Reviews: Fantastic Mr. Fox & A Christmas Carol

Fox is a Hound

There are some animated films out there that are to be admired solely for their attempt to tell an interesting story without being confined to the shackles of misleading marketing. For instance, there was a small Australian film called Mary and Max that came out this year. Like this film, it's stop motion but is nowhere near kid friendly. I didn't think the film was magnificent, but I applauded its attempt to be a little edgier without dumbing itself down to appeal to kids. Only in America, it seems, are animated films always sold as family fare. With this film, the marketing makes it seem like its for the whole family, but with so much quirk and slow jokes, I have a hard time believing kids will go all out for it. I am not a small child, and even I grew restless with this often humorous and tedious exercise.

From the book by Roald Dahl to the offbeat interpretation of Wes Anderson, the film centers on Fox (George Clooney), an ambitious and sneaky chicken thief who promises to settle down into a normal job after his wife (Meryl Streep) announces she's pregnant. Fast-forward tow fox years, and Fox is working as a newspaper writer and living in a hole in the ground with his family, now added by son Ash (Jason Schwartzman). But across the fields, three big-top farmers and their hordes of livestock tempt Fox back into his illegal ways, until they turn on him.

I admit that I'm not the biggest Wes Anderson fan. I do admire the style of his films, but sometimes it's all a little too quirky for me, and it tends to cover up some rather shallow characters. Even though Anderson has never worked in animation before or adapted someone else's work, this film still retains the offbeat humorous edge that all his films comply with. Some of the humor is right on and delivers a smile or light chuckle, and all of it is aided by the great texture the old-school style of stop-motion. Most of it, though, doesn't register much and instead overindulges a bit on the fancy. The script by Anderson and Noah Baumbach (big fan of his since The Squid and the Whale) doesn't have much traction in providing a concrete storyline to invest in from beginning to end. Not every character works, but I will say the script does offer a fair amount of funny lines and surprisingly poignant moments balanced out with ones that offer little and make a film under 90 minutes feel quite long.

The voice acting here is actually quite good, and is almost a saving grace for the film. Clooney and Streep provide the right amount of humor and sorrow in their characters, and find the balance quite well. Schwartzman's quite sarcasm and snippy attitude attract much glee, as well as Eric Anderson as the cousin who comes to stay with the Foxs and gets begins a rivalry with Ash. Michael Gambon also has some nice time as the most notable farmer, and his voice always pierces through the dull moments of the screen. Other talent like Wally Walodarsky as a meek possum friend, Bill Murray as Fox's badger lawyer, Willem Dafoe as an antagonistic rat are not present enough to get a good sense of their importance. Their presence on screen is enlightening, but not too much depth to their personas.

I don't think this is a terrible film, and in some parts of it I think it's quite excellent. I like the voice talent behind the film, I like the look of it, and I even think it's quite funny in some parts. However, there's just too many moments of slow patches and uninspired humor for me to fully recommend the film. I do applaud Anderson and his company for trying something different with the animated genre, something I wish more people were willing to do. If that were the case, then we'd get movies that are a little different from the rest, but still offers something just as good as the live action stuff. It'll be a good day when animated films can be looked at as not just family films, but just films. **1/2 / ****; GRADE: B-

A Christmas Gory

The hate now brewing inside the film loving community against Robert Zemeckis and his new found love of motion capture animation is extremely palpable. With every new announcement of an upcoming Zemeckis project, the haters seems to be ready to pounce directly on his doorstep and tear his ideas to shreds. I can't quite figure out why, but my guess is that they feel the animation doesn't look realistic, which is Zemeckis's intention. That's not really an issue for be because I recognize that it's animation and I don't go in looking for a realistic face. I look for an interesting story, which is something that Zemeckis's two previous films The Polar Express and Beowulf have been without. I can't say the same this time as Zemeckis is working off of a universally praised story and comes up with a thing or two that is really inventive.

Everyone should know of what is perhaps Charles Dickens's most famous story about the stingy old miser Ebenezer Scrooge and his Christmas eve visits from three spirits that send him on a change in character to become a merry philanthropist. Jim Carrey inhabits the role of Scrooge, as well as the three spirits that haunt him throughout the night. Also showing up are Gary Oldman playing Bob Cratchit and Marley, Colin Firth as Scrooge's more joyous nephew and Robin Wright Penn as Scrooge's long lost love from the past.

The number of Christmas Carol adaptations are countless (my favorites are the Disney animated one with Mickey Mouse's characters and the updated Scrooged with Bill Murray), but this one manages to offer something the previous incarnations don't have. This is perhaps the closest adaption to the book, and a lot of the power and creepiness is retained through Zemeckis's direction. He handles many of the silent moments quite well, and manages to showcase all the right moods when necessary, whether that be suspense from the ghosts or tenderness from the sadder moments. I do think Zemeckis lets his faithfulness get in the way a bit, and sometimes allows the dazzle of the animation to take over from the story, particularly in an extremely out of place chase scene during the third ghost's arrival. Still, I think Zemeckis is getting better with each new film.

Carrey's Scrooge is helped both by the animation and his performance, and both do well at their respective jobs. Scrooge is always going to be a familiar character, so while his character arc is predictable, it's still fascinating to watch his sunken features change as the story progresses. As the ghosts, Carrey also does a good job with them, though I think he piles on the Ghost of Christmas Present on a little too thick. The older version of Scrooge obviously had the most attention, and other characters seem to look like similar molds of the background players, with the exception probably going to Cratchit, who bears a good resemblance to Oldman. We're still at a point where it's difficult to judge a performance here as credit to the actor or the animator, but both tend to do their jobs well here.

Zemeckis still has a bit of a way to go with this technology, but he has come a long way from the creepy children's eyes in The Polar Express. It's difficult for a film like this to have many surprises, but it manages to pull off quite a few, as it manages to provide the same amount of emotion from the other incarnations as well as adding a level of genuine suspense that has never been achieved before, unless I just didn't see another film adaptation of this film in which Marley's jaw falls off; I could be mistaken. Maybe Zemeckis can finally get it right with his remake of Yellow Submarine. I doubt it, but one can dream. ***1/2 / ****; GRADE: B+

Review: The Road

The Road Not Taken

Leave it to Hollywood to continue their duality of films in the marketplace. It seems like there's always going to be one film out about a particular subject matter, and then not too long after that there's another one. Take 1997, for instance, when Dante's Peak was followed shortly after by Volcano. The following year saw a back-to-back double feature of Deep Impact and Armageddon. Now this year we have another one, another in the realm of fighting global disaster. There is this film and Roland Emmerich's schlock-tastic 2012. Between the two, one definitely has a bigger budget, one definitely has better acting, but only one is comfortable enough to sit through and waste a few hours of your life. Sadly, it isn't this one.

Based on the well renowned book by Cormac McCarthy (No Country for Old Men), this is another tale of a close knit group of people surviving a planet that has been torn apart by a global apocalypse. The specific event is never shown, but it has left the face of the Earth a barren, gray toned wasteland with bleak skies and raging fires. Viggo Mortensen and Kodi Smit-McPhee star as a father and son trekking their way to the coast, constantly trying to avoid the elements, staggering starvation and aggressive, cannibalistic groups of surviving humans. Charlize Theron pops up in flashbacks as Mortensen's wife before he left home.

I am thoroughly convinced that Mortensen is incapable of giving a bad performance. Every character he takes on has such an emotional well that he mines to perfection, no matter how large or small the part. Here is no exception, and he gives a tender and complex performance of a man not on a definite mission, but only to make sure his son stays alive. From Mortensen, he remains a man that isn't completely figured out, but we totally buy he strength and sensibility. McPhee doesn't soar in every scene he's in, but shows that he's capable of delivering an emotional side. Also, the makeup and cinematography are pretty good.

And that is about the extent of the praise I can give this film. The main fault of the film is that throughout all it's fantastically bleak looking visuals, there's not too much in the story that convinces you to stay through it. Director John Hillcoat and screenwriter Joe Penhall offer some great touches here and there, with the direction offering an interesting angle and the screenplay giving some nice conversational dialogue, but the whole thing never goes anywhere. It's very meandering and finally leads into a misanthropic mess. It looks good on the surface, but underneath it all, there isn't much as these two characters go from place to place with not much significance in between.

The one other major problem is related to the acting, and that is the connection between Mortensen and McPhee is never felt to the extreme that the film needs. The two are good in their own right, but the bond between father and son in extreme situations never pulls us into the story convincingly. Then, when an emotional peak is met at the end, it feels cheap and contrived rather than feeling touching. That lack of a connection is also felt between Mortensen and Theron, making a handful of those scenes feel like filler for an emotional reveal that is never felt. Robert Duvall shows up late in the film for a brief role as a blind man who crosses their path, but he feels wasted and more like an opportunity to show off the makeup budget.

I don't rely on the adage that one good performance can save an entire film (see my review for The Reader to reaffirm that). Despite the best efforts that Mortensen tries to put on the screen, the rest just doesn't hold up. The direction feels aimless and allows the film to become quite long winded, and the severe lack of emotional connections between the characters is the main reason why the film doesn't succeed. It's strange for me recommend a Roland Emmerich film with a phoned-in cast over one more ambitious and starring Viggo Mortensen. But I guess there's a first time for everything, a phrase that Hollywood hasn't heard in quite some time. **1/2 / ****; GRADE: C+

Review: An Education

World Hues

This has been one of the most elusive and, conversely, sought after films of this year for me. For the life of me, I'm not certainly sure why. The premise for the film is certainly not something completely out of the ordinary and upon first glance, at least from the trailer, it looks like a pretty tame presentation. Well, after a month of bitching to myself, the film has finally arrived at an easily accessible theatre. This isn't groundbreaking cinema by any measure, but this is a mostly well crafted piece of filmmaking that offers an intriguing story flushed out by its equally enjoyable characters.

Budding new breakout star Carey Mulligan has the leading role of Jenny. Jenny is the only child in a middle class, British home in 1961. Her restrictive parents (Alfred Molina, Cara Seymour), as well as her literary school teacher (Olivia Williams) hammer into her a strict schedule of school, music and language so that it all can lead to a hopeful destination towards acceptance at Oxford. She begrudgingly goes along with their plans until she one day runs into the stranger David (Peter Sarsgaard) in the rain. From there, David introduces her to a world outside of rigorous study: a world filled with expensive dinners, lavish gowns and culture at every turn alongside David's friends Danny (Dominic Cooper) and Helen (Rosamund Pike).

Nick Hornby is a well known writer both in the literary and Hollywood circles, but he's mostly known in the latter because of the former. Many of Hornby's published works have been turned into films (About a Boy, High Fidelity, Fever Pitch), but Hornby hasn't had too much practice at actual screenwriting. Here, he gets the chance and allows the story to unfold into some rich areas. It's all a bit rushed and awkward at the beginning, the story wanting desperately to leave the exposition, but soon the right rhythm is set and breathing room is established for the characters to develop. Hornby offers that usual light, British charm but also allows the script to become a meditation on '60s rebellion, generational hypocrisy and personal conflicts.

However, while the screenplay falters here and there, while mostly succeeding, the direction has a hard time finding the right place to strike. This is Danish director Lone Scherfig's first English language film, and while I am not familiar with her body of work, there is something about the execution here that feels off. It's not simply the problems of the beginning's rushed pace or the film's unwillingness to give up near the end. It's more basic problems like continuity mistakes in the editing and scenery. While they are simple slip-ups, it takes you completely out of the film and starts you on a direction away from the story. I have to say the direction is the weakest part because it feels rather amateurish, which is sad to say of someone as accomplished as her. Perhaps the old adage "practice makes perfect" applies here.

Mulligan has been getting a lot of press for her performance, and it is certainly well served. While the twenty-three year old (at the time) actress doesn't always seem like a sixteen-year-old, she fortunately has the talent to make you believe in a young body that is forced to grow up very quickly even when she emotionally isn't at that stage. Mulligan does a fantastic job at capturing the paradoxical mixture of certainty and confusion that propels her forward. She doesn't hit a single wrong note in this performance. Sarsgaard fits comfortably with an English accent, and lets David become a figure whose charm is easy to be distracted by and never becomes someone to fear. The same goes a bit to Molina, whose fatherly figure is never cartoonishly cruel and even allows a great emotional complexity to sink in. There are also nice supporting performances from Cooper and Pike, with Cooper providing a good amount of subtext and intrigue in his performance to allow admiration and Pike providing a real scene stealer of a comedic turn.

It's certainly not a flawless film, and you can even see some of those flaws as the film is being shown in front of you. However, the film is most certainly saved by a terrific ensemble, that also includes a brief appearance by Emma Thompson as the school's headmistress, as well as a script that is equal parts deep sophistication and light wit. The one film that always seemed to escape my grasp has finally landed, and I have caught it. Now there's only about a dozen more before the end is out. ***1/2 / ****; GRADE: B+

Reviews: 2012 & Pirate Radio

Apocalypse Now and Again and Again

You know, I had almost given up hope on old Roland Emmerich. I thought that his heyday as a great action director from films like Independence Day and The Patriot were slowly coming to an end. The Day After Tomorrow was a mild success, but it really wasn't his success entirely. And then there was 10,000 BC, a film that was so bad that I thought for sure that this was the final nail in the coffin, and the deliverer of the news that Emmerich's time as the new "master of disaster" had passed. Well, it might still be true, as Emmerich has stated that this will be his last disaster epic. But if it truly is, then he has gone out with a definite bang in this cheesy, over-the-top piece of riveting popcorn entertainment.

Like most of these types of films, and what is probably the best callback to those '70s flicks, there are a plethora of melodramatic storylines among an assortment of characters that circle around the natural disaster. The disaster this time is the destruction of the earth itself that happens to fall right on the Mayan calendar's prediction of an apocalyptic end to occur on December 21, 2012. The pseudoscience tries to explain that intense particles of the sun's rays are internally heating up the earth's core which is causing the crust to become unstable and produce massive earthquakes. Then that causes the polarity of the poles to shift and with it even greater tremors which then all leads to massive tsunamis all over the world.

The many subplots concern an out of work writer (John Cusack) trying to save his ex-wife (Amanda Peet), her new boyfriend (Tom McCarthy) and his kids, the lone scientist (Chewitel Ejiofor) going up against cold hearted politicians like Oliver Platt, a Russian billionaire (Zlatko Buric) and his own efforts of survival, the president (Danny Glover) dealing with the strained relationship with his daughter (Thandie Newton) and a little bit of Woody Harrelson's wacky mountain man who knows all the hidden government hidden secrets.

This whole film is what Emmerich has worked all his career for. Our modern day Irwin Allen is hellbent on destroying the earth a thousand different ways, and he does so here in some really spectacular manner. But it's not just that the destruction is so descriptive, it's that it is deliberately over the top extravagance. There's something fascinating about Emmerich's unabashed imagination at destruction, and the result is several action scenes that are incredibly over the top but ultimately fascinating in their path of great destruction. Emmerich does indulge in a little too much exposition, some flawed character types and a third act that adds one malfunction after another when the film should be wrapping up. But so what, nobody says this was a perfect film.

This is also not a film about the acting, but I will say that it isn't atrocious. In fact, Cusack doing an autopilot performance still manages to squeak out the charm enough for us to get invested with him. The same goes for McCarthy, a sometime writer/director (he make The Visitor, which didn't have even a tenth of the budget on this one)Performances from Platt, Newton, and Ejiofor seem so serious and good that they're almost out of place in this film. Peet and Glover give disappointingly bland turns, but Harrelson seems to be the only one who's having fun with this ridiculous film, and his brief screentime is some of the film's most memorable.

The film is filled with flaws and cracks, and some of them are as the ones that tear through Los Angeles. But on the whole, this is what going to movies is about. That fun, entertaining thrill ride and takes the mind on a roller coaster of effects. Emmerich has delivered just that in all its glory. Just when I thought he couldn't do it anymore, Emmerich manages to pull it off one last time. He says this will be his last, but can we really imagine him doing a little indie drama? That might be just as harrowing. *** / ****; GRADE: B

Cast Away

There was a movie that came out earlier this year that not too many people saw. That was Ang Lee's Taking Woodstock. Now, I liked that film, but I know some others that weren't quite too fond of it. I can understand that viewpoint because many people wanted a light, breezy comedy that would be accompanied by the sweet classic sounds of the era. Instead we got a heavy dose of character study that was followed by a third act that was tethered by faintly heard music and too much melodrama. I dug a good deal of that film, but many didn't, as was reflected in its poor critical and box office reception. Quite similarly was this film in its native England back in April, when it was called The Boat that Rocked. Since that time, it was given a trim, slapped with a new name and put out in American cinemas. I don't know how it compares to the previous version, but this film ends up being quite a fun ride and everything that Ang Lee's film should have been.

It's 1966, and the authoritative rule of the British government has zeroed in on rock and roll music as the element that is corrupting the nation. One politician (Kenneth Branagh) is in charge of shutting down a broadcasting ship in the ocean that is away from most on the onshore regulatory laws. On board is the head American DJ "The Count" (Philip Seymour Hoffman), along with another well known English one (Rhys Ifan), the ship's actual captain Quentin (Bill Nighy), Quentin's godson Carl (Tom Sturridge), who is the main focal character of the film, as well as other nutty character actors like Tom Brooke, Rhys Darvey (from "Flight of the Concords"), and Nick Frost of Shaun of the Dead/Hot Fuzz fame.

A big deciding factor as to whether or not you're going to like this type of film is if you love the music as much as the characters and filmmakers do. For me, I don't know if I'm willing to die in a fight for The Hollies, but make it the Rolling Stones and The Who, maybe so. Needless to say that the music from this era has been part of my life for a long time, and the soundtrack is full of nostalgic energy (though there are a strange number of references to the Beatles without their catalogue being heard). Still, the film is also quite funny, and writer-director Richard Curtis's well placed blend of quirky humor among a sea of sophisticated accents keeps the film afloat.

Well, most of the time it does. Despite the trim, the film still carries on longer than it should, particularly at the end when the ship meets an unfortunate accident. The sequence is well shot, but feels overly dramatic and out of place when next to the light comedy that came before it. That scene also goes on too long. As well, the motivation behind Branagh's actions never seem quite clear, and he's seems to only exist as an uncompromising, square authority figure to rebel against. On the one hand, it's nice that the film doesn't get bogged down in elaborate details of the specifics on the government's issue and creates a real mindset that the '60s were really about just standing up against who was in charge. At the same time, it makes the fight to stand up have little value when the stakes aren't really made clear. It's a win some, lose some approach that falters the film slightly.

Everyone in this cast contributes quite well, and it comes close to breaking the normal comedy rule that one person is the showman while everyone else stands around doing their best to keep up. It almost does, but the singling out has to go to Nighy, with his light attitude and always on the mark responses. The rest from Hoffman, Branagh, Ifan and particularly Frost all have their moments of comedic showcase and add a great deal to the film. As the central character of the film, Sturridge plays the part well, but his character presents a fault. He's not the most interesting character on this ship, and it's a bit of a shame when the film deliberately wants to make him be that. His struggles of searching for his long lost father are not interesting, and when we get a cameo by Emma Thompson, who plays his mother, the film really feels like it comes to a halt.

The film's has got some faults in it, for sure, but most of the film achieves what it sets out to do. It's a nice, breezy comedy that equally indulges on the laugh track and the soundtrack. If anything, you should see the film for the music and Bill Nighy's wonderfully comedic turn, as well as some other members in that very talented cast. I don't expect Ang Lee to take any notes from this film, but he probably should. But then again, Curtis should also take some notes from Lee whenever he decides to hit it heavy on the drama again. That would be a win-win in my book. ***1/2 / ****; GRADE: B+

Review: Precious

Harlem Nights

I remember first seeing the trailer for this film and not being too enthused about seeing it. The story of an inner-city black youth dealing with a destructive home and encountering the few adults that decide to take an interest in her was a premise that always seemed present in the trailers, and to me it was just another story about peering into the downtrodden life of a black teenager. It's a story that has been done before, and I was skeptical that I would respond to it. Then the buzz from Sundance started to grow, and I became a little more interested, but was still wondering how a movie that seemed this predictable was able to garner so much acclaim. Upon finally viewing the film, I finally understood why so many people had latched onto this truly emotional and powerful film.

As the subtitle to the film clearly states, this is based on the novel "Push" by Sapphire, and it tells the story of Clairice "Precious" Jones, played by newcommer Gabourney Sidibe. Precious is overweight, illiterate, poor and has two children, both fathered by her own father. Her mother (Mo'Nique) is a monstrous woman who physically and emotionally abuses Precious with frying pans and degrading remarks about her image, along with the insistence to get her to get welfare. After Precious is kicked out of school, she attends a special class to help with her reading. There is where she meets the teacher (Paula Patton) who is the one who takes a liking to her.

What's particularly amazing about this film is that it continually allows you to get invested in the extreme melancholy of this world without it feeling too manipulative. There's a rich blend of forceful and delicate touches that director Lee Daniels institutes for this film. Daniels is most known for producing Monster's Ball, but I did not respond so warmly to that film as others. However, this is an effort that finds a much more sympathetic leading character and earns every heart-wrenching moment through a character that doesn't beg for that sympathy. That is the real key.

Newcommer Gabourney Sidibe is really amazing in this role. Her relatable persona and upbeat personality in the face of such horror is the real spirit of the film, and she infuses the film with an incredible amount of believability. She is funny, charming, depressing, and hopeful all at the same time. As the horrific mother, Mo'Nique has been getting a lot of press. I don't want to oversell her performance, but I do think she's very good in a role that requires you to despise her throughout and try to get some sympathy by the end. It might totally succeed, but she does a truly remarkable job at providing so much energy to a hateful person. And that is more than I thought I would ever say about the person who starred in Soul Plane and Phat Girlz. There are also nice supporting players from Patton, the many schoolmates in Precious's class, and even Mirah Carey in a deglamoured role as the social worker and far away from Glitter.

There are some times when this film comes dangerously close to histrionic melodrama. However, just when it's about to get to that point, it settles down and offers the drama to then unfold in the energy of the performances. Sidibe, Mo'Nique, their incredible cast and Daniels have to take credit for that. This is a film that may not look like much on the surface, but draws you into the many layers it hides. What is there is humor, tragedy, hope and what will probably end up being my favorite film this year. **** / ****; GRADE: A