Film

Review: Public Enemies

2009-07-04T00:15:19Z

Public Enemies
Directed by Michael Mann

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

“Public Enemies” tells the story of bank robber John Dillinger (Johnny Depp), who became both the nemesis and the inspiration for J. Edgar Hoover as he was expanding the FBI. It’s a film that I would expect to enjoy, despite not being a big Depp fan, as it has numerous other cast members and the fact that I usually like cops-and-gangsters themes. But there are aspects of the project that took me out of the moment and left the whole experience feeling flat.

I’ve enjoyed the work of Christian Bale (Special Agent Melvin Purvis) and Stephen Dorff since they were both child actors, albeit with some misses, and I especially liked the appearance here of some other favorites in smaller supporting roles: Billy Crudup (as J. Edgar Hoover), Rory Cochrane, and Giovanni Ribisi. But the film takes a somewhat stand-offish tone with the characters. After initially introducing the major protagonists, we don’t seem to be encouraged to sympathize with either side. It’s hard to tell if this is an attempt at being non-partisan or an avoidance of the inherent risk of having an audience side with a doomed character. But the outcome made me feel detached, not really caring too much about anybody’s ultimate fates. And there is a lot of ugly fate at work. In recent years police have lamented the advanced fire power of criminals, but there are enough bullets flying around in “Public Enemies” to destroy vehicles and buildings, as well as human bodies.

My larger problem with the film, and this may have been very personal, was in the manner in which it was shot. There was a turning point in the movie for me, during a scene at the Little Bohemia Lodge, in the woods of Wisconsin (and a historic location in the Dillinger story), when the nature of the action and cinematography suddenly made me acutely aware that I was watching video and not film. I’m not sure why it hadn’t occurred to me sooner than that, but it then bothered me for the rest of the movie. Film and video, depending on quite how the video is shot and what cameras are used, have a different appearance and at times “Public Enemies” felt like an extremely high budget home movie, or at least something that seemed sub-par for a production of this type, more like the video standards of a few years ago.

The story itself seems sound, and the problems I perceived may not bother others. But I came away from it in a strangely ambivalent mood, wondering if I would have liked it even less with a different cast or liked it better with different cameras.

Review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine

2009-05-02T05:56:25Z

X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Directed by Gavin Hood

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

At the end of this movie, one of my reviewer colleagues remarked about superhero back stories and their generally downbeat nature. He was right: After all, one doesn’t get a grudge, a revenge motive, or a haunted, dark personality from a childhood full of happy picnics in the park and adorable puppies. You start to feel bad for anybody who encounters these characters early on. It’s like watching TV’s “Seventh Heaven” and sympathizing with anybody who had the misfortune of encountering the Camden children – only more violent.

However, in all of its dark moodiness, “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” is a fairly fun ride. After seeing the previews, I was expecting to spend more of my time in that eye-rolling “oh please” mode, watching endlessly ridiculous stunts and fight sequences. But there were only a couple (watch out for the helicopter and fire escape sequences) that really reached that ‘Legolas riding a shield down a Helm’s Deeps staircase’ level – the film equivalent of the ‘Fonz’ jumping the shark on “Happy Days.”

Hugh Jackman continues to play the Wolverine role well. He’s joined here by Liev Schreiber as his even moodier but equally likely to snag a sweater older brother, Sabretooth. They’re both recruited into a secretive military unit headed by William Stryker (played by Danny Huston – previously played by Brian Cox in X2). But when things don’t go quite according to plan, the not-so-happy gang go their not-so-happy ways – until, of course, their not-so-happy paths cross again. Not so happily.

I’m not qualified to judge whether “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” is faithful to the comic book origins of the story and characters. But it does a good job of providing a background for our hero while fitting quite nicely into the established sequence of the previous X-Men movies. There’s also a timely lesson in doing the right thing, or at least not doing the worst thing simply because one is told to do so by a superior officer. It should appeal to fans of the genre and subject matter and is fun enough to keep their friends and significant others pleasantly amused at the same time.

Note: Not only is there a scene after the beginning of the credits, but there’s also an extra scene after the end of the credits – so stick around until the very end.

Review: Star Trek

2009-05-09T03:03:31Z

Star Trek
Directed by J.J. Abrams

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

I’ll open by cutting to the chase and saying that this is a neat movie, firing on all dilithium chambers and achieving everything I had hoped it would achieve, despite a host of hurdles to overcome. So what about those hurdles…

Star Trek has a back story that’s intimidating to say the least. One has to decide whether to stick to the original canon or branch off in a new direction and enrage a generation of fans. Or, in the case of Trekkies, a generation and a next generation of fans.

It’s now 40 years since the first TV series ended, and there have been six series, including an animated version, and 10 movies. Some of those projects have leapt off in different directions (“Star Trek: Voyager”) or gone back in time (“Star Trek: Enterprise”) in order to avoid conflicts with the mythology. So it was an ambitious plan to not only work within the existing setting, but to also with the original characters.

“Star Trek” tells the story of how those original characters came together as the crew of the Starship Enterprise. A lot of publicity has surrounded the choice of a fresh young cast to play the familiar names: James T. Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto), Leonard “Bones” McCoy (Karl Urban), Montgomery “Scotty” Scott (Simon Pegg), Uhuru (Zoe Soldana), Hikaru Sulu (John Cho), and Pavel Checkov (Anton Yelchin – whose accent impressed my Russian friend). The whole lineup is well chosen and successful, with each actor given the opportunity to pay homage to their respective predecessor and shine in their own right. It would be a neat pick for a Screen Actors Guild cast award.

This is a movie on the grand scale of summery blockbusters – with great special effects and all the pizzazz one might expect. But what makes it work as well as it does is that it’s a great exercise in writing. Without giving away the plot, the filmmakers have managed to respect the origins of the series, update it and give it a refreshing new lease on life, and also leave the door wide open to more films that still protect that history.

I mildly enjoyed “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” a week ago, but “Star Trek” is like an object lesson in how to tell a back story in a manner that pleases fans, old and new. George Lucas could learn a lesson or two from this one. The rest of us can just have a blast watching it. Set phasers—and opinions—to stun!

Davis in last minute race to host "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" world premiere...!

2009-04-18T01:38:39Z

We often hear about internet competitions to name things, host things, win things, etc. Well, a couple of weeks ago, Hugh Jackman announced that he would travel to whichever town raised the highest number of votes, to host the wolrd premiere of the new "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" movie, complete with all the trappings and stars of a Holywood premiere.

Amazingly, as the clock ticks down to today's deadline, Davis is in the running to host the event!

Here's the original youtube video press release with Jackman making the announcement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-drLdnk-g24

To vote and help influence the outcome and maybe have a little Hollywood glamour and blitz in our own backyard, log-in and vote:

www.x-menorigins.com/premiere to VOTE FOR DAVIS (95616).

Pop-Up Pop

2009-02-27T12:12:18Z

I started my Thursday evening at the opening night of the 2nd Annual Sacramento All Sketch Comedy Festival (www.AllSketch.com) which put me in the mood for more humor. This, added to the Sacramento Press readership’s love of music, fine artistry, and great depth, led me to end my evening at the midnight screening of Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience (!).

My first impression was that it was the least crowded midnight screening I can recall attending, with approximately 30 of the less curfew-challenged fans making little more than a slight dent in the capacity of one of the Century Stadium’s main dome auditoriums/auditoria (take your pick). My second impression was that 3D is apparently taking hold, for a while at least, given five previews for upcoming attractions in the format.

However there’s an odd irony in this project, given such a medium. 3D cinema is an attempt to take a traditionally two dimensional artform and enable it to better represent a three dimensional world. (Of course it always tends to do this by filming people thrusting and throwing things towards the camera for added effect, in a manner almost but not quite entirely unlike the way that people actually behave in that three dimensional world.) However, the three brothers Jonas have previously been converted from actual three dimensionality into a two dimensional market sensation by the folks at the house that Walt built and so it seems additionally artificial, like rehydrating a dehydrated food product.

Although not without significant talent, the Jonaseses are merely one of the latest commercially packaged music sensations, having risen to fame largely through their association with Miley “Hannah Montana” Cyrus, the achy breaky cash cow daughter of daddy Billy Ray. So these newest kids on the block follow assorted acts from the Monkees to the manufactured boy bands of the 90’s, although they may have most in common with Hanson, another brotherly threesome who had the audacity and skills to actually write, play, and perform their own material (and who grew to be far better than most media ever acknowledged) rather than simply line dance their way through somebody else’s tunes.

That said, the concert footage in the film is quite well done, proving that one doesn’t need Scorsese to make a decent concert film (take that Rolling Stones!). It’s hard to tell how many takes might have been employed and the clips seem fairly heavily edited from the overall show given a few wardrobe changes along the way. But it’s an energetic and showy performance, supplemented by both acrobatics and pyrotechnics, and a strange performance on the top of three tall columns that played out like a 1,550 year anniversary celebration of the death of Saint Simeon Stylites (take that Dennis Miller!).

The concert clips are the primary 3D material and they are interspersed with mostly 2D coverage of behind the scenes activities and tightly scheduled appearances, including a remarkably pointless-seeming occasion in which Times Square ground to halt while thousands of fans watched the Jonaseseses arrive in a motorcade, buy three freshly available CD’s in a publicist’s moist dream trip to the Virgin Megastore, and then leave. But the lowest low point of the movie is a self-contained music video shot in and around Central Park, in 3D, that plays almost like a parody of obviously lip-synced and staged performance video over studio audio. And it seems entirely out of place and poorly conceived in a film that otherwise clings to a slight semblance of authenticity.

By comparison, the high point is probably an appealingly edited sequence of clips over the closing credits. Either that or the weird auxiliary surround sound associated with singing audience members. After watching it with the midnight audience of just 30 or so, I would suggest earplugs and Xanax for a primetime screening.

This is a film that fans will hail as celluloid gold and non-fans will either avoid like the plague or respond to as if infected by the plague. Watching the brothers display their assorted talents also primes one for future Jonas trivia, like which Jonas fathers a child with Miley Cyrus in the lukewarm summer of 2012 and names it Bristol Palin Cyrus Jonas in honor of that other champion of abstinence education. If the Jonaseseseses are the spinoff of that other spinoff offspring, then Nick seems most likely to spinspinspinoff, perhaps with Kevin as his road manager and session guitarist, while Joe seems most likely to chase his dreamboat youth on a VH1 reality show for capsized dreamboats. That may be overly harsh and it’s based on nothing but totally unjustifiable conjecture, but I hope for their sake they have a good financial manager.

Review: A Single Man

2010-01-08T09:30:12Z

A Single Man
Directed by Tom Ford

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Colin Firth plays George Falconer, a professor in 1962 Los Angeles who loses his long time partner in a distant car wreck and struggles through the lonely aftermath, trying to get through each day without him. There’s nothing unique about losing a loved one but Falconer, as a gay man in that period, has only one person he can share his feelings with, his best friend Charley (Julianne Moore) with whom he also shares a complicated past. At work and in his daily life, he maintains a stoicism that hides the lost romance that was always hidden.

“A Single Man” is based on the novel by Christopher Isherwood – the Chris of “Chris and Don” and the writer of the source material for “Cabaret.” The film is directed by fashion designer Tom Ford. There are some directorial choices that are a little too self-conscious at times, but the result is still powerful and one of the top picks of the year (it’s a 2009 film opening slightly late in Sacramento). Firth is excellent in the lead role [side note: Firth himself is the child of two college educators] and is supported well by Moore and by Matthew Goode as lost love Jim (seen in flashbacks – and also seen in another release this week: “Leap Year”). All grown up since 2002’s “About a Boy,” Nicholas Hoult plays a concerned student in one of George’s classes and rounds out the cast nicely.

It’s perhaps too easy to look at “A Single Man” in the context of the era depicted and sympathize with George for the time in which he lived. This was California a decade before Harvey Milk moved from New York City to San Francisco and a period when ‘moral turpitude’ was still very much an issue, especially for educators. But, almost 50 years later, and despite much greater acceptance of gays in society, many individuals still live in fear of adverse family reactions and even the loss of employment for simply being themselves. One of the complications for George is that he isn’t welcome at Jim’s funeral—and is only even aware of it because of the kindness of a single sympathetic family member. This is not something that will be hard to appreciate for gay members of the audience, especially those who have had to cope with similar inhospitality and homophobia. And the fictional George and Jim, as well as the real life Chris and Don, would still not be able to marry in today’s California.

But, politics aside, the movie is excellent and reminiscent of both “Lost in Translation” and “The Visitor” in terms of capturing a mood and a moment in the life of a middle aged man who no longer expects to form the type of personal connections he has previously. It would make an interesting double-header with the character study of middle-aged isolation, albeit more self-inflicted, depicted by George Clooney in the similarly excellent “Up in the Air.”

"A Single Man" opens at the Crest Theatre, January 8th.
For showtimes and other details visit www.thecrest.com.

Review: Transformers - Revenge of the Fallen

2009-06-26T17:50:27Z

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Directed by Michael Bay

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Describing this movie is an almost pointless exercise. It’s not going to be seen—or not seen—because of what critics think, or based on minor details like logical storytelling and plot coherence (or the lack thereof). It’s a movie that will be raved about by fanboys and by those who just dig 150 minutes of sequentially coordinated but also oddly disjointed special effects. In that regard, it’s a visual orgy of arbitrary excess.

That arbitrariness often comes in the form of clashes between the signature “alien robots” with no real sense of logic as to who is likely to win in any such encounter. That the Autobots win more on balance than the Decepticons seems to have very little foundation other than the old movie phenomenon that suggests that good guys are stronger and shoot straighter than bad guys. We are somewhat reliably informed that Optimus Prime (a juggernaut of a good guy) is going to win any reasonably fair fight, which makes one wonder if it’s really that fair, but you could reverse the outcome of almost any other clash without really affecting much or noticing the difference.

You’d have to watch the movie at about quarter speed to actually pay close attention to the robots as they make their extraordinarily complicated transformations from vehicles or appliances to hyper-articulated fighting machines. There isn’t an ounce of subtlety in the movie – not that any is expected from either the material or the director. The first sight of Megan Fox, for example, is in short shorts, from behind, as she stretches across a custom motorcycle. If she’s the objectified object of lust, and she is, then most of the other characters are just as broadly painted archetypes.

This is a movie that stalls in the midst of a headlong quest for the ultimate weapon for an unlikely romantic interlude, and which can somehow take us through the back wall of the Air and Space Museum directly into an airplane graveyard somewhere in the desert. It’s clearly more of a commercial for the US military and Chevrolet than for Mapquest or MENSA. But Shia gets sweaty, Megan gets skimpy, his parents provide moderately comic relief, robots share b-movie witticisms as they pound on each other, and many, many, many things explode. And those are what will ultimately matter as it takes the box office crown for a week or two.

Review: Battle for Terra

2009-05-02T06:01:29Z

Battle for Terra
Directed by Aristomenis Tsirbas

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

“Battle for Terra” is the latest politically-charged kids’ movie. It’s also the latest to come to the screen—where available—in ‘Real D’ 3D. Thankfully, it didn’t seem quite so overt in its pandering to the 3D technique and, as such, I think I enjoyed the effect more than when I feel like I’m being played by having things cinematically thrown at me.

Alternatively titled as just “Terra” the story expands on an idea that director Aristomenis Tsirbas explored in a seven minute animated short of the same name in 2003. We’re first introduced to an alien world of seemingly near-idyllic bliss, with a capable but seemingly low-tech species who fly and float around their planet in harmony with their neighbors and surroundings. This setting is disturbed by the appearance of an object in the sky, initially prompting religious questioning, but resulting in an attack by humans. We are told that in our future, humans have exhausted the limits of Earth and have terra-formed both Mars and Venus, with a subsequent war of independence between the planets resulting in disaster and a group of survivors on a quest for a suitable new planet to colonize.

For starters, the resource-centered themes are as heavy here as in any kids movie. But there’s also the even deeper question of the morality of invasion, conquest, and dominance. The story happens to focus on humans and aliens, but the message might just as easily be directed at perceptions of ethnic/religious superiority or the disregard towards native populations portrayed throughout our own history by assorted waves of expansion. Interestingly, the film also shares with “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” a strong message of questioning authority and not following orders that seem contrary to societal lessons about right and wrong. It’s certainly well matched to the resurgent torture debate.

The imagery is designed to appeal to children. Though there is too much death and destruction for the youngest among them, and the material is certainly not lightweight and could prompt some pretty heavy discussions in the minivan/crossover/SUV on the way home from the theater. There’s also a resemblance to “The Village,” in the idea of a group of elders sheltering their people from reality, in a manner they believe to be for their benefit. It’s probably better than “The Village” in that regard, but then that bar is Shyamalanningly low.

I enjoyed “Battle for Terra” more than I expected to. It’s a modern day futuristic parable, and it’s worth knowing a little of what to expect before walking in with the kids. It’s also probably not the film to have your kids watch with other parents who don’t share your political ideals, as it has the potential to cause a few sparks to fly.

Review: Monsters vs. Aliens

2009-03-28T19:16:17Z

Monsters vs. Aliens
Directed by Rob Letterman and Conrad Vernon

by Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

This is an interesting release for Sacramento, for a couple of reasons. For starters, it’s set in California, with the initial action taking place in the Central Valley and the climax in San Francisco. But it’s also a bit of a departure from the established norm in this market, in that it’s being released in 3D on the giant IMAX screen on the same day as it hits the multiplexes – so you can pick your format without having to wait.

Susan (voiced by Reese Witherspoon) lives in Modesto, where she’s about to marry the local TV weatherman Derek (Paul Rudd). Derek is waiting to expand his horizons with a move to an anchor position in the larger Fresno market, but he isn’t quite ready for Susan’s expansion into giant womanhood, brought on by a direct meteor strike on their wedding day. Naturally, the newly enormous Susan is captured by the military, who house her with an odd assortment of previously found monsters, including a genius man/cockroach, an amorphous blue blob, an evolutionary missing link (Link), and a giant insect larva. The last of these is the least well developed, but also the subject of a cute running joke that has it guided around by a bright light suspended from a helicopter.

The monsters seem destined for a life of containment until a megalomaniacal alien arrives, intent on recovering the powerful substance from the meteor that has given Susan her strength and size. The basic story is very much geared towards children, with an interesting mix of animation that includes realistic objects such as chairs, tables, and machinery, but also very generically cartoony vehicles (unlike the perfect rendition of a VW Beetle in the recent “Coraline”).

Hidden within the kids’ storyline are a few small nuggets of humor for the adults, including stabs at San Francisco’s Tenderloin district and outsourcing to India. At one point, Link ponders whether the earth has become warmer and refers to what he perceives to be a desirable warming trend as a “convenient truth.” The movie also offers some appeal to older siblings by having the President voiced by Comedy Central’s Stephen Colbert – who is also in the news this week for winning the popular vote in the bid to name a room on the international space station.

“Monsters vs. Aliens” is a fun ride for younger kids, and is just amusing enough to keep the rest of the family entertained. There are several scenes that are set up to benefit from the 3D effects, but the basic appeal of the movie would be preserved in 2D. That said, some of the multiplexes have a surcharge for 3D screenings that cut the price differential compared to the IMAX – so it’s mostly a matter of taste and magnitude.

Review: Terminator Salvation

2009-05-23T06:59:26Z

Terminator Salvation
Directed by McG

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

If the recent “Star Trek” was a total system reboot of an aging franchise, then “Terminator Salvation” is more like a welcome software upgrade, complete with flashier graphics and increased memory.

Set in 2018, it follows John Connor (Christian Bale) as he exhibits inspiring leadership in the battle against Skynet and the machines. If all of this seems a bit familiar, with outposts of humans battling overwhelming odds against hard to kill opponents led by a crusty Bale, it may not be the previous “Terminator” movies that you’re thinking of. At times it’s a little reminiscent of “Reign of Fire” only with bullet-spewing robots instead of fire-spewing dragons. And slimmed down bat-bikes.

All of which works pretty well. There’s nothing especially groundbreaking here, but it hums along quite nicely in a manner that ably jump-starts the series. “Terminator Salvation” is directed by McG, a former music video director who helmed the two big screen adaptations of the “Charlie’s Angels” franchise, and who manages here to interrupt the early scenes of this movie with one of the most gratuitous and redundant onscreen director’s credits I can recall.

One of the most interesting aspects of the movie, for industry watchers, is the second half of the sudden rise to ascendancy of Anton Yelchin, as Kyle Reese, John Connor’s time traveling teenaged father. Just a week ago, he was hitting the big screens as Pavel Chekov in the aforementioned “Star Trek.” In other interesting casting notes: Both Helena Bonham Carter and Jane Alexander have small roles that seem undemanding with respect to their talents; much of the movie is carried by Sam Worthington, not Bale; and a secondary but pivotal character is played by Moon Bloodgood, who seems destined to be the best ever use of a single vowel purchase on a future episode of “Wheel of Fortune.”

At some early screenings, there are gimmicky little movie-related gifts. At the end of “Terminator Salvation” I was expecting a network cable or an organ donor card. Instead I had to settle for a modest sense of contentment regarding a series that will be back. Probably starring Anton Yelchin.

Review: Crossing Over

2009-04-05T00:50:40Z

Crossing Over
Written and directed by Wayne Kramer

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Thirteen years after making a short film of the same name, writer/director Wayne Kramer (“The Cooler,” “Running Scared”) has revisited the topic for a feature that feels like three or four shorts spliced together. Unfortunately the outcome makes me wish they could be separated again and shown one after the other, with their respective overlaps encountered sequentially.

“Crossing Over” is the latest film to tell a story that weaves multiple lives, with a common theme that connects them. It’s successful on some levels, but it also suffers the fate of other similarly-structured films in that some of those connections have a small-worldiness that is almost distracting (I’m reminded of 1998’s “Dog Park,” which connected people in Los Angeles as though they lived in a village of 20).

The theme this time is immigration. “Crossing Over” attempts to be for immigration what “Crash” (2004) was for racism, which is a shame given that “Crash” played like an after-school special (“I’ve been a racist my whole life but my maid helped me when I fell and now I’m cured!”). To some extent it’s actually more successful than “Crash” because it isn’t preaching on content that’s quite so well established. Yet it trips over itself by trying to inject too many angles beyond the fundamental immigrant experience.

It’s often said that certain minority experiences can only be fully understood and appreciated by others with shared backgrounds. Perhaps the most interesting outcome of “Crossing Over” is the suggestion that the illegal alien experience is one of these shared-circumstances. I’ve seen this happen with a roomful of military “brats” watching a documentary about growing up in service families. As an immigrant myself, I can relate to the sense of powerlessness and vulnerability it entails, just as I recognized my Royal Air Force upbringing in the earlier screening.

However, at the narrative level, the twisted stories have been told better, separately, in multiple films over the past year or so: “Under the Same Moon” (a mother and son separated by the Mexican border), the excellent “The Visitor” (the vulnerability of the undocumented and legal callous disregard), “Towelhead” (cultural suspicions and fear), and “Gran Torino” (youth alienation and gang influences). A talented cast (including Harrison Ford, Ray Liotta, Ashley Judd, and Jim Sturgess) make “Crossing Over” pleasantly watchable, but can’t ultimately save it. “Crossing Over” is a much better starting point for a conversation about immigration than it is an inherently worthwhile movie-watching experience. But a trip to the video store with a copy of this paragraph would be far better.

Review: The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus

2010-01-16T00:16:04Z

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus
Directed by Terry Gilliam

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

This is a movie that will be seen for two reasons: The movie itself and morbid curiosity associated with the death of its star, Heath Ledger. Ledger had completed “The Dark Knight” and was shooting this when he died of an accidental drug overdose, leaving Director Terry Gilliam with half a movie, no lead actor, and an uncertain future for the project.

Gilliam is still best known by some of us as the wacky animator for the original Monty Python shows. But he’s also an accomplished director of not just Python movies, but also “Brazil,” “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas,” and “Twelve Monkeys,” amongst others. He’s also been trying to film “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote” (currently back in production with Johnny Depp involved) for years, with a truly disastrous earlier attempt chronicled in the noteworthy documentary “Lost in La Mancha.” So he’s no stranger to adversity in production.

But a dead lead actor is extreme adversity. Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell all stepped up and agreed to fill in for Ledger. Gilliam was able to make that work in a manner that is far more successful than it might sound. The story revolves around the ancient and mystical Dr. Parnassus (Christopher Plummer) who, we discover, has spent a great deal of time making questionable wagers and agreements with the Devil (Tom Waits). He currently drags a ragtag group around in an amazing horse-drawn sideshow in which audience members are able to pass through a magical mirror into imaginary worlds. This is where the heart of the film lies, in Gilliam’s extraordinary view of a fantasy world – one that makes you want to peak under the rocks and into the crevices of his very weird mind.

Into this arrives Tony Sheppard—played mainly by Ledger and, yes, that’s really the character’s name!—a mysterious stranger who falls in with this odd group and possibly has an agenda of his own.

This is a very cool movie – both for the crazy visuals (Gilliam at his best) and for the extraordinarily effective writing that pulled such a winning outcome out of such tragic circumstances. It might be the morbid curiosity that drives you to see it, but the movie can capably take it from there.

Review: Adventureland

2009-04-05T00:53:45Z

Adventureland
Written and directed by Greg Mottola

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

“Adventureland” is a movie I almost loved but instead had to settle for really liking. Imagine a story about a man who gives up on the idea that chance will ever favor him or that he could ever be lucky again. In the end, he regains his faith in good fortune and buys a lottery ticket. That act demonstrates his change of heart. We don’t need to see whether he wins or not.

James (Jesse Eisenberg – drama’s counterpart to comedy’s Micheal Cera) had planned a post-college summer exploring Europe, but his hopes are dashed when his father’s demotion results in the loss of his cash graduation gift. With no marketable skills, he finds himself working the games booths at the local amusement park alongside an assortment of equally unenthusiastic colleagues. The outcome is an amusing and touching summer of life lessons and romantic missteps involving the love interest (Kristen Stewart), the dorky colleague and mentor (Martin Starr), and the quasi-legendary older dude (Ryan Reynolds).

“Adventureland” manages to capture a sense of time, place, and experience that is somewhat reminiscent of films like “Dazed and Confused” and “Almost Famous.” But it’s a slightly-removed sense of authenticity in that it feels more like the reminiscence of a memorable summer than merely an observance of one. Certain key characters (for example, the park’s owners, played by Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig) seem genuine, yet also slightly undeveloped in the manner in which one might recount their existence to others many years later (“I remember this time when…”). This is James’ story, and we only know the others to the extent that he did (or that writer/director Greg Mottola did).

I left “Adventureland” with an uneasy feeling that it had progressed one scene too far and I might have preferred it if it had stopped five minutes earlier. That said, I’d still recommend it, especially to those who had formative but menial seasonal jobs. It’s an easy sell for me – as somebody who teaches about the business side of recreation, I enjoyed the setting of the movie. I’m also a fan of well-executed coming of age movies—not necessarily “first sexual experience” movies, but movies in which characters reach a moment of significant realization regarding the human experience, at any point in life. After all, one “can come of age” at any age.

Review: The Great Buck Howard

2009-03-21T06:39:23Z

The Great Buck Howard
Director: Sean McGinley

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Based on the Amazing Kreskin, known for his appearances on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, “The Great Buck Howard” tells the story of a mentalist (not a magician!) with a similar Carson track record (“Johnny Carson, not that nitwit who’s on there now!”). Buck has long since faded from the A-list of talk show talent and now tours the country, performing his never-changing act in never-filled venues.

Soon to be put-upon road manager Troy drops out of law school, which was more his father’s dream than his own, and stumbles into working with Buck Howard as a day job in support of his desire to be a writer. It soon becomes apparent that while Buck has faded in the public eye, his own mind’s eye view of himself seems as clear and star-spangled as ever, and he still exhibits diva-like behavior and expectations. Meanwhile, he continues to consistently entertain, especially with regard to his signature trick.

The most noteworthy aspect of the movie is the cast, including John Malkovich as Buck Howard, Colin Hanks as Troy, Tom Hanks as Troy’s father (type cast!), and Emily Blunt (who may become this year’s most-seen actress, with as many as six movies slated for release) as a PR coordinator retained to publicize Buck’s attempt at a comeback. Malkovich in particular is wonderful in the role of the faded celebrity. Colin Hanks has his father’s talent for the natural “everyman” performance. Additional self-referential cameo appearances include Conan O’Brian, Martha Stewart, Jon Stewart, Tom Arnold, Gary Coleman, and George Takei.

Unfortunately, the story itself is little unfulfilling and bland in its resolution. This despite being amusing and engaging in the first half, with such neat touches as look-alike theater owners and Buck’s propensity to assume somebody is about to walk the other way despite his alleged mentalist abilities. On balance, “The Great Buck Howard” is probably worthwhile for fans of Malkovich or either Hanks, for those who enjoy anything pertaining to magic, and for anybody who appreciates insider jokes about the nature of celebrity and/or the logistics and experiences of touring acts. But even they may feel that it somewhat ironically fades in the third act, failing to maintain its earlier gloss.

Review: Angels and Demons

2009-05-16T07:10:56Z

Angels and Demons
Directed by Ron Howard

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

“Angels and Demons” is the second movie made from a Dan Brown book featuring the character of Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks). The other is “The Da Vinci Code” and while the “Angels and Demons” novel appeared first, the films are being presented to audiences in the reverse order, with the implication in the film that the stories are sequentially switched. This works in the sense that the events of the two novels are independent of each other and the sequence is unimportant, so there’s no real point in selling the second film as a prequel just to preserve the original publication order. But it also presents some problems of another kind, both in the production and the marketing of the film.

“The Da Vinci Code” is canonically offensive to many Christians, especially the Catholic Church, and the Vatican was not supportive of the new film production, even obstructive, according to director Ron Howard. The other problem with the notoriety of the first film is that the stories are extremely different in both tone and content. “Angels and Demons” is a fairly straightforward murder mystery that happens to be set in the context of the Vatican during the time of the selection of a new Pope. If people are expecting another story that challenges basic church teachings then they will either be surprised (pleasantly or otherwise) or disappointed. If it’s offensive at all, it’s simply in treating the church and its traditions as a backdrop to murder and intrigue, which some may find crass, but it doesn’t contradict doctrine as “The Da Vinci Code” does. The film is actually quite respectful towards faith and people of faith.

Hanks reprises the role of Langdon, a Harvard professor and expert in religious symbols, who is called in by the Vatican (irony: common usage) to help solve a threat. He’s joined this time around by the always reliable Ewan MacGregor (as the Pope’s assistant, or ‘Camerlengo’), Stellan Skarsgard (as the Commander of the Swiss Guard), and Armin Mueller-Stahl (as a senior cardinal). The outcome is another film that is as slick in its presentation as one might expect from Howard, Hanks, and colleagues, and it’s entertaining in a shallow ‘whodunnit’ kind of way, but the story itself is really quite mundane and even somewhat flawed.

Without getting too deep into the film’s plot, there’s a threat against the lives of several cardinals, with a series of hourly deadlines that determine their safety. This ought to be the story’s strongest asset, as it should represent a plot that never lets up, progressing at a breakneck pace throughout. However the film preserves the book’s tendency to pause between events. This is a story in which you’d expect Hanks’ character to end the day wearing the same shirt he got blood on several hours earlier, not to give him time between deadlines to stop, clean up, and change into fresh clothes, with enough extra time for MacGregor’s Camerlengo to compliment his appearance. Isn’t there a cardinal somewhere that needs saving!?

In short, if you’re looking for a well-produced but routine murder mystery with a Vatican setting, then “Angels and Demons” is a satisfying holy rollercoaster, albeit also a fairly graphically violent one. If you’re expecting religion-redefining content and related controversy like that of “The Da Vinci Code” then it’s likely to make you question your faith in Hollywood’s ability to make people question their faith.

Review: Night at the Museum - Battle of the Smithsonian

2009-05-23T07:03:23Z

Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian
Directed by Shawn Levy

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

I was pleasantly surprised by “NatM:BotS” and it may be one of those rare sequels that manages to surpass the original, albeit by taking a slightly different tack.

Ben Stiller returns as Larry Daley, erstwhile museum night guard and now successful inventor and infomercial pitch man (supported in his commercial enterprises by another pitch man, George Forman). His old work place, New York’s Museum of Natural History, is undergoing renovations and updates, and the exhibits are scheduled to be archived in Washington. This of course is problematic, given the presence of an ancient Egyptian artifact that re-animates those exhibits at night. Suffice to say that the move is not entirely smooth, and fighting breaks out amongst the new residents and their incumbent neighbors.

Where the original movie was driven by the basic concept of museum exhibits that come to life, the sequel succeeds by going beyond that. This one is more character-driven, with greater time dedicated to appreciating the new historical figures involved, including Amelia Earhart (another delightful performance by Amy Adams), Kahmunrah (the older brother of the owner of the magic artifact – played by Hank Azaria, who also gives voice to two other characters), and Napoleon Bonaparte (in a scene stealing performance by Alain Chabat). Azaria in particular is given a lot of time and opportunity to engage Stiller, and “wins” most of the shared time on screen. Much of this novelty is at the expense, however, of the relatively under-utilized returning characters who are given very little to do—most notably Robin Williams.

One nice additional touch is the animation of the paintings on the walls of the Smithsonian, but it’s offset by some flaws in the internal logic of the film. At one point, Larry and Amelia get to fly the Wright Brothers’ first plane, the Wright Flyer. The real plane made a historic but very short and straight flight before falling victim to a stray gust of wind. But they fly it like it’s an air show stunt plane, crop duster and an X-Wing fighter all rolled into one. Later, they put a suspiciously heavy load in a Lockheed Vega.

The film also makes no suggestion of there being a range of effect for the magical reanimating artifact, whether above or below ground. It might actually be more fun—and plot-helpful—for characters to lose their mojo as the artifact moves out of some pre-determined range.

All of which is not really the kind of analysis that may seem appropriate for a kid’s movie. But a film like this should also be somewhat respectful of actual historic characters and objects, in my opinion. You could come away from this thinking the Wright Brothers were simply bad pilots of an awesomely capable plane, for example. That said, I had a far better time than I expected. I recommend it.

Moviebrief: I Love You Man

2009-03-20T06:44:30Z

For a word-of-mouth pre-screening of “I Love You Man,” the studio challenged any guys in the audience to coordinate their clothing and make it a man date to remember, in return for preferential seating. The only two at the Downtown Century tonight who were up for it were Sac State students Ryan Johnson (left) and Alan Badarou (right). (With apologies for the poor quality photograph, courtesy of my cell phone!)

The film itself is a true bromantic comedy, taking all the cues of the typical rom-com and translating them into a platonic, man-man bromance. The outcome is remarkably funny and endearing, largely as a result of the performances of leading men Paul Rudd and Jason Segal. Rudd in particular is almost pitch perfect throughout as a guy who has never really had any male friends and who is trying just a little too hard to fit in and be cool. OK, a lot too hard.

But it also works as a result of a neat cast of secondary characters, all of whom fit and play well against each other. It’s hard to fault a project that finds a reason to put J.K. Simmons, Jane Curtin, Jon Favreau, and Lou Ferrigno together on screen.

"Sunshine Cleaning," which I haven’t seen yet and which opens in Sacramento next week, has had an exceptionally strong opening in other cities (the best per-theater averages of the year so far) – but for now at least, the funniest movie I’ve seen so far this year is “I Love You Man.”

Brief Interview: Deon Taylor

2009-04-12T01:09:52Z

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

The Judges judge and the waiting line waits!

A little Hollywood-style excitement came to the Downtown Plaza on Saturday, April 4th. The event was an open casting call for the planned late night show “Up All Nite” from Deon Taylor Enterprises. Deon is a champion of local indie production, with a studio facility and multiple feature films and shows about to be released and productions that have remained in Sacramento despite the siren call of multiple, cumulative production incentives from other states and cities. I asked Deon a few questions in a quiet moment:

CW: Could you tell me a little about the concept behind “Up All Nite?”
DT: Basically the concept is to bring a live entertainment show here locally that highlights people that are in the entertainment space: writers, producers, directors, actors – whatever it is that you do – dancing! And to really highlight that because I feel there’s a lot of talent here locally and a lot of people who don’t really understand how to get into LA. Hopefully this show would let people see other people do their things and become an aid to help them get out.

CW: You’re producing a lot of material for TV and film here in Sacramento. Why Sacramento and why now?
DT: I think Sacramento now because I live here. I enjoy the area, I enjoy the place. Even though I’m in LA two or three days out of the week, I still come right back here. And like I said before, I think it’s a a growing market and I think there’s a lot of talent here and so I like to call myself one of the pioneers trying to bring entertainment into the space. Just like you man, you should be writing for Vibe or Entertainment Weekly very soon! [I laugh]

CW: So is this easier to do here because there aren’t 100 people on every street corner doing the same thing or would this be easier to do in LA?
DT: Yes and no. I think it would be received more easily in LA, but I think you have different battles. I think here the battle is trying to conform or change people’s mindsets to accept something like this here. Everyone wants to cheer when you fail and everyone wants to cheer when you win and you’ve got to make it work. Like I said, its different battles. In LA it would be accepted, but there’s 100 people doing it. Here it’s like will they accept it on top of them trying to accept it - can you keep their attention span long enough for them to want to have it more.

CW: What else else can people expect from Deon Taylor Enterprises?
DT: Everything man, everything. I’m working really hard to try to create a brand that speaks to all audiences from comedy, to horror, to cartoons, it doesn’t really matter. I have a lot of things in development. I think my next venture outside of shooting the film “Terminated” this summer is a cartoon I’m doing, called “Snappy the Lion” which is pretty funny and really cool. Snappy, like people are real snappy when they wake up or argumentative. Snappy!

One of the roles they were auditioning for was a cynical movie reviewer – so, naturally, I tried out. While in line I bumped into local actor and comedian Mikhail Chernyavsky, who seemed like a strong contender for the show’s host:

Mikhail Chernyavsky auditions for Up All Nite

CW: So why come down today?
MC: They had an audition for a TV show and as a standup comic that’s the natural transition for me. I want to do TV and I’ve always wanted to host a show and I’ve had fun hosting other [events] and I thought this would be a fun way to explore the Sacramento community!

Review: Race to Witch Mountain

2009-03-19T05:57:31Z

Race to Witch Mountain
Directed by Andy Fickman

“Race to Witch Mountain” is an interesting and ultimately successful retread of a franchise that goes back over 30 years to 1975’s “Escape to Witch Mountain” (and assorted theatrical and TV sequels and remakes). It’s very much a movie for kids, tweens, and the less cynical or gore-hungry teens, but it has themes and details that are designed to be appreciated by the adults in the audience, albeit probably the more left-leaning adults.

While many family movies pander to adults with mild (or worse) sexual innuendos or raunchy sight gags, “Race to Witch Mountain” is refreshingly free of any content that requires awkward explanations in the car on the way home. Instead, adults get lightweight cameos from the likes of Cheech Marin and Garry Marshall, neither of which is likely to be recognized by the movie’s primary target demographic. Additionally, the story is geared towards our current times and political climate and is notably different than the originals.

To the best of my recollection, in the original movies, the villains were scheming megalomaniacs of that generic kids’ movie bad guy type. It’s a product of our time that a movie like this gets remade with a mysterious government agency, armed with black helicopters and the Patriot Act, as the villain. Even the alien homeworld is depicted as having a short-sighted government and military, and the problem that has caused the visit to earth is related to rampant climate change. This probably isn’t a movie outing of choice for the local chapter of the young Republicans.

At its core, it’s still about a couple of aliens who look like human teenagers and who have powers that include telekinesis, telepathy, and the ability to pass through solid objects. After crashing near Las Vegas, the Disney-perfect duo, played by AnnaSophia Robb ("Bridge to Terabithia") and Alexander Ludwig ("The Seeker: The Dark is Rising"), pick the cab of Jack Bruno (Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson). Bruno is skeptical about these unsupervised kids carrying large sums of money, but he’s the ex-con cabbie with a heart of gold, and he gets dragged into their circumstances largely because he’s a nice guy.

The story is surprisingly well set up, with Bruno’s own backstory involving a group of generic thugs who, from a distance, are conveniently confused with the government agents who are tracking the kids, so Bruno initially thinks it’s him that’s being followed and not them. Las Vegas is also the coincidental venue for a marvelously geeky sci-fi convention (there’s some redundancy there) that acts as a neat background and plot point for a story about actual alien visitors. (Apparently the sci-fi crowd hasn’t received a government financial bailout and then been spanked for running off to Vegas for a meeting!)

“Race to Witch Mountain” is a perfect vehicle for Dwayne Johnson, who has been at his best so far with light and fun material that benefits from his apparent easy-going nature. He’s an actor who recognizes the source of his fame (as a professional wrestler) and doesn’t seem to have image hang-ups – as evidenced by his very loose appearances on “Saturday Night Live.” The two young actors in the movie are better than they might appear at first sight, required to play very awkward roles as characters who are not familiar with local language and customs, with the resultant stiffness being part of the act. Robb, in particular, already has an impressive resume and is a noteworthy actor in her age range.

Add an appealing dog, a Terminator/Predator-lite-like assassin, amusing tertiary characters, fun chases and loud but gore-free action, in addition to a storyline that already has appeal for kids of both genders, and you have a solid entry in the pantheon of family entertainment. This isn’t high-brow or an action film for fans more likely to enjoy the current “Watchmen” release, but it isn’t intended to be either and it works extremely well in the context of what it’s attempting to be.

Review: (500) Days of Summer

2009-08-08T07:45:44Z

(500) Days of Summer
Directed by Marc Webb

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

The Summer of the title is a girl and not the season and the movie tells the story of Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and 500 days during his relationship with her (Zooey Deschanel). This could be a fairly mundane story, with few significant surprises, except for the way in which it’s told. And that telling will appeal to some audience members and drive others completely crazy as to some extent the movie becomes more about the form than simply about the tale, a phenomenon that often leaves me on the crazy side of the fence but which this time around I found really appealing.

As the story unfolds, the audience is presented with an onscreen counter that tells us which day of the relationship we are on and the story itself is completely non-linear. Such stories are sometimes frustrating, depending on the effectiveness of the direction, as they jump from one point in time to another without immediate clarity in the chronology. In this movie, we always know exactly what moment we’re experiencing and it rapidly becomes both a roadmap and a running inside joke.

This is just one visual trick in a movie that employs several, perhaps one or two too many, which on balance I enjoyed. Mainstream feature films are often very formulaic in nature, whereas short films and music videos are often more visually innovative. “(500) Days…” is a debut feature from a director, Marc Webb, who has previously made shorter projects and seems to have carried that innovation forward, in my opinion successfully.

Certainly to the advantage of the overall outcome, Gordon-Levitt and Deschanel are both appealing and believable in most moments of their respective roles as the hopeful and smitten young man and the girl who is skeptical about the existence of true love. This is a story that could fail purely on an absence of chemistry and audience sympathy with other actors in these roles, but they are well matched and effective during both the highs and the lows of their relationship. Additionally, the movie has one of the best pairs of opening and closing scenes I’ve seen in a while, contributing to my overall positive response.

Review: District 9

2009-08-22T19:04:17Z

District 9
Directed by Neill Blomkamp

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Sitting at the Number 1 spot in this week’s box office rankings and modestly masquerading as a relatively low-budget creature feature, “District 9” is brought to you in a hands-off way by producer Peter Jackson (the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy).

I say masquerading, as it’s really quite an insightful commentary on politics and international power-brokering, both past and current. The story has aliens arriving over Johannesburg, complete with their clearly superior technology and weaponry but also with a broken spaceship and apparently no intergalactic towing service. This results in two outcomes – a giant refugee camp for the stranded “prawns, “as they become known, and a great desire to crack the potentially lucrative mystery of their guns, which don’t operate in human hands. The film unfolds in the style of a news story or reality TV show, as we watch a mid-level manager undertake the manipulative relocation of 1.8 million refugees from their longstanding slum environment to a new purpose-built tent city.

But what is most noteworthy is the effective way that the film reflects our treatment of not just refugees, but people who we deem unworthy of integration. Being set in South Africa, it’s impossible to watch the movie and not think of Apartheid. But it also looks like a cross between Gaza and any number of shanty towns worldwide, with a trapped population driven to desperation in the face of a complete lack of opportunity. It’s also uncomfortably believable to watch the policing of this fictional environment being performed not by the quasi-UN-type organization depicted, but by a multi-national company of mercenaries and arms manufacturing who clearly have a greater vested interest in the hidden arsenal than in the well-being of the prawns.

Like the best of the genre, this is science fiction against a backdrop of our political and social vulnerabilities and shortcomings. The aliens and their city-sized cosmic-utility-vehicle may be hard to believe, but the humans and their actions are all too real. “District 9” is the best sci-fi of the year, with more thought-provoking content than four years at Starfleet Academy—and without all the financial aid.

Review: Che - Parts One and Two

2009-04-13T21:12:35Z

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Che: Parts One and Two
Directed by Steven Soderbergh

History, it is said, is written by the winners. But that's an over-simplification, or perhaps an over-complication: It's written by whoever write histories, from their own perspective. Japanese textbooks probably don't look like ours when it comes to WW II. Was George Washington a hero in a noble and justified War of Independence, or was Benedict Arnold a tragic hero in a traitorous Revolutionary War in the Colonies - that probably depends if you grew up in the US or the UK. I've also lived in the US South, where you still occasionally hear about the War of Northern Aggression.

I'm not a historian and certainly not an expert in the life of Dr. Ernesto Che Guevara. So I can't comment directly on where the accuracy lies or who might or might not approve of this account. But it feels like a fairly non-partisan depiction, as though the audience got to tag along with the man and the action that surrounded him. And, whether or not you admire or agree with his politics and policies, you do get the impression that he was a true believer of his own message, not a partisan hack or an opportunist. The film is epic in proportion, with two parts and a total running time of 4h 17m (plus an intermission). The toughest aspect of this isn't so much the sheer length but the relaxed pacing that makes it seem, if anything, even longer.

The first film tells the story of the Cuban revolution, from dinner table plotting to addresses at the UN years after the fact. It is interestingly non-linear, as it jumps from later speeches and appearances, to and from the jungles and mountains of Cuba. To some extent, if there's a hero or a tactical genius depicted here, it's Fidel Castro, who is seen calling most of the shots with Che (Benicio del Toro) following those instructions (something that is missing in the later Bolivian campaign). But it also demonstrates the concept of an insurgency that has the hearts and minds of an oppressed people behind it.

Watching the two halves back to back is interesting for multiple reasons. It doesn't just compare and contrast the events, but it also demonstrates what we are often told about Iraq and Afghanistan - that the same tactics won't necessarily work in different places and with different people. In the second film we see Che as he attempts to repeat the success of the Cuban experience in Bolivia. This is a very different account, entirely linear in presentation, and as different in outcome as is possible. Here we see the insurgency failing among a people who have no reason to trust either side. With peasants who are unimpressed with money, for example, because they have nowhere to spend it, and with a counter-insurgency that's playing from the insurgent's handbook.

While slow, the overall effect is also compelling, and one gets an impression of the hardships, victories, and losses that would be lost in a lesser telling. And the two halves play somewhat successfully independently of each other, especially the first as a stand-alone telling of the Cuban chapter. If you have an interest in this subject and you get a chance to catch this before it disappears, I would recommend seeing at least Part I - otherwise make a note to see it on DVD when it arrives. It's a another powerful and significant collaboration between Soderbergh and Del Toro, who both won Oscars for "Traffic" in 2000.

"Che" plays at the Crest Theatre through Thursday April 16th - see www.thecrest.com for showtimes and ticket information.

Review: My Life in Ruins

2009-06-06T06:10:11Z

My Life In Ruins
Directed by Donald Petrie

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

“My Life In Ruins” is a little how I felt about my morning after watching this film. This is the follow up to “My Big Fat Greek Wedding” with several of the same production team (including Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson, who also has a small role) and lead actress Nia Vardalos (who wrote the earlier movie but simply acts, or acts simply, in this one). “My Big Fat Greek Tour Guide Job” would be a more honest title.

I’m not being a snobby film elitist here, knocking the lightweight romantic comedy genre. I enjoyed the first movie, and often dig even very formulaic offerings of this kind. But this is heavy in execution and featherweight in outcome. It plods along with stereotypical characters who are poorly cast, moderately offensive themes (ha ha ha, gay men are funny!), and virtually nothing that can’t be seen coming a mile away through a dirty bus window.

Put simply, it’s bad. It’s stiff and so broad in its portrayals that it resembles children’s theater or British pantomime. Vardalos often seems to be projecting her performance towards the back row - of the theater across the street. Her character, Georgia, is a laid off professor working as a tour guide. And not a very good one for the average package holiday participant who, we are told wants fun, shopping and sex, not anything resembling facts or history. The movie would have us believe she has lost her mojo, Austin Powers style, or “kefi” as the Greeks apparently call it. Her quest to regain it is championed by Richard Dreyfuss, as an aging tourist who’s lost his wife but not his own rambunctious kefi.

All of which would play better with a laugh track. Not because it’s funny, but because it needs some laughter coming from somewhere. I can’t remember a movie that seemed to be trying so hard at every step, yet stumbled so consistently. If you thought it was hard to maintain continuity in scenes with burning cigarettes of different lengths or wine glasses with levels that go up and down, watch out for the scoop of ice cream that changes size, shape, and lick patterns.At least in the movie, the bus tour gets better. Sadly, the movie itself doesn’t.

Moviebrief: The Haunting in Connecticut

2009-03-31T10:54:40Z

The Haunting in Connecticut
Directed by Peter Cornwell

The only thing haunting about The Haunting in Connecticut is its haunting mediocrity. If you jumped during this movie, then most likely the ear-bleeding ambient soundtrack level overcame the the Ambien®-narrative slumber. And on we go to find true experiences of horror result in horribly found experiences of true ennui. B-list--ness is no excuse for being listless.

Lo! I expect I have lowered expectations. Enough? Enjoy.

Interview: Trash Film Orgy's Co-Producer Christy Savage

2009-07-10T21:36:26Z

Trash Film Orgy
Saturdays, Midnight (doors open at 11:30pm), July 8th – August 15th
Crest Theatre

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

As well known to the veteran loyal fans (many of whom routinely wear zombie makeup) as it is completely unknown to more formal film festival goers, the Trash Film Orgy (TFO) opens its 9th season this Saturday, at midnight at the Crest. Every week of the season, TFO showcases a cult or B-movie offering with audience participation, in the form of competitive loud witty banter during the movie, not just permitted but encouraged. I asked TFO Co-Producer Christy Savage a few questions about the concept and this season’s lineup:

Tony: Could you explain the basic concept behind TFO?
Christy: The Trash Film Orgy is really all about fun. We embrace the sensationalism of the old Grindhouse movie shows, the fun of the Drive-In experience and the no-holds barred attitude of the Midnight Movie. We strive to give our audiences a truly unique, enjoyable theatre experience, while presenting the best in 35mm cult and exploitation cinema.

Tony: You’ve clearly had a taste for Trash Films for a long time, how did that first translate to the TFO festival idea?
Christy: Back in the late 90’s, our buddy Keith Lowell Jensen was doing a movie show, the Thursday Night Grindhouse, at the Colonial Theatre, and we were doing a similar sort of thing on Cable Access TV: Deth’s Oogly Hed. When Keith lost his partners in the Grindhouse, he suggested we team up to do a show at the Crest and well...the rest is history.

Tony: The screenings are a little unique in their audience participation, are there any guidelines and rules for audience members?
Christy: Once again, the key word for TFO is FUN! We strongly encourage folks to play along and have fun at our shows, but of course we do expect our audience to also be respectful of others and show normal common decency. For instance, we’re fine with heckling, but please don’t just yell non-stop obscenities...that’s not fun for anyone, just annoying. Practicing common sense wherever you are can really go a long way...after all, we’re all adults here.

Tony: For non-TFO regulars, could you describe a few of the other things someone might expect to find at TFO?
Christy: You would be wise to expect the unexpected! You never know what you might find at TFO - that’s part of the fun! But some ‘normal’ TFO things would include: Lots of folks in costumes; lots of zombies; lots of beautiful, scantily clad ladies; ridiculously silly stage shows; interactive games and contests; original and vintage shorts; and the finest in late-night cinema fun!

Tony: What are some of this year’s highlights?
Christy: Besides an awesome sampling of the best in cult cinema, we will also be welcoming back our original host-Francois Fly! We will be transforming the Crest Lobby into the seedy spectacle that is Trashville - an interactive shanty town full of fun and surprises. We will also be welcoming legendary director Jim Wynorski when we screen “Chopping Mall” on July 25th and hosting a Vampire Prom when we show “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” on August 1st. And so much, much more.... [Note: These two screenings coincide with the Sacramento Film & Music Festival, July 24th - August 2nd at the Crest Theatre, and Festival Passes are also honored at TFO]

Tony: Not satisfied with just screening Trash, you’re now making Trash - what’s next for TFO Productions?
Christy: Our last film “Monster from Bikini Beach” managed to gain us quite a bit of attention and excellent reviews, so our big focus now has indeed become making our own feature films. This year, we are making a brand new and exciting film: “Planet of the Vampire Women.” It’s an action-packed sci-fi adventure of the galaxy’s sexiest space pirates who pull off the ultimate heist only to crash into an unknown world. Finding themselves trapped on a storm-shrouded planet overrun with monsters, the intergalactic outlaws unknowingly awaken an unspeakable horror that causes the dead to walk...with an insatiable lust for blood!

TFO schedules and archives are available online at www.trashfilmorgy.com

Review: The Cove

2009-09-08T02:44:25Z

There’s something about the title “The Cove” that makes me think of a teen horror movie. But “The Cove” is a horror movie of an entirely different kind – a documentary about routine dolphin slaughters in Taiji, a small coastal town in Japan, and the degree of cover up and misinformation that keeps the practice from becoming common knowledge. This is a tough movie to watch, with brutal and graphic footage, but that’s also a large part of why the film exists – to capture on video what the local industry has tried to keep hidden.

This is a message movie, made to get the word out. It’s the kind of movie that demands that a reviewer actually divulge the content.

This is unusual for me and if you intend to watch the film, you might want to stop reading this column. But most of you won’t watch it (judging by the fact that I was the only viewer at a recent screening) and the message is too important to skirt around.

The film makes its central point, that there is a hidden cove where thousands of dolphins are captured or killed, in the opening minutes. The rest of the project is an unveiling of the background to this issue and essentially a “making of” film documenting the team of assorted experts who stealthily infiltrate the barricaded area around the cove to videotape the killing.

This team coalesces around Ric O’Barry, one of the most prominent dolphin activists in the world. Ironically, he’s famous for being the guy who captured and trained all five of the dolphins used in the “Flipper” TV series – the show credited for making everybody dolphin-crazy in the first place. But as he himself says, he spent 10 years buying a new Porsche every year off the dorsal fins of dolphins, and has spent the last 35 trying to free dolphins from captivity. He was arrested for attempting to free his first dolphin the day after Kathy, the lead “Flipper” dolphin, died in his arms – or as he describes it, committed suicide. There is a earnestness to O’Barry and his cause that isn’t present when Michael Vick condemns dog-fighting or when Bristol Palin promotes abstinence.

Taiji is the world’s largest source of dolphins for aquariums and dolphinariums around the world. A healthy trained female bottlenose dolphin (just like the ones in “Flipper”) can bring in $150,000. But all the others, herded by fleets of boats into Taiji, are sold for whatever their meat is worth (approx. $6,000 apiece). Japan is the world’s holdout nation when it comes to whaling in general, a trade supposedly controlled by the International Whaling Commission (IWC), but the IWC exempts dolphins and porpoises from regulation.

The film details how the Japanese have managed to manipulate the IWC not only with dubious data and reports (“we have to kill the dolphins because they’re eating all the fish”) but also by essentially buying the votes of small countries that wouldn’t otherwise care about whaling or even be members of the IWC. The film shows IWC delegates who can’t name a whale species and, for example, several Eastern Caribbean island nations who have expensive Japanese-funded fishing centers that aren’t even used.

Additionally, as apex predators in a food chain, dolphins are now illustrating our own worst fears regarding fish consumption and mercury poisoning. The US Food and Drug Administration allows 1 part per million (ppm) of mercury contamination in seafood and the Japanese allow 4 ppm. In the film, a Japanese University Professor finds 2000 ppm in a sample of dolphin meat from Taiji. Mercury poisoning is a tricky subject in Japan, where there is a history of death and birth defects, most notably in the case of Minimata disease in the 1950’s, where methyl mercury was released in industrial wastewater and poisoned the local fish and seafood around the city of Minimata.

While whale meat is somewhat accepted in Japan, dolphin meat is not - at least not as much and not outside of these smaller communities. In Taiji itself, at the whaling museum that also controls the dolphin trade, one can actually watch a dolphin show while eating dolphin. Elsewhere, as the film shows, dolphin meat from Taiji is sold and packaged as other species of whale – not only inaccurately labeled but also masking the contamination risk to consumers. In another attempt to get rid of the excess dolphin meat, local officials actually proposed supplying the school lunch program.

The assembled team is comprised of an odd mix of adventurers, free divers, and special effects and tech experts – the kinds of people who can hide video cameras in fake rocks. Amid close scrutiny from the local ‘fishing’ community and town officials, they proceed to document the slaughter in the cove that runs red from the blood of dolphins who are repeatedly stabbed until they drown. At one point, both a local official and the IWC delegate are seen proclaiming the newly adopted humane killing techniques as they are each confronted by video taken by the team.

This is a powerful and shocking film and a topic that is sadly under-exposed. For more information about the film and the problem visit www.takepart.com/thecove.

Update: For the first time, sufficient media gathered in Taiji on Sept 1st to delay or stop the start of the dolphin season.

Multiple Award Winning Actor Hal Holbrook in Sacramento

2010-03-05T03:16:20Z

Hal Holbrook has over 120 film and television credits stretching back to 1954. In addition to his Tony Award for portraying Mark Twain and four Emmy Awards (with six additional nominations), he became the oldest male actor nominated for an Academy Award for his performance in 2007's "into the Wild."

His new film "That Evening Sun," a co-presentation of the Crest Theatre and the Sacramento Film & Music Festival, opens at the Crest on Friday, March 5th. Holbrook plays an aging farmer who escapes a nursing home only to have to fight to regain his family farm.

"That Evening Sun" has won at least 15 film festival honors, including two Special Jury Awards from South by Southwest. Joe Leydon of Variety describes it as "An exceptionally fine, richly atmospheric film. Holbrook is at the absolute top of his game. A career highlight star turn."

Mr. Holbrook will conduct a question and answer session following the 5pm screening on Friday, March 5th and will introduce the 7:50pm screening. Advance tickets for the special screenings are available at tickets.com and the Crest box office.

For further information visit: http://www.thecrest.com/calendar/expand.cfm?EventID=3349

Review: Sunshine Cleaning

2009-03-28T19:19:10Z

Sunshine Cleaning
Directed by Christine Jeffs

by Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

“Sunshine Cleaning” is another intriguing opening this week. When it opened in very limited release a couple of weeks ago, it generated the highest per-screen averages of any movie so far this year. And it’s easy to appreciate why when you see one of the most perfectly assembled film casts.

Rose (Amy Adams) is a single mother struggling to raise her son on her house-cleaning income. Her adulterous detective lover and ex-high school sweetheart Mac (Steve Zahn) happens to mention how lucrative the messy crime scene and death cleanup business seems, and a new startup is born. Rose enlists her less ambitious sister Norah (Emily Blunt) and leaves her son with their cranky father (Alan Arkin) as they head off to mop up blood and assorted other body fluids in a series of pungent venues.

What’s especially neat in all of this for those of us who like comparing faces and appearances, is the remarkable casting of Adams and Blunt as sisters – not just because they are such appealing and talented actresses, but because they look like they could fit into the same genes. And it works beyond just the two of them, as the rest of the family is unveiled. Zahn and Arkin are as appealing as ever. They are complemented by a wonderfully understated and physically impressive performance by Clifton Collins Jr. as Winston, the one-armed proprietor of a janitorial supply company.

Like the recent “Wendy and Lucy,” “Sunshine Cleaning” gains by the timing of its release. There’s something especially poignant in the current economic climate about a young mother juggling bills and trying to start a small business to make ends meet. And while the premise of the movie may seem conveniently contrived at first, it’s also an industry that is depressingly steady in its opportunities, and an equally steady source of both morbid comedy and genuinely touching moments – both of which provide an excellent return on investment.

“Sunshine Cleaning” is produced by the same folks who made Little Miss Sunshine, the delightful and under-appreciated “Everything is Illuminated,” and the upcoming “Is There Anybody There?” (with Michael Caine). They also have projects on the way from Sam Mendes (“American Beauty,” “Revolutionary Road”) and Philip Seymour Hoffman (in his directorial debut). That’s a pretty interesting and impressive list of projects. “Sunshine Cleaning” is a worthy and neat entry into the growing collection.

Review: The Class

2009-03-21T06:42:42Z

The Class ("Entre les murs")
Director: Laurent Cantent

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Set in Paris, "The Class" follows a year in the life of teacher Francois Marin as he tackles assorted challenges with students in his inner city high school. "Entre les murs" which is also the title of the adapted book, translates as "between the walls" and this may have been a better English title for the film also, as it conveys a better sense of the film being about a place and a dynamic as much as people that inhabit it. Much of the film takes place in one classroom. The director has described his approach to the film's style in part like that of a tennis match, with the majority of the perspective being from the side as the volleys of conversation are fired back and forth.

This is a multi-cultural classroom of diverse experiences, where Francois is teacher, referee, diplomat, sparring partner, and occasionally as much of an inadvertent instigator as his students are, as the ambiguity of language is examined. At one point, for example, he is accused by the students of being culturally insensitive by always using "whitey" names in his vocabulary examples. As is often the case, the faculty is significantly less diverse than the student body.

While many stories set in schools initially focus on a new student entering the school and encountering new classmates and situations, "The Class" starts with a scene in which the old and new faculty introduce themselves to each other and compare class assignments. The result is an almost Altman-esque film that has more to do with characters than plot, in a bureaucratic setting where faculty discussions of punishment and perceived impunity devolve into complaints about the price of coffee in the vending machine because the topic is less divisive.

Interestingly, Francois is played by Francois Bégaudeau, a teacher who wrote the book on which the film is based. The characters in the film are almost all played by their real-life counterparts: teachers play teachers, students play students, and film parents are played by the real parents. Much of the dialog was improvised on set to fit the constructed situations. Given this approach, it is especially noteworthy to point out that the film won the best adapted screenplay at the César Awards, along with four other César nominations, a best foreign language Academy Award nomination, and a win in that category at the Independent Spirit Awards.

"The Class" is compelling filmmaking, working as both the story of the classroom experience as well as a microcosm of a diverse society. Although set in Paris, this is a story that could take in any urban center. The themes translate better than the title.

Review: The Messenger

2009-11-27T09:26:35Z

The Messenger
Directed by Oren Moverman

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

Ben Foster and Woody Harrelson are an Army Casualty Notification Detail, tasked with informing the N.O.K. (next of kin) when their loved ones have been killed in action. It’s a soul-destroying assignment and, as explained by the older man (Harrelson) to his younger colleague (Foster), it’s not one that can be made easier by staged shows of understanding. But it’s a necessary function in a time of webcams and cable news shows. They race to get to the N.O.K. before they hear the news from anybody else.

Foster has been on the edge of stardom for a decade and may be best recognized recently as Angel in “X-Men: The Last Stand” or as Charlie Prince in “3:10 to Yuma.” As staff sergeant Will Montgomery, Foster turns in a gritty and realistic performance that’s similar to Ryan Gosling’s career-altering “Half Nelson.” This is also Harrelson at his best in the supporting role, with the mentorship between the two men reminiscent of Ned Beatty and Liev Schreiber in the woefully under-appreciated “Spring Forward.”

“The Messenger” is also a timely reminder of loss during a war in which we weren’t allowed to see flag-draped coffins and funerals. Harrelson’s captain Stone remarks that every funeral should be on live TV and laments: “…and then bullets fly and soldiers die and it’s such a shock – what did they think it was going to be like, ‘Fear Factor’?”

But the strength of the film is in its notion of what it means to be a casualty during wartime as the notification process produces even more casualties of war in the families of those who are lost. The notification detail themselves are also victims of time served in situations the rest of us will remain blissfully ignorant of. One wife explains that it’s hard to mourn the man who died during a third tour of duty in Iraq when you’re already mourning the man he was before tours one and two. They’re all casualties of lost lives, loves, and innocence and the movie is a remarkable portrayal of that harsh reality. “The Messenger” is vying with “The Hurt Locker” for this year’s top war film honors.

The Messenger was an official selection of the Sundance Film Festival and won both the Best Screenplay Award and the Peace Film Award at the Berlin Film Festival. For more information visit www.themessengermovie.com

The Messenger opens Friday, November 27th exclusively at The Crest Theatre. Opening weekend screenings will be on the historic main screen and validated parking is available in the 10th and L Street garage. For showtimes visit www.thecrest.com

Film Reviews/Discussion: State of Play & Sin Nombre

2009-04-24T23:27:36Z

State of Play
Directed by Kevin Macdonald

and

Sin Nombre
Written and Directed by Cary Fukunaga

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

The news media get a bad rap for assorted reasons. Every major outlet is either too liberal or too conservative, depending on whose eyes are doing the beholding – and regardless of how much one goldilocks (see urbandictionary.com) one’s way around the news channels, the commentators never seem to find one that’s just right. If it’s not perceived bias, then it’s the perception that stories are avoided in order to appease corporate overlords with corporately overlordish ties to the subjects of scandal.

This topic of avoidance surfaces briefly in “State of Play,” in which the Washington Globe’s crack reporter, Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe) is chasing down a story that is suitably full of suspicion, politicians, infidelity, and murder. The lead researcher for Congressman Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck) falls (or was she pushed!?) under a train while prepping for hearings that Collins’ committee is holding. McAffrey and Collins just happen to have been college roommates, and they lead us on classic whodunit with plenty of interest and a side helping of conflict.

The action also includes Helen Mirren as McAffrey’s long-suffering editor (“long suffering” being a job requirement for movie newspaper editors), Rachel McAdams as the newspaper’s online blogger, Robin Wright Penn as Collins’ wife, Jeff Daniels as Collins’ party whip, and Jason Bateman as a rather colorful co-conspirator. The cast is as solid as one might expect and if the story suffers, it does so as a result of an apparently obligatory but rather unsuccessful attempt to trick the audience.

“Sin Nombre” is written and directed by Student Academy Award winner Cary Fukunaga, who also won directing honors at Sundance for this film. It tells the powerful story of two young people who are brought together by the worst of circumstances. Sayra (Paulina Gaitan) is traveling from Honduras to the U.S. with her father and uncle. It’s the first time she has seen her father in years. He is leading the family towards an illegal border crossing after his own prior deportation. Willy (Edgar Flores) is a member of a violent Mexican street gang who is targeted by his former gang-mates after a deadly fall from grace. They meet on the roof of a freight train, amidst countless other aspiring undocumented workers.

But both “State of Play” and “Sin Nombre” are intriguing for other news-oriented reasons. Each tells timely stories in a manner that seems to beat the CNN’s and Fox’s at their own game – and they aren’t alone in doing so. Some of the best coverage of immigration issues in the last year has been in movie theaters (and covered extensively in this column: “The Visitor” and “Under the Same Moon” for example). Topics related to war and resources in the Middle East have also had ample recent screen time from 2007’s documentary of incompetent occupation “No End in Sight” to the surprisingly meaningful “Stop Loss” (2008) from MTV Films.

The critical force behind the circumstances in “State of Play” is the Blackwater-esque private military contracting firm PointCorp. The parallels are profound, from no-bid/yes-shoot government contracts in warzones, to a massive U.S. training facility, and post-Katrina “security” involvement. This is a story from a powerhouse writing team with all the right subject matter experience: Matthew Michael Carnahan (writer of “Lions for Lambs” and “Kingdom”), Tony Gilroy (writer/director of “Duplicity” and “Michael Clayton” and writer of the Bourne screenplays), and Billy Ray (writer of “Breach” and “Shattered Glass”). The extent of the power, reach and financial stakes in the contracting world are, not surprisingly, very well articulated.

“Sin Nombre” illustrates at least two current affairs topics remarkably well: The hardships and danger that people are willing to undertake for their chance at an illegal American dream, and the extent and nature of gang culture in Mexico. This is not a neighborhood group of thugs that Willy (or El Casper as he is known on the streets) can escape by running away. This is networked organization that can call ahead hits across vast distances and international borders. It’s as if two great American traditions have been studied, adopted, and combined – gun violence and corporate franchising.

I’ve watched and read many stories about government security contractors and, especially recently, the rise in Mexican gang violence. But we’re a nation in which many people get their news from comedy monologs, movie scripts, and crime shows that play out like last week’s headlines. That may seem like a sad state of affairs. It is reassuring at times to find stories that carry such interesting and powerful messages, whether it be the (very) thinly veiled corporate interests of “State of Play” or the blunt brutality of “Sin Nombre.”

They will, of course, still be filtered through our own political biases, but either way, it’s an interesting week at the movies.

Review: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

2009-06-14T04:37:20Z

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3
Directed by Tony Scott

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

In the early-mid 70’s, my father subscribed to the Reader’s Digest Condensed Book series. This was my introduction to “The Taking of Pelham One Two Three,” “Jaws” and assorted other titles. I remember liking the story and, later, I enjoyed the 1974 film adaptation starring Walther Matthau and Robert Shaw. I don’t recall watching the 1998 TV remake, which, based on web comments, may have been a good thing, but it’s fair to say that this 2009 adaptation had to fill some pretty big shoes from my adolescence.

It’s a different film for a different time – there’s more blatant violence than I remember. John Travolta, as the lead subway hijacker, is unsympathetic and coarse. Denzel Washington, as the subway controller who takes the initial call (changed from a traffic cop in the original), is an overworked civil servant in the wrong seat at the wrong time. And a lot has changed in over three decades. You can’t realistically tell a story about a subway hijacking in New York City, or perhaps anywhere, without the subject of terrorism entering the screenplay, even if only as a source of fear.

But despite the differences and updates, the movie still works. It’s well-acted and tautly directed in real time, with neat action and solid secondary characters, including John Turturro as a hostage negotiator and James Gandolfini as the mayor. The basic plot elements remain the same, with the complexity and fears associated with the capture of a subway train under busy city streets being as compelling now as ever. Thirty-plus years later, “Jaws” still scares me when I’m swimming, and “Pelham” still entertains me.

An Unlikely Double-Header: Funny People & The Hurt Locker

2009-08-08T07:52:54Z

Funny People
Directed by Judd Apatow
&
The Hurt Locker
Directed by Kathryn Bigelow

By Tony Sheppard
Capitol Weekly

At first sight, these two movies seem to have little in common, but watching them back-to-back while trying to catch up with the summer’s offerings reveals interesting similarities. “Funny People” is the latest from the Judd Apatow machine (‘The 40 Year SuperKnocked Dewey Zohan Step Talladega Express’ or something like that) while “The Hurt Locker” is from Kathryn Bigelow, a dudette who makes movies for dudes (“K-19: The Widowmaker” & “Point Break”). While I’m on the topic of “Point Break” does anybody know what the dudest of dudes Keanu Reeves was doing in town last week?

Anyway, “Funny People” tells the story of comedian George Simmons, played by Adam Sandler, as a character who could easily be Sandler himself in terms of both the success and choice of projects. George appears to outsiders to have everything in life – a ridiculously large house, assorted expensive cars, and flights on private jets – but he also has a blood disease and a 92% chance of imminent death. Feeling unfunny in his malaise, he hires the younger Ira (Seth Rogan), who idolizes him, to write jokes and to be his assistant.

Part of the appeal of watching “Funny People” is the insider feel as the characters encounter a significant stream of celebrities playing themselves, along with the easy onscreen friendship between Rogan, Jonah Hill and Jason Schwartzmann, who play three roommates in varying stages of show business success. Not only do the relationships feel real, but the circumstances feel like those I’ve seen with friends breaking into the industry.

The Hurt Locker” focuses on a team of bomb disposal experts in Iraq five years ago, facing the constant threat of improvised explosive devices in every unexplored piece of garbage on the trash-lined streets of war-torn Baghdad. The powerful performances are helped by the lack of stellar celebrity of the recognizable but relatively less well known lead actors (Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, and Brian Geraghty). This feels more like a character study than it might if one were watching Tom Cruise or Tobey Maguire (both minor punchlines in “Funny People”) defusing bombs.

Like “Funny People,” “The Hurt Locker” works in its depictions of both friendships and acquaintanceships because of the genuineness of the awkward and ugly moments. The verbal sparring is often more harsh than fond, even between buddies. While war is often depicted onscreen as a heroic endeavor, or at least as a series of tense but heroic moments, that’s not the focus here. Instead we see decisions made for many of the wrong reasons. Respect and trust are hard-won victories, not automatic outcomes of shared uniforms and roles.

What both movies have in common are individuals driven by needs so innate they obscure or destroy other pursuits. Most notable among these are personal relationships, both platonic and romantic. Sandler’s character is an inherently lonely man, who has squandered real connections in favor of shallow encounters. He is surrounded by fans and household staff, but nobody who he cares for or who cares about him. Renner’s character has become so good at what he does in the war zone that it makes more sense to him than the normal world. Their decisions and relationships are both driven by adrenaline rushes, whether in the face of high explosives or the explosive highs of fame and fortune.

There’s an addictive nature to what the movies show us. While the circumstances are extreme in both instances, the phenomena of choosing between career and relationships, or personal satisfaction versus the needs of others are more commonplace. I don’t immediately identify with either profession, but I can identify with the choices involved. I’m sure I’m not alone in that regard.

I enjoyed both movies at both surface and deeper levels, although both switch gears significantly along the way. “The Hurt Locker” has one or two scenes that seem somewhat inconsistent, although to some extent that fits the depiction of the inconsistency of combat.

“Funny People” switches between comedy and drama in a manner that some may find unappealing, especially those who are looking for one but not the other, but it also seems true to life in that regard. Both are journeys of self-discovery that take their central characters through painful introspection and not especially flattering or desirable realizations.

Both movies clock in at well over two hours and I wouldn’t recommend the double-header for any but the most ardent of movieholics, but I would recommend each to people who enjoy movies that package mood swings with a dose of soul-searching. Neither is especially surprising in their outcomes, but they are less about eventful surprises than about their respective character arcs.