The Amazing Spiderman ***1/2
Short Take: Remake of the first Tobey McGuire Spiderman film is well acted, well staged, and well photographed but winds up being totally forgettable.
Reel Take: It would appear that we have now reached the stage where it is necessary to reboot successful comic book hero movies of the recent past. The first Tobey McGuire Spiderman was only 10 years ago and it was tremendously successful, but that’s not the reason for the remake. The reason is that it was too comic bookish. As evidenced by the Christopher Nolan Batman series and the recent attempts at transferring The Incredible Hulk to the screen, the trend is to make our superheroes depressed and dour with serious personal issues just like real human beings.
There are notable exceptions like Marvel’s Iron Man series and the recent Avengers box office phenomenon, but overall it would seem that gloom is in. To borrow a line from Heath Ledger’s Joker, “Why so serious?” There was nothing wrong with the first series of Spiderman movies. Number 2 was better than #1, but by #3 it had run its course. Why Sony would want to spend all the money they did ($230 million) on this effort is beyond me especially since the results were so tepid.
It has only been a few days since I saw the film and already I am hard pressed to remember much of it. Of the performances, only two stand out; Emma Stone as new female interest Gwen Stacy and Rhys Ifans as the Doc Ock-like villain Dr Connors (he means well but things go wrong). Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker seemed like a surly teenager and little else. I could have cared less about what happened to him. Sally Field and Martin Sheen do well as Aunt May and Uncle Ben but Cliff Robertson and especially Rosemary Harris left a more lasting impression.
Next we come to the much touted special effects. From a technical standpoint they are clearly superior to those of the first series, and I had a real problem with that. Because they were so realistic and lifelike, the comic book sense of wonder and artificiality was completely absent leaving me to get lots of jaw exercise because of all the yawning. To me the point of a comic book movie is that it’s supposed to be…a comic book movie. That’s not the case here. It’s a large scale action adventure picture like Transformers or Roland Emmerich’s 1998 remake of Godzilla and just as pointless.
It would seem that several critics agree with me as The Amazing Spiderman gets a 74 rating on Rotten Tomatoes compared to the original’s 89 rating. It also is 20 minutes longer. Some of that is endless end credits of course but then the first one had them too. The biggest overall problem is pace. It takes too long to set up and, once it is, it takes too long to go anywhere. The ending mayhem was tedious and ordinary. The recent movie Chronicle had effects that were as good and even more exciting and they did it for only $12 million.
The Amazing Spiderman is not a bad movie but it’s a classic example of a paint-by-numbers one that’s trying to cash in on the new found respectability of the comic book film genre by playing it as if it were Eugene O’Neill (if you don’t recognize the name, google him). As for me, I’d rather have more like Iron Man, Captain America, and The Avengers.
Rated PG-13 for sequences of action and violence.
Review by Chip Kaufmann
The Dark Knight Rises *****
Short Take: The last film in Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy turns out to be the best thanks to a story that has plenty of heart to go along with Nolan’s typically heavy head games.
Reel Take: It’s unfortunate that the tragedy of what happened opening night in Aurora, Colorado will forever be associated with this movie, since it turns out to be the best film in Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy and a fitting conclusion to one of the most successful and most talked about series ever made.
It is now possible, in hindsight, to see all three films as a large scale mythic drama (like The Lord of the Rings) with a beginning, a middle act, and a proper ending. It makes for a complete eight hour extravaganza on the rise, fall, and redemption of the Bruce Wayne / Batman character. Nolan likes complicated characters; with the three Batman films he finally has the proper canvas, unlike Inception or The Prestige, to do his overall vision justice.
It is eight years since the events of The Dark Knight. Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), his body crippled by injuries as Batman, has become a recluse. He spends his time funding the development of a clean and perpetual energy source. Enter Bane (Tom Hardy), a super villain with a mask and a voice like Darth Vader, who plans to bring Gotham City to its knees through a series of terrorist acts.
Assisting Bane, but with her own agenda, is Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway) an extraordinary cat burglar with a costume to match. Their actions force Batman out of retirement much to the dismay of Bruce Wayne’s loyal butler Alfred (Michael Caine) who resigns. With Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) in the hospital, the only friend Batman has is a young, unorthodox police officer (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who seeks to be like him.
A confrontation with Bane leads to Batman’s defeat and imprisonment. In Bruce Wayne’s absence a rich and powerful businesswoman (Marion Cotillard) and old ally, Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), try to keep Wayne Enterprises going but are thwarted by Bane’s economic terrorism (he bombs the Gotham Stock Exchange) and sabotage. In order to defeat Bane, Bruce Wayne / Batman must summon everything he has and then some to turn the tables. In order to succeed, he finds he needs the assistance of Catwoman.
As you would expect from Christopher Nolan, things are a good bit more complicated than that and it is those complications and their resolutions that makes The Dark Knight Rises the Crown Jewel of the set. The film easily stands on its own as first class entertainment but when put into context with the other two then it becomes something else, something richer and deeper.
The only drawback to the film, from my perspective, is the amount of time devoted to the IMAX action set pieces. At 164 minutes the movie, like its predecessors, is just too long. At least this time the action sequences are well integrated into the flow of the film just like an installment of the Bourne franchise.
The performances from all concerned, even Christian Bale, hit all the right notes. Wally Pfister’s cinematography guarantees an excellent thrill ride while Hans Zimmer’s music provides a powerful emotional accompaniment. Now that you’ve read about it, go and see it then see how you feel once you’ve left the theater. I’ll bet you’ll be talking about it for some time afterwards.
Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense violence, some sensuality, and language.
Review by Chip Kaufmann
The Intouchables ****
Short Take: Based on a true story, when a young ex-con from the projects becomes the unlikely care giver, for a middle aged quadriplegic from the top of the 1%, both lives are forever changed.
Reel Take: The Intouchables has been a box office sensation in its native France, topping even The Artist for several awards including Best Actor, which went to Omar Sy. The film is based on a true story of a young man from the wrong side of the tracks who became the unlikely caregiver for a wealthy quadriplegic. For the film they cast Francois Cluzet (best known to American audiences for Tell No One) and French comedian Omar Sy. There was apparently a bit of hubbub about the casting of Sy, because the real fellow wasn’t black. But the box office, critical and popular success of the combination of Cluzet and Sy has pretty much silenced objections.
Philippe (Cluzet) is a millionaire who became a quadriplegic from a paragliding accident. Driss is an ex-con from the projects who reluctantly accepts the job after initially trying to extend his unemployment benefits. Philippe is cultured, educated and refined; Driss is coarse, ignorant and a bit of a joker. Philippe is drawn to Driss’ lack of pity and his boisterous behavior.
What ensues is fairly predictable – the two become friends. Philippe becomes a happier man and Driss becomes a better man. The film succeeds on it the merits of irreverent attitude and its actors. Cluzet and Sy are the real deal. Some of the dialogue even seems fairly unscripted. Whether it is or not, I have no idea, but either way it works.
Much has been made of Sy’s performance; he is the crowd pleaser. He rises to the dramatic moments, but he really shines when he’s allowed to play to his comedic, less staid strengths. Personally, I think Cluzet deserves a nod as well. His entire performance is from the neck up, and that takes some doing. He plays the part with strength, not pity. It’s not about the man being handicapped. It’s about being a man, about being a human being regardless of circumstances.
The Intouchables is now the highest grossing non-English language film. It’s done well by critics, but even better by audiences. It’s a buddy picture with a Maserati instead of a bucket list. At the end of the day, The Intouchables is quite embraceable.
Rated R for language and some drug use.
Review by Michelle Keenan
Safety Not Guaranteed ****1/2
Short Take: After seeing a personal ad for a companion for a time travel experiment, three Seattle Magazine writers decide to track the person who placed the ad to get the story.
Reel Take: I watched Safety Not Guaranteed recently at an Asheville Film Society screening. Prior to the start of the film, my colleague Chip Kaufmann and I were swapping movie opinions with Mountain Xpress movie critic and AFS Program Director, Ken Hanke. He told us the film moves along wonderfully and that he kept expecting them to screw it up. Much to his utter and most pleasant surprise, they didn’t. He also told us, “It may not be the best film you see this year, but it may just be one of the most special films you see this year.” As both a critic and as plain old moviegoer, I quite agree with his assessment.
This is the classified ad that inspires three employees of a Seattle magazine to find out who placed the ad and the story behind it. Jeff (Jake M. Johnson) is a slick talking writer, who enlists the help of two interns, Darius (Aubrey Plaza) a brooding misfit, and Arnau (Karan Soni), a shy nerd.
Darius is immediately curious about the ad, whereas Jeff is primarily looking for a paid vacation and hoping to hook up with an old girlfriend, and Arnau is looking to expand his academic C.V. They travel to a seaside town where they find Kenneth (Mark Duplass, recently seen in Your Sister’s Sister), a reclusive, conspiracy theorist type, who happens to be building a time machine in his garage. What ensues next takes them all on a hilarious, offbeat and heartfelt journey of self discovery.
The story is complete fiction, but was allegedly inspired by a classified ad that made the Internet rounds a few years back. I believe it was worded exactly as they have it in the film. Writer Derek Connolly and director Collin Trevorrow apparently pondered what kind of person would write this ad, and the character of Kenneth was born. Kenneth is a grocery store clerk by day and a time machine builder at night. No surprise he’s a totally paranoid weirdo. But if ever there was a sympathetic likeable paranoid weirdo, it’s him.
Darius connects with Kenneth and gets him to trust her, and they (of course) eventually fall for each other. Plaza and Duplass do a great job, but even as sympathetic as Duplass makes Kenneth, he’s still an uber weirdo. So much so that it’s hard to imagine any girl really falling for Kenneth, but then that’s what, at its heart, this movie is really about – trust, compassion, and a leap of faith. Safety Not Guaranteed is definitely a leap of faith worth taking.
Rated R for language, including some sexual references.
Review by Michelle Keenan
Trishna ***1/2
Short Take: A retelling of the Thomas Hardy classic “Tess of the D’Urbervilles” set in modern day India.
Reel Take: Director Michael Winterbottom apparently has a bit of thing for the writings of Thomas Hardy. Having previously adapted Hardy’s “Jude the Obscure” in 1996’s Jude and “The Mayor of Casterbridge” in 2000 with The Claim, it only seems fitting that he’d eventually get around to some of Hardy’s biggest titles.
Trishna is the retelling of the Hardy’s tragic “Tess of the D’Urbervilles,” set in modern day India. Trishna (Frida Pinto) is the oldest daughter of a poor family in Rajasthan. While working part time at a nearby resort she meets Jay (Rizwan Ahmed), the son of a wealthy property developer. He takes a genuine interest in her and, after her father suffers an accident which prevents him from earning a living, he helps her find work at one of his father’s hotels.
The two fall beautifully in love, and even though it is set in a caste society, it is the 21st century; one can’t help but think these two lovebirds will find their happily ever after together. For a little while it even seems possible, when they run away to Mumbai – he a Bollywood proudcer wannabe and she a Bollywood dancer wannabe. But then again, this is Thomas Hardy, so that means their love is of course doomed to go south (and how).
The first half of the film works brilliantly. We understand Trishna. We understand Jay. We understand the differences of their lives and the difficulties befalling their love. It also struck me that if one were going to adapt “Tess of the D’Urbervilles for modern day, setting it in India is actually a very smart call.
Unfortunately the second half becomes a tad frustrating. When Jay returns from a trip home to England to see his ailing father, he decides it’s time do right by him and the family business. In doing so, he becomes a cruel, arrogant, chauvinistic and cold person. He reduces Trishna to his sex slave and maid. The understanding of the characters we had in the first half, dissipates in the second half, particularly with Jay’s character. Trishna has sacrificed her reputation and her family’s reputation to be with Jay, so our sympathies are with her of course. As their love is destroyed, unwittingly they are as well. By the time tragic climax hits, it doesn’t particularly pack much punch, when it really should have leveled the audience.
Frida Pinto gives her best performance to date and the movie is, for the most part, very good. Some of the camera work was too busy for me, echoing the overcrowded, bustling streets of Mumbai, but to no great purpose. Winterbottom does a great job showcasing the caste society of India rather matter-of-factly, without making it look to dreadful or too beautiful, and without getting into the morality of it.
If you want to see something uplifiting this month, see The Intouchables or Safety Not Guaranteed. If on the other hand tragic love is your cup of tea, then by all means, Trishna it is.
Rated R for sexuality, some drug use and violence.
Review by Michelle Keenan
