Brotherly LoveThis film is the result of two pop culture trends coming together, neither of which I'm particularly fond of. One is the "Apatow Look-a-like." This is the film that has the same raunchy humor that one would expect from a film directed or produced by Judd Apatow, and often contains many actors that he works with, but nowhere is his name found. Films like Role Models, Zach and Miri Make a Porno and the forthcoming Observe and Report are a few examples. The other trend has coined the term "bromantic comedy", a term that I despise. This is the film that dissects the relationship between two straight men as they search for the strong platonic love for one another (the reality show "Bromance" is the worst example of this as it gives the world another reason to hate Brody Jenner). As I said, I don't care for these two trends but they have combined to create this surprisingly pleasant film.
The always reliable Paul Rudd plays Peter Klaven, a well to do, but meek, relestator who is recently engaged to his fianceé Zooey, played by The Office's Rashida Jones. As they prepare for their wedding, Zooey and Peter realize that he has no best man, as Peter has had many girlfriends over the years but has never gravitated toward a male friend. After many unsuccessful attempts, then enters Sydney (Jason Segel) the brash counterpart to Peter's controlled life who eventually helps Peter rediscover himself and grown on him as a best friend.
Rudd is always a good guy to have in your movie, and I've always been convinced that he'd make a good leading actor. He showed us one side in Role Models, and it was an effort I appreciated from Rudd but didn't think carried all the way through to the end. Here, Rudd is always doing great work but this time he's got the material to back him up, and if this continues, I would hope to see more roles with Rudd as the top star. Segel is great in the film, and is actually the reason why the movie works. Sydney is meant to be a total opposite, but his character is never cartoonishly over the top. He's got real problems, and many of them are called out and shown him as a human being. He is crude, but in the most realistic way one can think of. Both Segel and Rudd have great chemistry together and their friendship is totally believable (unlike Rudd and Seann William Scott).
Circling them, the supporting players tend to range from good to throw away. For instance, Jones is a good sideline for the film as she always invests a warm spirit without stealing the focus away from the two leads. Jaime Pressley and Jon Faverau (yes, the director of Iron Man), play a couple friend of Peter and Zooey and the two can go over the top in one moment then bring it back down to a reality the next. Andy Samberg as Peter's gay brother and J.K. Simmons as his crass father are good saviors to a film, but others like Rob Huebel as Peter's real estate rival, Thomas Lennon as an awkward "man-date" participant, Joe Lo Truglio as a voice pitch impaired trainer and Lou Ferrigno as himself seem like parts of a movie striking below the smart bar, which didn't seem necessary for a movie that could have been a little smarter.
Director John Hamberg and his co-writer Larry Levin most of the time deliver well in the comedic scenes as well as the sincere ones. Not only are the moments between Peter and Sydney genuine, but so are the moments between Peter and Zooey, a rare find in these films. Still, there are elements of the story that don't always work and they seem included just to excite for excite sake. For instance, I don't really understand why Samberg's character is gay since the film does nothing with him, nor do I really get why all the friends circling Peter and Zooey tend to be one note characters. Fortunately, these concerns are not present all the way through.
As much as this film tries to be a little smarter than what you would normally expect, it still reduces itself to some sophomoric humor that really makes the quality lower itself. It's too bad because with such a strong execution from a wimpy premise, that would have been a major surprise. Even still, there's a lot to take from the film, particularly the stellar performances from the whole cast. I may not like the reasons for the movie's existence, but I do like the finished product. *** / ****; GRADE: B
Knowledge is SourI've always been amazed at how Nicolas Cage is one of those few actors who is able to let his own hair upstage him in nearly every scene. I've also been amazed at how Cage is constantly able to gravitate toward sub par material when we obviously know that he is much better than that. Why must the latter half of his career be plagued by Ghost Rider, Next, Bangkok Dangerous, The Wicker Man and the ridiculously silly, but money grabber that it is, National Treasure films. For his latest outing, I was going in with some pretty low expectations, as one can imagine. In the end, I found many elements to a film that made it a little more tolerable than I thought it would be.
Cage plays John, a professor at MIT who is a nonbeliever about all things predestined and divine. As his son Caleb attends the opening of a time capsule at his school from fifty years ago, he discovers a piece of a paper scribbled with numbers all around. John discovers that these numbers correlate to major disasters that occurred over the last half century and three more dates remain until the numbers finally run out.
Knowing is a film that starts off with a good premise but finds some flaws within its execution. Director Alex Proyas, the man behind the cult classic Dark City the enjoyable joyride known as I, Robot dresses every scene up quite nicely, and he has a good sense of pace for the film. All the action is able to flow out at an even pace and we don't get a film that seems hurried along. Proyas's direction is also enhanced very well by the excellent lighting from Simon Duggan and the effectively eerie score from Marco Beltrami, particularly during some intense disaster sequences that accomplish their unnerving tasks.
However, it is the script that is the major fault of the film. John switches from skeptic to true believer with no stop in between and his quest is always one that feels it doesn't have energy. By the time we get to the third act, the plot no longer seems necessary. Some might laugh at the film's heavy religious ending, but I quite enjoyed the reminder of science fiction's strong parallel to religion. Still, that doesn't mean all of it easy to take in, and even I found myself rolling my eyes during some of the final parts of the film.
At this point, you're either going to like Nicolas Cage or you're going to hate him. Here, there are reminders that he provides which shows he is still a great actor, and there are other moments when his mind goes on auto pilot with that blank stare as he lets the action sequences take over. Overall, it's certainly not the best work Cage has done, but we've certainly seen him in a lot worse. Some other members do quite well, such as Chandler Canterbury, who plays Caleb as more than just the plucky kid and Nadia Townsend as John's sister brings some good natured humanity to the film. However, Rose Byrne doesn't really impress here and she's got a pretty basic throw away part.
The movie is far from perfect, and because of a tough call with the third act, I can't really say that the film is a recommendable one. However, knowing where Cage's career has been the last few years, to get a project that has an intriguing premise and a halfway decent execution is a nice surprise. Unfortunately, the film doesn't follow up all the way through, but I certainly found this to be a little more engaging that the poster might had led me to believe. **1/2 / ****; GRADE: B-
No comments:
Post a Comment