Dead Man Down ***

Short Take: This modern attempt at a film noir is a real train wreck of a movie and yet another example that a big budget and a high powered cast do not guarantee success.

Reel Take: It no longer comes as a surprise when a foreign director comes off a highly acclaimed small film only to be derailed by a big budget and the “Hollywood” treatment. Danish director Neils Arden Oplev becomes the latest victim with Dead Man Down, his highly anticipated follow-up to the Millenium trilogy of which the original The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is the best known.

Dead Man Down has everything that money can buy, a first rate cast, glossy cinematography, ominous symphonic music, and a number of high octane set pieces that are truly impressive. What it doesn’t have is a coherent storyline or a good enough screenplay to cover up that fact. Plot coherency has never been a strong suit in film noir (just look at 1946’s The Big Sleep) but trying to keep up with Dead Man Down is downright wearisome because director Oplev WANTS you to follow it and that makes it all the harder.

For the record it goes something like this. Victor (Colin Farrell) wants revenge on Alphonse (Terrence Howard) for causing the deaths of his family. Beatrice (Noomi Rapace) wants revenge on the man who disfigured her. After watching Victor kill someone (and capturing it on video), she blackmails him into helping her. Victor’s plan is to get two rival gangs (including Howard’s) to do each other in a la A Fistful of Dollars but then there’s Rapace to deal with and that’s just the beginning.

The performances by the principals range from intense (Farrell) to uneven (Rapace) to having a good time (Howard). Isabelle Huppert and Dominic Cooper both wind up bringing much needed support and there are brief appearances from old pros F. Murray Abraham and Armand Assante that leave you wanting more but in the end you wind up being disappointed. Bad movies are one thing but missed opportunities, or in this case blown opportunities, are another. Nothing is more frustrating than realizing what could have been.

Film noir is meant to be a brutal genre and here Dead Man Down doesn’t disappoint. Most of the really violent sequences are highlighted in the trailer in order to get the people interested in that sort of thing into the theater. However you need to have more than that if you’re going to make more than a temporary impression. The fact that Dead Man Down dropped out of the box office Top 10 after only one week tells you all you need to know.

The chances are good that this film may be out on DVD before you finish reading this review (just kidding!). When it does come out you may want to give it a try, especially if you are a fan of the leading players or just enjoy the film noir genre like I do. Others should think about renting something else unless you enjoy obtuseness for its own sake.

Rated R for violence, language throughout and a scene of sexuality.
Review by Chip Kaufmann

Emperor ****

Short Take: When General Douglas MacArthur finds himself as Supreme Commander of US occupied Japan in the wake of Japan’s surrender, he enlists the help of an expert on Japanese culture and psychological warfare to determine Emperor Hirohito’s fate.

Reel Take: General Douglas MacArthur would not have approved with the lack of fanfare and publicity surrounding the release of Peter Webber’s Emperor. In this instance I would quite agree with him. Emperor is a fine film that has been met with mixed reviews and very little promotion. At press time it has been quietly playing for a couple of weeks at the Carolina Asheville. Word of mouth seems to be the only thing keeping it there; though for how much longer I cannot say.

Emperor takes place in U.S. occupied Japan just after Emperor Hirohito (Takataro Kataoka) surrendered. General MacArthur (Tommy Lee Jones) is the de facto ruler charged with leading the rebuilding of Japan and deciding the fate of Japan’s beloved emperor. To aid him in the latter, he enlists the assistance of a General Bonner Fellers, an expert on Japanese culture and psychological warfare, to lead the investigation to determine Hirohito’s culpability in the war. Fellers has ten days to execute the mission and make his recommendation to MacArthur. Adding to his burdens is his anxious search for a Japanese woman (Eriko Hatsune) he loved before the war, the woman who first brought him to Japan.

Most people, or at least most people over a certain age, know that Hirohito lives, so that’s not what holds the suspense here. The intrigue comes in learning about this little known investigation and how they get to Hirohito. The task is grim and the proceedings deadly serious, but it is balanced out by Jones’ colorful portrayal of MacArthur (and ‘good old fashioned American swagger’) as well as by the secondary plotline. As Fellers works day and night on the Hirohito investigation, the story is peppered with flashbacks to his relationship with Aya which in turn dovetail back to his current search to learn if she survived the war.

The flashbacks serve the story well on several levels, not the least of which is to illustrate the stark contrast between pre-war Japan and post atomic bomb Japan. This difference is important to both General Fellers, and General MacArthur.

I have read criticisms of this secondary plot in several reviews. It’s not a Rick and Ilsa love story by any stretch of the imagination, but whatever your opinion of it, this sub-story (albeit a fiction) is integral to creating cultural understanding and empathy and compliments the historical events.

Webber takes a very simple approach to a very complicated story. The film has an old fashion style and sensibility befitting the era in which it takes place. To this end, Fox cuts quite an old school leading man – sort of Henry Fonda meets Dana Andrews. He does a good job, but there is an uneasiness to Fox that gives him a slightly constipated look during some of his most serious efforts.

Jones on the other hand did nothing more to look like MacArthur than don a pair of aviator glasses and a corncob pipe and hit the nail on the head. He inhabits the character with an easy zeal, culminating in the famous meeting between MacArthur and Hirohito.

At the time, the American public and American politicians wanted Emperor Hirohito punished regardless of whether he had anything to do with Pearl Harbor or not. Emperor makes one glad calmer heads and cultural understanding prevailed.

Rated PG-13 for violent content, brief strong language and smoking (historical).
Review by Michelle Keenan

Ginger & Rosa ****

Short Take: A coming-of-age story of two young women in early 1960’s England.

Reel Take: Sally Potter’s Ginger & Rosa is a smart, emotionally elegant coming of age story in early 1960’s England. Born in London in 1945 in the same hospital at the same time, Ginger (Elle Fanning) and Rosa (Alice Englert) are best friends from day one. Ginger’s mother (Christina Hendricks) is young artist-turned-homemaker, while her father is a forward thinking, young professor. Rosa is born to a working class Catholic family – her mother (Jodhi May), a cleaning lady after her father exits the picture. The girls do everything together and share everything together.

By 1962 they are young women, keen for grown up adventure. They talk life, love, politics and the bomb. Ginger has the soul of a poet and is moved by the ‘Ban-the—Bomb’ movement, while Rosa is more attracted to carnal desires than a desire for peace. As the cold war casts a shadow over their lives, the crumbling relationship between Ginger’s parents also threatens life as they know it. The girls rebel against their mothers, while they gravitate to Ginger’s father, Roland (Alessandro Nivola).

Roland is a progressive pacifist and, to the girls, he cuts quite the romantic figure. Roland encourages Ginger’s activism while Rosa’s interest in him becomes something altogether different. This of course brings a new level of strife to their young lives. Ginger finds solace with ‘the Marks’ a gay couple both named Mark (Timothy Spall and Oliver Platt) as well as their poet friend Bella (Annette Bening). As emotions collide and relationships whither Ginger struggles to find her place in the world.

The script is solid but not great. It’s Potter’s grasp on the nuances of emotion that extracts wonderful performances from her actors and draws the audience in. Their is an ache at the heart of this film, but it’s an ache that holds both pain and hope, the pitfalls of life and the opportunities of life.

Elle Fannning, who isn’t even as old as her character in this film gives a luminous performance, filled with idealism, angst, hurt and innocence. Newcomer Alice Englert is lusty and almost tragic as the firey and fatherless Rosa. Madmen’s Christina Hendricks turns in a terrific performance as Ginger’s defeated mother, while Nivola is spot on as politically progressive but incredibly narcisitica Roland. Spall, Platt and Bening do not have big parts, but are simply nice to have around and offer a wonderful flavor of the time.

Like another recent coming of age movie, The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Ginger & Rosa is not a great movie or an important movie, but it is a captivating little film. It may also be Potter’s most wholey vulnerable and approachable film to date, and I prefer it to her other work. Ginger & Rosa is one of those films that will likely come and go quite quickly and quietly, so watch for it if it sounds like your cup of tea.

Rated PG-13 for mature disturbing thematic material involving teen choices – sexuality, drinking, smoking, and for language.
Review by Michelle Keenan

Oz the Great & Powerful ****

Short Take: $200 million dollar Disney prequel to The Wizard of Oz is an engaging film for the whole family despite a less than stellar performance from James Franco.

Reel Take: I’m of the generation that not only grew up the annual TV showings of the classic 1939 The Wizard of Oz (which wasn’t a hit when first released) but also knew that there was a whole series of Oz books. Once I got into the study of silent movies, I discovered that there were several silent Oz films some of them were even produced by L. Frank Baum himself.

On consideration, it makes economic sense at this time to do a new Oz film. Not only is the original approaching its 75^th anniversary next year but the Broadway musical Wicked is still selling out shows months in advance. Both play a large part in this Disney endeavor which was directed by Spiderman alumnus Sam Raimi.

Like the 1939 film, Oz opens up in black & white and in the old pre-widescreen 1939 aspect ratio and like the original, once we arrive in Oz the film turns to color and becomes fully widescreen. We are then introduced to some characters that we are already familiar with and some that we aren’t. But first, let’s back up a little.

Carnival magician Oscar Diggs, known as Oz the Great & Powerful (James Franco), is whisked away in a balloon by a cyclone and arrives in the fairy tale land of Oz where his coming has been foretold and eagerly anticipated. Theodora (Mila Kunis), a witch, along with a flying monkey named Finley (Zach Braff) welcome him and escort him to the Emerald City. The city is currently ruled by Theodora’s sister, Evanoria (Rachel Weisz) who tells Oz that he must kill another witch Glinda (Michelle Williams) before he can claim the throne.

However things are not what they seem as we already know that Glinda is a good witch. It turns out that Evanora is the evil one and she turns her sister Theodora into the Wicked Witch of the West. This sets up a final Battle Royale for the Emerald City. Give credit to Sam Raimi and company for coming up with an ending that is quite clever as well as spectacular.

The technical wizards at Disney have come up with a visually ravishing CGI Oz that looks like a cross between a Maxfield Parrish painting and the famous Disney cartoon Flowers and Trees (1932). I’ve grown rather tired of CGI backgrounds which have robbed movies of the “how did they do that” factor but here the visuals are justified and quickly become part of the cinematic landscape.

The performances by the three female leads are first class and give the movie a much needed boost from the bland goings on of James Franco. To be fair, the character of Oz is meant to be unmemorable compared to the others and in that regard, Franco succeeds admirably. Although Oz is longer than it needs to be, it’s makes for an ideal family film. Just save your money and skip the 3-D; it’s unnecessary to the enjoyment of the film.

Rated PG for action sequences, scary images, and brief mild language.
Review by Chip Kaufmann

Phantom ***1/2

Short Take: Retiring Russian submarine commander is sent on one last mission only to have his ship taken over by rogue elements who threaten to start World War III.

Reel Take: Phantom is an interesting throwback to the low budget, performance driven movies of not that long ago. Also like those films it doesn’t overstay its welcome clocking in at just over 90 minutes. It says what it has to say, does what it has to do and then it’s over. Good old fashioned disposable entertainment of the best kind.

As the plot synopsis above shows, there’s really nothing new here. Phantom reminded me of quite a few movies that I’ve seen before including Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (1960), Ice Station Zebra (1968), and especially The Hunt for Red October (1990). Nevertheless within the first 15 minutes I was interested and thanks to the no frills look of the film and the solid cast, the movie went by all too quickly.

A worn out naval captain (Ed Harris) is hurriedly dispatched on one last mission to “honor” the retiring of one of the Russian fleet’s oldest subs before it’s sold to the Chinese. Along for the ride is a KGB officer (David Duchovny in a surprisingly effective performance) who, it turns out, has a mission of his own. Suddenly Harris begins to have cryptic visions of disaster (similar to a famous Twilight Zone episode “The 30 Fathom Grave”) and these things come to pass.

One of the biggest criticisms leveled against the film is that no one in the cast speaks with a Russian accent. Puh-leez! Speaking with an accent wouldn’t make it more authentic and a bad Russian accent would only detract from the story. Oh for the days when a title card said it was Casablanca and that’s all that was needed.

In fact the film has come in for more than its fair share of criticism (it has a 38% rating on Rotten Tomatoes) on many fronts and, frankly, I just don’t understand it. The acting is solid, the story is interesting, the photography is good, the music is effective, what more do you need?

Thanks to the negative reviews, the film came and left Asheville in just one week’s time and this was at three different locations. Part of that reason is that despite the cast and the action-adventure subject matter, Phantom is essentially an independent film with a small budget and no major studio backing so it doesn’t have the clout to stick around and build a word-of-mouth audience.

I’m sure that the DVD release is only a few weeks away and when that happens, take advantage of it. Phantom is not a great movie and isn’t trying to be. Being good, solid entertainment is more than enough and should be worth something.

Rated R for violence.
Review by Chip Kaufmann

Stoker ****

Short Take: After the death of his brother, a mysterious man moves in with his late brother’s family and both mother and daughter are strangely attracted to this long lost relative.

Reel Take: The title of this film evokes Vampiric images, and while Stoker has nothing to do with Dracula, it does have a gothic novel-like sensibility. Stoker is a wonderfully stylized and chilling story of family dysfunctionality – talk about skeletons in the closet! Influenced by Alfred Hitchcock’s Shadow of a Doubt, South Korean director Chan-wook Park has a field day with actor Wentworth Miller’s dark web of a screenplay.

The story revolves around India (Mia Wasikowska), an odd, saddle shoe wearing loner from a privileged home. She doesn’t like to be touched and she sees and hears what other people don’t. When her beloved father (Dermot Mulroney) dies in a car accident, an uncle (Matthew Goode) she never knew existed comes to live with her and her vapid mother Evelyn (Nicole Kidman), all is not what it seems.

As the insidiously charming Uncle Charlie immerses himself in their lives, India becomes suspicious of him. Curiously the more India learns of his wicked secrets the more fascinated she become by him. Meanwhile the poor widow Stoker also takes a shine to Uncle Charlie, which he deftly uses to provocatively manipulate both of Stoker women.

To say much more about the plot would ruin the ride. Suffice it to say the whole thing plays out like cerebral dance. All three of them watch each other, trying to figure out what’s going on with each other. It’s a bit of a head game for the audience as well. We (the audience) never become emotionally involved. Instead Miller and Park engage our minds and stimulate our visual senses. We watch the proceedings with the same cool detachment that India does when she watches a spider crawl up her leg. This is genius for a game of psychological suspense; done any other way Stoker would be wholly unpalatable.

The time and place are current day, but you would scarcely know it from the way Park dresses his characters and the house. This works to build his atmospheric canvas to be sure, but it’s the simple but intriguing imagery he uses to seduce the viewer that really sets the movie apart.

Mia Wasikowska is disturbingly good as India. Matthew Goode is the perfect red herring for this vehicle. Nicole Kidman’s character is Stepford Wife meets laudanum laced Southern gothic novel. She doesn’t have a lot to do or a lot to say, but what she does, she does so with cold precision.

As someone only vaguely acquainted with Park’s work (Oldboy being the best known of his work in this country), I liked this far more than I thought I would. It’s probably the most approachable work he’s done so far, but not saying much. For people who know and like Park’s work, Stoker is a no brainer.

If Ginger & Rosa is coming of age story marked by self discovery, first love, heartbreak and idealism, Stoker is a coming of age story of self actualization and first arousal – both carnal and lethal.

Rated R for disturbing violent and sexual content.
Review by Michelle Keenan