Director: Gareth Evans
Cast: Iko Uwais, Joe Taslim, Donny Alamsayah, Yayan Ruhian, Pierre Gruno
The Raid: Redemption follows an Indonesian SWAT team as they try to takeout a legendary crime lord who is holed up on the top floor of an apartment complex in the slums of Jakarta. Most of the apartment complex's residents are junkies, drug dealers or other criminals who will do whatever possible to protect their lawless building and its leader. If you are intrigued by this premise, you will like the movie. If you are on the fence about the premise, you should watch the first 15 minutes, if you like them, you will like the movie. If you don't like the premise or the first 15 minutes you won't like the movie and your brain hasn't been turned to mush from playing too many video games.
The Raid has been compared to relentless video games in so many reviews that I was wary of it in the way I am often wary about arthouse fare. Do I really want to watch 90 minutes of uninterrupted asskicking / closeups of butterflies narrated by an elderly Swedish man? To my surprise Gareth Evans showed some restraint and made a well paced movie: the scenes between fights are all competently acted, drive the plot and allow the audience to catch their breath, before the electronic music kicks in and we are ready to see some more skulls bashed via Pencak Silat, an Indonesian Martial Art.
At times the movie is slightly overwhelming and feels like a Streets of Rage type video game where Axel (or whoever you chose) goes into one generic setting, get rushed by several bad guys and stays in that setting until a sufficient number of buttons have been mashed/people have been killed that he can advance to the next stage. To combat this problem Evans wisely creates a number of disparate settings within the apartment complex, which gives each fight an aesthetic that differentiates it from previous fights and gives the fighters different peripheral items to creatively murder people with. However Evans' best defense against monotony is impeccable choreography and cinematography that supersedes the occasional repetitiveness of the fight scenes.
This Sunday I was watching Breaking Bad when a couple of non-watchers entered the room and started asking questions about the show "Is that the dad from Malcom in the Middle?", "Why is the meth blue?", "His name is Heisenberg ... bad ass" and so on. At this point I excused myself for the room and wasted time until I could watch the 12:30 rerun without any distractions. I am not particularly proud of my actions, but what other people would describe as minor annoyances are horrible tragedies that prevent me from watching my show the "proper way". As I watched The Raid: Redemption, my testosterone frequently spiked to such highs that it could only be released by unintelligibly exclaiming "HOLY FUCKING SHIT WAS THAT A HAMMER?" I looked over to my friends who were also screaming unintelligibly and realized in this case I was watching the film in the proper way.
Thursday, August 30, 2012
The Dead Zone - 1983 - 2 1/2 Stars
Director: David Cronenberg
Cast: Christopher Walken, Brooke Adams, Tom Skerritt, Martin Sheen
I am afraid my citizenship might get revoked for admitting this, but The Dead Zone is the first Cronenberg movie I have seen and even worse, I didn't really care for it. There are moments of excellence in the film, so it's not as if I have given up hope on this plucky underdog Jewish-Canadian filmmaker but I, like most people, don't like being disappointed.
The Dead Zone is an adaptation of a Steven King novel about Johnny Smith (Walken) a man who awakes from a coma with the ability to foresee other's futures when he touches them. As someone who has seen Ed Glosser Trivial Psychic too many times to count and is vaguely familiar with Cronenenberg and Steven King, I was expecting a hammy Walken performance, some good horror setpieces and a Twilight Zone type ironic twist. I got all of that, but there was a lot of brooding in between the elements that I liked, which ruined the films pacing and muddled the film's message.
The double-edged nature of supernatural powers is a common theme in science-fiction and while the quandaries faced by Johnny Smith are addressed throughout the film none are given enough screentime to give the story thematic relevance. Should Johnny Smith be playing God with his supernatural knowledge? Does he have a moral responsibility to use his power even if it causes him immense physical pain? Is sacrificing the ability to have personal relationships worth gaining the power he has?* There is lip service given to all these questions and some others (like a brief detour where Johnny Smith is a local celebrity) but most of the conversations about these questions are clunky and one-sided and all of they cannot all be answered in one 90 minute feature. Cronenberg tries to answer all of them, while having a dense plot and in the process ends up answering none of them.
Muddled themes aside there is still a lot to like about this movie: Walken doesn't just give a great hammy performance, he gives a great performance and shows real humanity and restraint throughout. Martin Sheen gives a dynamic performance as an evil, charismatic, politician and Cronenberg wisely gets wooden performances out of the rest of the cast so Walken and Sheen's energetic performances standout even more than they usually would.
After watching the movie, I read the plot summary of Stephen King's novel on Wikipedia and the film, like most adaptations diverges from source material. As I read the summary I kept thinking to myself "this could be a great movie". It's too bad that Cronenberg didn't deliver a film with a more focused thematically or narratively to take advantage of some great performances and source material.
*Most glaringly his lack of personal relationships isn't solely a function of his power, it's also a function of his coma and while there is a movie to be made about people in coma's acclimatizing to society, The Dead Zone is not that movie.
Cast: Christopher Walken, Brooke Adams, Tom Skerritt, Martin Sheen
I am afraid my citizenship might get revoked for admitting this, but The Dead Zone is the first Cronenberg movie I have seen and even worse, I didn't really care for it. There are moments of excellence in the film, so it's not as if I have given up hope on this plucky underdog Jewish-Canadian filmmaker but I, like most people, don't like being disappointed.
The Dead Zone is an adaptation of a Steven King novel about Johnny Smith (Walken) a man who awakes from a coma with the ability to foresee other's futures when he touches them. As someone who has seen Ed Glosser Trivial Psychic too many times to count and is vaguely familiar with Cronenenberg and Steven King, I was expecting a hammy Walken performance, some good horror setpieces and a Twilight Zone type ironic twist. I got all of that, but there was a lot of brooding in between the elements that I liked, which ruined the films pacing and muddled the film's message.
The double-edged nature of supernatural powers is a common theme in science-fiction and while the quandaries faced by Johnny Smith are addressed throughout the film none are given enough screentime to give the story thematic relevance. Should Johnny Smith be playing God with his supernatural knowledge? Does he have a moral responsibility to use his power even if it causes him immense physical pain? Is sacrificing the ability to have personal relationships worth gaining the power he has?* There is lip service given to all these questions and some others (like a brief detour where Johnny Smith is a local celebrity) but most of the conversations about these questions are clunky and one-sided and all of they cannot all be answered in one 90 minute feature. Cronenberg tries to answer all of them, while having a dense plot and in the process ends up answering none of them.
Muddled themes aside there is still a lot to like about this movie: Walken doesn't just give a great hammy performance, he gives a great performance and shows real humanity and restraint throughout. Martin Sheen gives a dynamic performance as an evil, charismatic, politician and Cronenberg wisely gets wooden performances out of the rest of the cast so Walken and Sheen's energetic performances standout even more than they usually would.
After watching the movie, I read the plot summary of Stephen King's novel on Wikipedia and the film, like most adaptations diverges from source material. As I read the summary I kept thinking to myself "this could be a great movie". It's too bad that Cronenberg didn't deliver a film with a more focused thematically or narratively to take advantage of some great performances and source material.
*Most glaringly his lack of personal relationships isn't solely a function of his power, it's also a function of his coma and while there is a movie to be made about people in coma's acclimatizing to society, The Dead Zone is not that movie.
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Lost in America - 1985 - 3 Stars
Director: Albert Brooks
Cast: Albert Brooks, Julie Hagerty
Albert Brooks is one of the great comic minds of his generation, whether doing stand up, performance pieces on late night shows or directing short films on SNL, he always manages to inject his projects with a unique point of view, strong comic conceits and a feeling that anything can happen. Despite his talents, I find it amazing that there was a point in history where Albert Brooks could write, direct and star in a movie and even more surprisingly that he was allowed to keep making movies after his previous projects failed commercially. It's not surprising he never had a big hit, his leading men are brash, neurotic, obnoxious and arrogant. He's Alvy Singer if Alvy actually confronted the blowhard talking about Marshall McLuhan in Annie Hall. Brook's descendants include George Costanza and other popular supporting tv and film characters, but none of Brooks' progeny have had success as leading men, because spending a lot of time with them is exhausting.
Lost in America opens with a long tracking shot through David Howard's (Brooks) darkened home, as David listens to Larry King interview film critic Rex Reed. I initially thought was an interview written for the movie, but it is the audio from an episode of King's radio show. In the interview Reed talks about how he'd rather watch a comedy by himself than in a crowded theatre and that he "doesn't respond very well to mass hysteria anyways". It's a petty way for Brooks to open the movie, especially because most of his output seems to be arguing against a "get laughs at any cost" ethos and is more about subverting audience expectations and not pandering to the audience. (See his standup about opening for Richie Havens on Comedy Minus One). Some cursory googling has shown me that Brooks is taking shots at Reed for giving his earlier films poor reviews and while the opening scene provides hooks the audience it also feels childish and exploitative.
Outside of establishing an uncharacteristically strong visual style for a comedy, this opening sequence has very little bearing on the rest of the film, which is about David Howard missing out on a promotion, blowing up after missing the promotion, quitting/getting fired and deciding to sell his house to pay for an early retirement so he can travel the country with his wife (Julie Hagerty) in a Winnebago. The movie's premise opens the door for some insight on how people fall into routines and end up living boring, unsatisfying lives, as they hope each minor improvement in car/job/home quality will solve everything. Unfortunately the Howard's journey off the grid begins with a large deus ex machinas, that undermines everything the film tries to say about upper-class ennui. Choosing to enter an early retirement and leaving the rat race is not equivalent to being forced to work at Der WienerSchnitzel to pay for rent at a trailer park, but the end of the film seems to be promoting this false equivalency.
Lost in America is still the product of a unique comic mind and features some top notch comic setpieces and one off gags. The scene where Brooks gets fired cements him in a class with Bob Odenkirk and John Cleese as one of the great comedic yellers of our time. A scene featuring Gary Marshall as a Casino floorman is a real highlight and is a great piece of sketch comedy. Julie Hagerty gives an off beat performance that is very good and that somehow matches Brook's energy, however ultimately this movie is a disconnected group of funny performances and setpieces that don't build to a larger thematic point, despite its best efforts.
Cast: Albert Brooks, Julie Hagerty
Albert Brooks is one of the great comic minds of his generation, whether doing stand up, performance pieces on late night shows or directing short films on SNL, he always manages to inject his projects with a unique point of view, strong comic conceits and a feeling that anything can happen. Despite his talents, I find it amazing that there was a point in history where Albert Brooks could write, direct and star in a movie and even more surprisingly that he was allowed to keep making movies after his previous projects failed commercially. It's not surprising he never had a big hit, his leading men are brash, neurotic, obnoxious and arrogant. He's Alvy Singer if Alvy actually confronted the blowhard talking about Marshall McLuhan in Annie Hall. Brook's descendants include George Costanza and other popular supporting tv and film characters, but none of Brooks' progeny have had success as leading men, because spending a lot of time with them is exhausting.
Lost in America opens with a long tracking shot through David Howard's (Brooks) darkened home, as David listens to Larry King interview film critic Rex Reed. I initially thought was an interview written for the movie, but it is the audio from an episode of King's radio show. In the interview Reed talks about how he'd rather watch a comedy by himself than in a crowded theatre and that he "doesn't respond very well to mass hysteria anyways". It's a petty way for Brooks to open the movie, especially because most of his output seems to be arguing against a "get laughs at any cost" ethos and is more about subverting audience expectations and not pandering to the audience. (See his standup about opening for Richie Havens on Comedy Minus One). Some cursory googling has shown me that Brooks is taking shots at Reed for giving his earlier films poor reviews and while the opening scene provides hooks the audience it also feels childish and exploitative.
Outside of establishing an uncharacteristically strong visual style for a comedy, this opening sequence has very little bearing on the rest of the film, which is about David Howard missing out on a promotion, blowing up after missing the promotion, quitting/getting fired and deciding to sell his house to pay for an early retirement so he can travel the country with his wife (Julie Hagerty) in a Winnebago. The movie's premise opens the door for some insight on how people fall into routines and end up living boring, unsatisfying lives, as they hope each minor improvement in car/job/home quality will solve everything. Unfortunately the Howard's journey off the grid begins with a large deus ex machinas, that undermines everything the film tries to say about upper-class ennui. Choosing to enter an early retirement and leaving the rat race is not equivalent to being forced to work at Der WienerSchnitzel to pay for rent at a trailer park, but the end of the film seems to be promoting this false equivalency.
Lost in America is still the product of a unique comic mind and features some top notch comic setpieces and one off gags. The scene where Brooks gets fired cements him in a class with Bob Odenkirk and John Cleese as one of the great comedic yellers of our time. A scene featuring Gary Marshall as a Casino floorman is a real highlight and is a great piece of sketch comedy. Julie Hagerty gives an off beat performance that is very good and that somehow matches Brook's energy, however ultimately this movie is a disconnected group of funny performances and setpieces that don't build to a larger thematic point, despite its best efforts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)