Nov 4: Red Lights

"Psychologist Margaret Matheson and her assistant study paranormal activity, which leads them to investigate a world-renowned psychic who has resurfaced years after his toughest critic mysteriously passed away."

Directed by: Rodrigo Cortes, Rated: R, 113 minutes

For those of you who have been reading this blog from the start, you know how big of a fan I am of Rodrigo Cortes' 2010 masterpiece, Buried. It's a film that proved to be incredible on both technical aspects and on how to craft a story. Well, Cortes' followup, Red Lights, doesn't have the wow factor of buried, nor is it really an experiment in filmmaker. It is, however, a well-crafted thriller that has plenty of things going for it. Unfortunately, in contrast, there are a handful of things to dislike about the film, such as a rather weak second act that leaves the movie stumbling onward towards its conclusion.

I still stand by Ryan Reynolds and feel he was completely overlooked for the Oscars in 2011. 

The film's introduction is incredibly engaging. Sigourney Weaver plays Margaret Matheson, a psychologist who makes a living off of proving the illegitimacy of so-called "psychics" that scam their audiences into believing what they do is real. Her assistant, Tom Buckley (Cillian Murphy) is a genius physicist but refuses to teach in his field, because of his loyalty to Margaret and the fact he finds what they do incredibly interesting. When retired all-star psychic, Simon Silver (Robert DeNiro), decides to get back into the game years after an accident, the world turns its focus upon the man, as do Tom and Margaret. A shroud of mystery surrounds Silver and Tom struggles to find out how he manages to seemingly read minds, bend spoons, and do all sorts of psychic things. As the secrets begin to unravel, Tom realizes that there is much greater things behind all of the happenings. Unfortunately, he's too caught up in everything and the only way "out" is to continue moving forward, facing Silver head on. 

You don't fock around with this guy. 

The first thirty minutes of Red Lights shows the duo taking down a handful of psychics by hijacking radio frequencies and all sorts of clever methods to prove they're fake. It's a job I certainly would love to have myself as I can only see great joy in ruining the lives of these high profile scam artists. It's also one of the better parts of the film and starts the film off with a lot of excitement. Unfortunately, the second act loses the energy of the intro and as more questions are raised, Red Lights grows tiresome. Lucky for us, by its conclusion, the movie regains its composure and delivers a pretty unique and unpredictable finish that honestly leaves you satisfied, even if some of those questions are still left unanswered. It's something that is easy to look past after the credits roll, but after processing your thoughts about everything, you're left with a rather bland taste in your mouth.

Mainstream psychics like this asshole need to "cross-over" into oblivion. 

A large part of the (somewhat) success of Red Lights is its cast. Cortes managed to recruit some incredible actors for his followup and they elevate it to something worth watching. Sigourney Weaver's role is somewhat substantial and reminds us that she's more talented than her sci-fi cameos. Robert DeNiro also seems to be getting a better grasp on his career, and doesn't quite remind us of his past greatness, but takes a step back toward it.  But even with two powerhouses, the star of Red Lights is Cillian Murphy, who shows us time and again that he's one of the greatest actors working today. He's mesmerizing as Tom Buckley and steals every scene he's in. He has this intensity about him that you don't find a lot and as his paranoia combines with his own intelligence (that Murphy always brings to the table), you can't help but understand his skewed frustrations. Personally, I would watch the man talk to a wall for ninety minutes, as I find him that interesting, and Red Lights does a great job of complimenting his abilities. The film also packs a strong supporting cast that includes Elizabeth Olsen, Toby Jones, and Craig Roberts. 

Seriously, world. Give this man every damn award you can think of. Shower him with love. Admire his talents. IDOLIZE HIM.

Red Lights received an incredibly small release in theaters and a quiet release on DVD. It's a film that deserves some love and attention for its acting and at times, its clever script. Rodrigo Cortes proves again that he's a talented filmmaker and while it's not on the same level as Buried, Red Lights still manages to be successful. It's suspenseful with plenty of twists, and has a unique ending that left me wanting a sequel (that would head in a completely opposite direction). Call me a nice guy, but I can forgive the film's faults and definitely recommend it. While it's not worth running out and buying, it's certainly worth renting and I really hope more people give this under-looked film a chance. If anything, the love and attention you'd show the film would at least give Cortes the money he deserves to continue making movies that are far more unconventional than what we're used to seeing.

The Good:

terrific acting that carries the film above averageness and turns the movie into a very interesting ride

The Bad:

a second act that's lacking the energy of the introduction and leaves you slightly bored

The Ugly:

knowing that there is a large majority of people that believe in psychics and rely on them for many of their day to day decisions

7.4/10

Trailer:

Aug 31: Being Flynn

"Working in a Boston homeless shelter, Nick Flynn re-encounters his father, a con man and self-proclaimed poet. Sensing trouble in his own life, Nick wrestles with the notion of reaching out yet again to his dad."

Directed by: Paul Weitz, Rated: R, 102 minutes

Being Flynn is a pretentious piece of crap that tries way too hard to tell some glorious coming of age, daddy-issue filled story. It features two incredibly unlikable characters that you can't sympathize with at all and throws every thing it possibly can at you in order to get that reaction.  It leaves you wondering if Robert De Niro's career is indeed, completely dead at this point, and if the man even has anything left in him. The film is a story about writers, a topic that for some reason has a harder transition to film than others, and the end result is usually genius (Barton Fink, Adaptation) or absolutely awful. Being Flynn falls under the latter category and is honestly a struggle to get through. 

His badass level is completely depleted. 

The movie follows Nick Flynn (Paul Dano) and his life in Boston. After losing his girlfriend and his job, Nick begins working at a homeless shelter, helping to feed and clothe those less fortunate. He falls for a girl named Denise (Olivia Thirbly) and the two seem to hit it off. After eighteen years of not hearing from him, Nick receives a phone call from his his estranged father, John (De Niro), who is a completely unlikable racist who hates black people and homosexuals. John needs some help and Nick picks him up, only to discover that his father just wanted the favor and nothing more. The two part ways soon after. After hard times fall on John, he enters the homeless shelter Nick is working at and the two, in a way, reunite. John reveals to Nick that he' been working on a "masterpiece" and this his novel will be published and he'll be rolling in money. Nick is a struggling writer himself, and as he talks to his dad more and more, he finds inspiration to write poetry. However, his dad doesn't stay around the shelter too long as he's kicked out for acting up (he's a violent son of a gun), and the two again part ways. 

Angry grandpa muscles don't make you likable, Bobby D. 

As I wrote the synopsis above, I began to realize how poorly the film was put together. The story's a mess, combining a rather unsatisfactory "reunion" of father and son with flashbacks to Nick and his mother (Julianne Moore who's just there... because). While the plot isn't complicated or anything of the sort, it's just too all over the place to really be coherent. There's very little substance to the plot and any character development is only seen at the very end of the film, and even then there's not much there. It's ironic that a story about writers would turn out so inconsistent and the screenplay is by far, the weakest part of the film. Robert De Niro does a decent job as John, but like I stated several times, his character is so unlikable you kind of grow to hate him. Sure, he has signs of crazy and he may not be completely right in the head, but it still doesn't excuse a large part of his actions throughout the movie. Paul Dano, who seems to be type-cast as the "self-loathing, whiny writer" just doesn't fit in the film. I loved the guy in Little Miss Sunshine and There Will Be Blood but his career is getting too repetitive and annoying for me to really care about. 

His neurotic-ness is turning into a weird combination of sleeze and desperation. 

Being Flynn is not worth the watch, even if it's a movie you catch on TV (for free). It's simply too much of an irritating portrait of characters you could care less about and tells its story in such a chaotic fashion that nothing emotional really sticks. By the film's conclusion, you've lost any interest in what's going on and you're actually hoping that it comes sooner than later. You'd also think that a film like this would at least have a great soundtrack, but not a single song is memorable, which is a shame because all the songs are from Badly Drawn Boy, a great band in its own right. Being Flynn is a skip. There's much better ways to end your summer than sitting in front of the TV and watching this flick. 

The Good:

the fleeting moments of Olivia Thirbly and the charm and sexy she brings to any movie

The Bad:

a story that's packed full of nothing and lacks any real substance to elicit any positive emotional response

The Ugly:

two very unlikable lead characters that seem to continually out-do each other in that department, making it way too easy to not give a damn about them

Overall: 3.5/10

Trailer:

July 27: Stardust

"In a countryside town bordering on a magical land, a young man makes a promise to his beloved that he'll retrieve a fallen star by venturing into the magical realm."

Directed by: Matthew Vaughn, Rated: PG-13, 127 minutes

There's a lot to say about Stardust. It's a modern fairy tale told with the heart and creativity you think you could only find in films and stories of old. It's creative in a completely endearing way, blending the perfect amount of romance, action, suspense and comedy. It's a film of many genres with a fantastical sense of adventure. Stardust creates a world inhabited by a wide variety of characters, including witches and sky pirates, without ever getting too big for its own good. In it's simplicity, Stardust never makes you expect much out of it, so when it delivers, it's magical in epic proportions. Plus, the film features a ridiculously sexy Claire Danes as the "damsel in distress", a role in which I know plenty of us would like to play her prince counterpart. 

Stardust tells the story of Tristan (Boardwalk Empire's Charlie Cox), a young man with big dreams and an even larger ambition, who lives in a quiet little village named Wall. Legend has it that the wall from which the village gets its name from is, in fact, a portal to another world full of magic and adventure. The love of his life, Victoria (Sienna Miller), demands Tristan retrieve a fallen star in order to earn her hand in marriage. This is a quest the blinded by love Tristan immediately accepts but, once he crosses the wall and tracks down the star, he finds it to be a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Danes). Tristan finds the fact that she's a star to be quite odd, but decides to "kidnap" her and bring her back to Wall to earn the heart of Victoria. As the two make their journey back to Wall, they are under the watchful eye of three witches, led by Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer, who only gets sexier with age), who seek to steal Yvaine for themselves, as her powers give magic and youth to the hags. The evil prince Septimus (the always-a-villain Marc Strong), also seeks the star as a way to rightfully claim his throne. Stardust is fun from start to finish, and the incredible cast only makes it better. 

She has her own kind of magic. 

As some of you may know, The Princess Bride is one of my favorite movies of all time. It's the perfect film, in my opinion, and one of the most unique films I've seen. I never thought any other movie could come close to capturing the imagination and charm that makes The Princess Bride so good, but Stardust comes damn close. Yes, the film has a much fancier look to it, but it still manages to hold onto some of the camp and cheese that makes it special. The comedy is also first class. The source novel of the same name, was written by genius Neil Gaiman, a modern day fantasy genius. He has a reputation of blending an unusual sense of humor with grand-scale adventure and the film adaptation of Stardust does not fail to deliver. And, while Gaiman may have written the novel, the adaptation would not be as great as it is without the screenplay written by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn (who later went on to make Kick-Ass and X-Men: First Class). 

Matthew Vaughn: The king of adapting stuff, or something.

I would highly recommend Stardust. If you haven't seen it already, you're missing out on quite an adventure. It's also worth mentioning that the two leads, Cox and Danes, have impeccable chemistry and seeing their own version of a fairy-tale play out is a joy to watch. Stardust also features great supporting roles from Ricky Gervais, Peter O'Toole, and an absolutely incredible Robert De Niro. I love Stardust and everything about it. My only complaint is that it's just one film, while I believe all the characters involved would find themselves in even grander adventures. 

The Good:

a unique and wonderful fairy tale that's instantly a classic

The Better:

Robert De Niro... just watch

The Best:

witnessing magic, first-hand, and aching to visit the world created and on display

Overall: 9.6/10

Trailer:

April 5: Limitless

"A writer discovers a top-secret drug which bestows him with super human abilities."

   Limitless is a really good average film. It has a great plot and just as good acting, as well as tremendous detail in the visuals, but for some reason it just doesn't leave a lasting effect. This is actually the second time I've seen it, and it really feels like it's the first time. Very little from my first viewing lingered in my brain (which ironically, a big part of the film's idea is that you can access all parts of your mind). It's not that the film even leaves a bad taste in your mouth, it's just the fact that it simply leaves no taste. It's actually like the little pill in the film. You take it, you enjoy a little high (in this case 115 minutes), then you return to normal. 

Unlike heroine. It's real bad, mmkay?

   The premise is cool. Eddie (Bradley Cooper) finds himself in possession of a clear little pill called NZT. This pill lets him tap into every corner of his brain and completely focus on anything he wants. He can do incredible math, speak new languages, and even recall old Bruce Lee movies he saw on TV to learn how to fight. A lot of it is similar to The Matrix, where Neo could download anything he wanted to know into his mind. In Limitless, Eddie simply needs to hear or see something to learn it. Of course, with every good thing there is consequences, and Eddie finds himself hitting lows and becoming addicted. Cooper does a fine job in the role and he dances on the border of genius and douche-bag. You can't tell if Eddie deserves the kind of power he's discovered and you can't help but be jealous of what he's tapped into. Oh, and Robert De Niro is in the film, but he's just around for his big name. 

You won't be jealous of the hangover he gets. *badum tss*

   Overall, even though it's nothing memorable, I'd recommend Limitless. Directed by Neil Burger (The Illusionist), Limitless is a fine example of a film with an attention to detail. Every time the drug is used, the camera, just like the user, gains a heightened sense of things, and focuses in on every detail. The style is terrific and adds so much to the film. The color and effects are kind of like a Michael Bay movie without the explosions, and thus, Limitless is pretty to look at. Even though it's good to look at, it also has a solid script. The only complaint is that Limitless doesn't leave you wanting more, it just simply is what it is. 

The Good:

great story that's very original and well executed

The Bad:

having that story not linger in your mind like it should

The Ugly:

wondering what you could do if you had the kind of pill in the film

Overall: 7.0/10

Best Quote:

Eddie: I don't have delusions of grandeur, I have an actual recipe for grandeur.

Trailer:

March 12: Killer Elite

"When his mentor is taken captive, a retired member of Britain's Elite Special Air Service is forced into action. His mission: kill three assassins dispatched by their cunning leader."

   Killer Elite is not a great movie. It's another run-of-the-mill Jason Statham action flick and, while enjoyable in the action, the dialogue and plot leave a lot to be desired. The whole plot is messy and is pretty confusing. This is surprising because most times, you watch a mindless action movie specifically so you don't have to think. The plot uses tons of names and places that slowly piece together, but the whole thing just tries too hard to be something it's not. The film is almost a bit of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy (with spy games and "cleaning up" the government's messes) meets The Transporter, but not using the bits that made those films awesome. 

A bloodier, more violent Spy vs. Spy. With Robert DeNiro. 

   Speaking of which, the presence of Robert DeNiro is cool, but almost unnecessary. His character is more of a plot device to give Statham a motive and his scenes are few and far between, most of them being very plain. He does have a moment of badass-ness when he shoots a guy in a subway but, even then, it plays second fiddle to Statham's ass kicking. I like Statham as much as the next guy, and really enjoy watching him beat the shit out of people, but he really needs to stop making films like this. With the addition of DeNiro, the film seeks more credibility than it deserves and in doing so, the final product is just an attempt that's too big. He's bordering the fine line between true action star and straight to DVD "action hero", and I am, quite frankly, worried. 

Find a damn good script already, bruffa. 

   Overall, Killer Elite is fun in the action but mundane and boring in everything else. Clive Owen and Robert DeNiro are nice little (and I mean little) additions to the film but, even then, these acting all-stars aren't at their best. The film also drags on and on even though the film is only 117 minutes long. There is just too much "filler" between the action sequences, including a very out of place love story. Filmmakers have to realize that when given a star like Statham, you need either an awesome script (The Bank Job, Snatch.) or enough scenes in which he destroys people with fists, feet, guns and whatever is laying around (The Transporter, Crank). 

The Good:

really cool action sequences, especially one where Statham and Owen beat the shit out of each in a hospital

The Bad:

not enough of those action sequences 

The Ugly:

a really plain, but slightly confusing and too elaborate story

Overall: 5.6/10

Best Quote:

No quote today, only a badass picture of Dominic Purcell and his awesome facial hair

Trailer:

Jan 15: Ronin

"A freelancing former US intelligence agent tries to track down a mysterious package that is wanted by both the Irish and the Russians."

   Ronin is a rather interesting movie, filled with great stunt driving, betrayal, violence, shootouts, and Robert De Niro. Ronin is widely considered one of the last "real" films, in that it uses all technical special effects with no CGI. Now a days, everything has to be in front of a green screen. Watching this film, made with real filming techniques, is refreshing.

That's a wrap. You can go, we'll make the movie later. 

   Robert De Niro is a former special agent and is brought on board for a heist. The plan is to simply steal a package and sell it, then walk away with thousands of dollars. Of course, since this is a movie, and there is 90+ minutes to fill, it does not go as planned. The package goes from person to person, and De Niro needs to track it down...of course, he does this with style. The car chases in Ronin are some of the best I have ever seen. The stunt driving is phenomenal and with clever camerawork, you can easily believe it is the actual actors doing the work. 

Look ma! No CGI!

  Now, Ronin is not without it's faults. Sure it has great action and a high body count (car and person), but the script is immensely lacking. The film uses many of the genre's cliches (betrayals, double agents, the "I know a guy" plot device). However, with the action as solid as it is, the script really does take second fiddle. The acting is just okay, as De Niro really just plays himself. Jean Reno, an always underrated badass, shines as his "partner". Whatever happened to that guy?

Dammit. 

   Overall, Ronin is a nice reminder of what action movies used to be and that you don't need computers and green screens to make a good film. The action makes Ronin a fun ride, but the acting and the script drag the film behind. Each scene of dialogue is not necessarily bad, but it is really used to break up the action and to give the crew time to find new cars to wreck. The film also has quite a soft, weak ending. Enjoyable, but not incredible, Ronin is a good film to watch on a rainy Sunday. I'd recommend staying in anyways, as Ronin will make you want to drive 90mph, wherever you go. 

Sight: The driving and stunt work are done extraordinarily well, as are the car crashes and explosions. The lack of CGI use makes the film even more impressive. 

Sound: The film really lacks much of a score. The sound effects, while seemingly done well in contrast with the stunt driving, are just okay. 

Skill: Like I mentioned above, the acting is not bad, it is just nothing award worthy. De Niro plays the badass De Niro (not the shitty Fockers De Niro), and the supporting cast is solid. 

Script: The script is nothing special. 

Overall: 6.2/10

Best Quote:

Spence: "You ever kill anybody?"
Sam: "I hurt somebody's feelings once."