertainment

The film opens with a shocking death (that I won’t spoil) that allows Staff Sergeant William James (Jeremy Renner of “The Unusuals”) to join an expert group of bomb-diffusing soldiers in Iraq. The enemy often leaves a bomb in the middle of the road to kill passing troops. When someone sees something suspicious - wires sticking out of some garbage, metal where there should only be sand - they call in James, Sergeant JT Sanborn (Anthony Mackie), and Specialist Owen Eldridge (Brian Geraghty).

The fragile Eldridge typically works the perimeter (checking rooftops for snipers and other suspicious characters) while Sanborn stays in constant communication with James. Our crazy hero puts on a bomb suit and heads straight to the location to diffuse a bomb that could easily blow up a few city blocks if he makes one mistake.

Sanborn and Eldridge are relatively by-the-book guys but James is one card short of a full deck. It may sound cliched to say that he’s reckless, but he undeniably puts his fellow soldiers in danger. The thing is that James also undeniably gets the job done. He’s defused over 800 bombs by the time we meet him and he’s out there doing the job that most people would consider cruel and unusual punishment.

“The Hurt Locker” uses a somewhat episodic structure (although I don’t mean that as a criticism because it’s an incredibly effective screenwriting decision) - linking together several of these men’s most insane assignments, including a suicide bomber with second thoughts, a dead child turned into a human explosive, and an amazing sequence in the middle of the desert with a sniper attack that will make your skin crawl. It’s a cliched, critical phrase, but this is truly edge-of-the-seat material.

(Left to right) Brian Geraghty and Guy Pearce star in The Hurt Locker.
Photo credit: Jonathan Olley

I know what you’re thinking. Most Iraq War movies to date have failed. The “soldier on the edge” thing was overdone decades ago. Trust me when I tell you that it has rarely, if ever, been done with such dramatic believability. Credit to the great Bigelow (who I expect will get an Oscar nomination for director for this work), but also credit Renner, who gives arguably the best performance of the year. (It’s him or Sam Rockwell in “Moon”. Don’t make me choose until I see both films again.)

Renner is simply spectacular and the rest of the supporting cast is strong as well, but most of the praise for “The Hurt Locker” will fall at the feet of the great Kathryn Bigelow. On a directorial level, nothing comes close in 2009 to what she accomplishes here. She opens with a scene that builds tension better than any action blockbuster climax of the summer season and sets the tone that will drive the entire film. She turns up the tension and then releases it for a second before she starts turning the dial again. It’s how she manages the pace of the film that make it a masterpiece.

But don’t think that “The Hurt Locker” is all tension. There are beautiful moments of character development and levity, which, of course, make the “action” scenes that much more believable and tense.

Life in a bomb disposal unit in the Middle East is probably not like anything that you or I could possibly understand, but “The Hurt Locker” believably takes us there. It throws us in the middle of the action, makes us sweat and cringe, and spits us out the other side. Don’t miss it.

‘The Hurt Locker’ stars Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, Brian Geraghty, Evangeline Lilly, Ralph Fiennes, Guy Pearce, David Morse. It was written by Mark Boal and directed by Kathryn Bigelow. It opens in Chicago on July 10th, 2009. It is rated R.

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