Welcome to the second part of my look at the duplicity that is the Hollywood we know and love (or love to hate in some cases).   Yesterday I delved into the mainstream films, such as Transformers, which get little to no recognition by the Academy.  These are movies that represent the very monetary foundation of which Hollywood is built.

Today I’m going to slide the other way and talk about the performance side of Hollywood.  Films with limited budgets, little to no marketing and have to fight tooth-and-nail in some instances for distribution as well as theater screens.  They are the darlings of Hollywood, praised for often dramatic portrayal of characters and deeply emotional stories.  Yet, even with all the attention they receive when nominated for an Oscar, only a select group of viewers end up seeing these films.

In contrast to their mainstream counterparts, performance films have always been the underdog.  It starts from the very point the script is completed all the way to getting onto the screen.  It’s the latter which ultimately proves the most critical because without theaters to show it, what good is a movie?

Continue Reading →

Green Zone is the third collaboration between director Paul Greengrass and actor Matt Damon.  Previously, the two brought us The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum.  If you are hoping for another adrenaline laced conspiracy drama, this movie will meet you half way.  There is conspiracy in excess, but the adrenaline-not so much.

The first half hour does a great job of depicting how unstable conditions in Baghdad were early on in the Iraq war. Greengrass ratchets up the tension and dread much like Kathryn Bigelow did in The Hurt Locker, by merely giving us a glimpse into everyday life after the initial destabilization of Iraq.  Soldiers wear heavy uniforms in blistering conditions, and crowded city streets could easily be harboring suicide bombers or other dangers.  Everyone is constantly and understandably on edge.

Unfortunately, during the second half of the movie much of the action takes place at night.  Greengrass elected to film these scenes with his signature hand-cam, and these scenes are grainy, jarring and indecipherable.

I don’t mind watching documentary style film, and fortunately I don’t get sick from shaky cam (heed my warning, if you have any tendency to get nauseous during this type of camera work, this movie will do you in), but it is really annoying when you cannot see anything that is going on.  I found my mind wandering to my mental list of chores during some really crucial chase scenes, because I just kind of gave up on trying to figure out what is going on.

Continue Reading →

This clearly falls into the “no surprise” category as Columbia Pictures has confirmed that Dan Brown’s novel, The Lost Symbol, will get the big screen treatment. The third film in the Robert Langdon series, this time we find Langdon traversing the mysteries of the Freemasons in Washington D.C.

Scribe Steven Knight is set to adapt the screenplay from the novel which sold over 1 million copies in the first day. Knight’s other credits include drafts for Martin Scorsese’s upcoming Shutter Island as well as The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

While both Brian Grazer and Ron Howard are set to return no word on whether Tom Hanks has committed to the project. That said, I find it highly unlikely that he would not reprise the title role of Robert Langdon.

While the second installment of the series, Angels and Demons, performed less then The Da Vinci Code, $486 Million compared to $768, the resounding popularity of  The Lost Symbol is sure to help.  Moreover, The Da Vinci Code was wrapped in controversy which had people eager to check out what all the fuss was about by seeing the film. Angels and Demons had little to no controversy surrounding it. Regardless, a $400 + million take is by no means a failure.

I, for one, was not blown away by either film. However, they were serviceable thrillers with solid production value. While all these stories involve enigmas at some level, there’s no mystery as to why they’re popular and I’ll certainly check out The Lost Symbol when it hit theaters.

There are many things to like about Law Abiding Citizen including both Jamie Foxx and Gerard Butler’s performances, direction by F. Gary Gray, cinematography by Jonathan Sela and a rather taught and suspenseful screenplay by Kurt Wimmer.

The movie follows Clyde Shelton (Gerard Butler), a family man whose wife and daughter are brutally murdered in front of him while he lies helpless during a home invasion. When the killers are caught, Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx), an ambitions Philadelphia prosecutor, is assigned to the case.

Nick offers one of the suspects a light sentence in exchange for testifying against his accomplice. Sadly, it’s not the guy who did the actual killings but his accomplice that goes to jail. The real killer goes free.

Cut to 10 years later, the man who got away with murder is found dead and Shelton, without remorse, admits his guilt. Then he issues a warning to Rice: Either fix the flawed justice system that failed his family, or more people will die in the name of real justice.

Continue Reading →

While attending the Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour to promote The Vampire Diaries, writer Kevin Williamson gave us some updates and the current status of Scream 4:

“I’m almost done with the first draft of Scream 4. I’m trying to get that together for Wes Craven. We’ve got to get going on that, during the hiatus. We have Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox and Dave Arquette. I was always holding out hope because the pitch was about those three characters. I didn’t want to have to re-route the whole story. We don’t have to do that. I can do it exactly the way I want wanted. The story is going to be told the way I originally conceived it.”

The immediate good news for fans of Scream are that all the principals are back, hopefully this will mean Wes Craven will return to direct. Films like this do best when you can bring back that core creative element. Of course, few of the other characters survived the first three films to return anyway.

Some may wonder if jumping back into the world of Scream is a good or bad idea. The horror genre has changed considerably since the first Scream movie came out in 1996. Scream 3 alone is ten years old. The big money makers these days are franchise films like Saw and unexpected indie hits like Paranormal Activity. The closest films to what Scream was would be the recent Halloween reboots, and even that’s a stretch.

Continue Reading →

We’ve been known to give John Travolta a hard time around here, and we don’t mean to. The guy has got some serious acting chops, and he’s still getting work after all these years. Any actor/actress that has fa diverse set of ilms like like Broken Arrow, Pulp Fiction, Hairspray, and Look Who’s Talking on a resume deserves some credit, so we’ll give it to him.

His newest film, From Paris With Love, seems to throw Travolta into a role that was definitely meant for another actor, if not many. His image in this film is something we’ve never seen before (not counting Pelham) and it’s quite refreshing to see an actor reinvent himself over and over in a span of 40 years.

In a new clip from the Pierre Morel (Taken) film, Travolta, as special agent Charlie Wax, infiltrates an enemy hideout in an unconventional way. Check out the clip after the jump, and be sure to catch From Paris With Love in theaters on February 5th.

Continue Reading →

Mel Gibson returns to the big screen after a personal and professional hiatus of over seven years. His last starring role was in 2002’s We Were Soldiers. Many are hailing Edge Of Darkness as Gibson’s “comeback.”  So is it?  Meh. He is fine as a grief stricken Boston Detective, but he won’t be winning an award any time soon. There are a dozen actors that could have navigated this role equally well. That’s not knocking Gibson, but it’s a pretty  generic role.

Edge of Darkness veers into spoiler territory early, and often, and I don’t like to spoil movies, so here is a spoiler-free synopsis. Gibson plays Craven,  a single dad who goes to pick up his grown daughter from the train station. It is obvious he loves her very much. She seems slightly distant. Sensing something is wrong, he implores her to tell him what it is.  Shortly after they get home, she becomes seriously ill. Craven takes her to the hospital, but as soon as they reach the front door, his daughter is violently gunned down in front of him.

The rest of the movie concerns Craven trying to uncover the mystery behind his daughter’s death. It involves government conspiracies, shady political types, evil corporations, and unconscionable greed. Because Craven has no family left, his vengeance is of the reckless variety, which too often translates into over the top.

Continue Reading →

Peter Jackson has made films that many have considered “instant classics”, such as The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, a bloated and unnecessary remake in the form of King Kong, and some little-seen but great cult classics such as Bad Taste, Heavenly Creatures and The Frighteners. His newest film, The Lovely Bones, adapted from Alice Sebold’s novel of the same name, is kind of a combination of all of the above.

The story focuses on Susie Salmon, a fourteen year-old girl who lives in rural Pennsylvania with her parents and two siblings. She describes to us, via narration, what she wants to be when she grows up, her disliking of a snowglobe with a penguin in it, and even how she normally gets the “skeevies” when she sees someone looking at her weirdly. She didn’t get that last feeling soon enough, which inevitably leads to her murder and time spent in the “in-between” Heaven and Earth.

We see that the Salmons are an idyllic family as they get Susie a camera for her birthday. She is in the throes of her first unrequited love, and even has to suffer through a film club that makes her watch Othello with that guy “who has two first names. Laurence. Oliver.” It’s after this class, and a bold move from the boy that she likes, which leads her into the hands of Mr. Harvey.

Continue Reading →

Much like vampires, zombies are having quite the resurgence these days. Not that they ever really went anywhere, but it seems after the success of Zombieland (and video games like Left 4 Dead) everyone in Hollywood wants a piece of the zombie pie (which, while popular, probably wouldn’t taste very good).

Recently, AMC announced they were adapting Robert Kirkman’s The Walking Dead for the network with Frank Darabont in charge and now, not to be left out, MTV is apparently turning George Romero’s classic Dawn of the Dead into a TV series.  Yes, one more non-music program on a channel named Music Television.  Don’t worry, it’s doubtful they’ll make the zombies dance.  At least in that MTV will preserve the greatness that is Michael Jackson’s Thriller video.

So far MTV has not made any details about the project available:

“They haven’t given away much in terms of details surrounding the show, how it will link to the original film or even when it might hit the air. They have noted the show will feature a mix of the classic, slow moving zombies and the latest fad of turning the undead into Olympic sprinters. It’s good to see so much diversity on television.”

A television series based on zombies may seem unconventional, but one only has to look to shows like HBO’s True Blood to understand the supernatural appeal. Moreover, I can’t help but wonder if some, if not all, of MTV’s motivation is driven by Zombieland itself.  While made into a movie, Zombieland was originally pitched to CBS as a television series.  Coincidence? Perhaps not.

No matter how the project started, is anyone really going to complain about more zombies to watch?  I didn’t think so.

There are several things that director Roland Emmerich (Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow) doesn’t seem too concerned about in the bloated, CGI-laden disaster movie 2012. These include, but are not limited to:  plot, character development, plausibility, restraint, and subtlety. I kind of understand why he chooses to ignore these elements. If you get bogged down with all these pesky details, how are you supposed to focus on THE SPECTACLE?

THE SPECTACLE is the star of this film, and clearly every resource available was used to ensure that this movie looks good, everything else be damned. 2012 is a full 2 1/2 hour visual assault of CGI, destruction, chase scenes, and every natural disaster a geophysicist could possibly imagine. It’s chalk full of action movie clichés, right down to the brooding and estranged ex-husband who happens to be near his old family when disaster strikes, and must lead them to safety. Not only is the movie wholly unoriginal, but it actually feels like Emmerich just cherry-picked his favorite scenes from action movies he likes, and found a way to throw them all into a threadbare story.

This is director indulgence gone too far. The movie is an hour too long, and a few key scenes would have had far more impact if there were not an action scene thrown in every 3-4 minutes. It’s as though Emmerich is saying to the audience: “You are going to sit there in your seat, and you are going to watch the crap out of this movie.”

Continue Reading →