Sunday, October 19, 2014

Fury, The Boxtrolls, The Skeleton Twins, The Zero Theorem Reviews


Fury
Dir. David Ayer

Tanks. Giant tanks blowing shit up. That's pretty much what the advertising has been for Fury, the latest film from David Ayer, best known for having written Training Day.  The film is about a "rag tag" group of American soldiers towards the end of WWII, pushing forward into Nazi Germany with their comparatively tiny American tanks.  Among the macho-men riding the dirt and blood-spattered 'fury' is Brad Pitt, who's basically playing his same exact character from Inglourious Basterds, Shia LeBeouf as a moustached bible thumper, Jon Bernthal as a brutish hardball (not far off from Shane in Walking Dead), Michael Peña as the token Mexican, and Logan Lerman  as the wide-eyed "new guy."  The dynamic of this crew is reminiscent of an old school war movie, but the story is ultimately a boring 2.5 hours of mindless shooting and none of the characters go beyond well-acted stereotypes.

The action sequences are without a doubt visceral and violent, and to an extent capture the claustrophobia of what it's like inside a battle tank, but the film doesn't really do anything innovative in the genre.  With countless similar, and better, films/shows like Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, even Lone Soldier from earlier this year, Fury doesn't do much to stand out among the crowd.  The action scenes were pretty standard in that it was difficult to get an exact handle on who was being shot at, and all the tension was diffused for me since I figured that the titular tank would survive until at least the end of the movie.  Even Steven Price's score fell victim at points to that same generic "sweeping" score from every film meant to honor veterans.  Although it's not necessarily badly made, it feels like an exercise; playing Call of Duty honestly gave me a more intense response to the horrors of war.

Rating: C


The Boxtrolls
Dir. Graham Annable & Anthony Stacchi

In an age of computer animation domination, Laika Studios has been taking the refreshingly tangible route of stop-motion to bring their stories to life.  The Boxtrolls, based on the series of picture books Here Be Monsters!, is their third feature following Coraline and Paranorman, two wonderfully dark, mature, intricately-crafted kids flicks; it tells the story of a (human) boy named Eggs, who was raised by impish creatures called boxtrolls that use boxes as a sort of makeshift turtle shell.  Living as underground scavengers and tinkerers, the posh “above ground” world straight out of a Dickens novel considers them flesh-hungry beasts.

This film is simply beautiful.  The artistry that went into every nook and cranny of the impossibly detailed sets and characters is wonderful, and I’m sure if you paused the film throughout you’d see all kind of cool nuggets in the background to discover.  The way the boxtrolls move around is so unique and fun, and the first 15 minutes or so after the prologue  basically tells you how this world works in a fantastic dialogue-free action sequence, reminiscent of Wall-E.  This really is a Pixar-level production.

I do have to say though, the story is a little on the light side, considering the company’s previous efforts.  This film really isn’t scary, and has far less “for-the-parents” moments.  Although it’s not outright juvenile, it does feel more kid-friendly (which to me is a slight disappointment), and functions closer to a family comedy.  I did love how the themes of the film were shown though, including the upper class vs. working class (in this case, tinkerers vs. “cheese eaters”), and a nice anti-waste message (with the trolls recycling the humans' trash into their little city).  It may not be as daring or engaging as Coraline or Paranorman, but The Boxtrolls is among the better animated fare this year.

Rating: B


The Skeleton Twins
Dir. Craig Johnson
Watch Trailer

It seems like the cool thing to do nowadays is for comedians to try their hand at more "serious" dramatic roles.  I have nothing against this, especially when we get performances like Jim Carrey in The Truman Show or more recently Will Forte in Nebraska, but it does seem to be an unnecessary trend at the moment (I'm still bitter for having to sit through This is Where I Leave You).  Craig Johnson's directorial debut, The Skeleton Twins, a dramedy about two suicidal siblings played by SNL alumni Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig, made a splash at Sundance, winning an award for its screenplay.  Although it's a tired genre at this point, and Hader and Wiig are clearly more wired for comedy, Johnson managed to get real, honest, seriously good performances out of these two clowns.  The plot is a little been-there-done-that, but these central performances anchor everything and elevate the material.

After their failed suicide attempts, siblings Milo and Maggie recoup in their suburban New York hometown. Maggie lives with her husband Lance (Luke Wilson), whose blue collar background doesn't really mesh with Milo's "LA sensibilities." Also while he's in town, Milo meets up with a former lover, Rich (Ty Burrell), who's now married with children and wants to move on. Meanwhile, Maggie is growing tired of her "perfect" marriage and starts banging her scuba instructor. It feels very much like your typical "Sundance-y" dysfunctional family drama, with characters at a crossroads in their life looking for answers, yada, yada, yada.

So many of the themes and plot elements of this film have been overdone, and done better. The whole idea of a post-suicidal comedy comes right out of Little Miss Sunshine (with Steve Carell knocking it out of the park), and the idea of a woman who, despite having a charming, funny, if simple husband, risks everything because she wants more intimacy is very reminiscent of Take This Waltz (which put Seth Rogen in the Luke Wilson role).  But despite its somewhat conventional structure, The Skeleton Twins' heart lies in the two leads, and they hold the entire film (and each other) together.  In terms of these types of films it's pretty middle of the road, but being a fan of Wiig and Hader's work it was enjoyable simply to see them stretch the limits of their acting abilities.

Rating: B


The Zero Theorem
Dir. Terry Gilliam
Watch Trailer

Ex-Monty Python member Terry Gilliam is responsible for some of the most imaginative science fiction films ever made (Brazil, 12 Monkeys), so when I heard his next project was to star Tarantino's hidden jewel Christoph Waltz as a completely bald, antisocial computer hacker bent on solving the meaning of life via a seemingly unsolvable math equation, I was in; after all, Gilliam did co-direct Monty Python and the Meaning of Life, and I actually think that film was the closest to ever answering that big question.  But unlike his previous masterpieces, Gilliam doesn't have a screenwriting credit this time - that would belong to Pat Rushin, a professor of English at the University of Central Florida who's been writing this sci-fi story for a decade or so.  I have no idea how this landed in Gilliam's lap, but you could definitely tell something was "off" here.  While the art direction and overall style of the movie is pure Gilliam, the story is as impossibly difficult to understand as the theorem Waltz is trying to prove throughout the movie.

Qohan Leth (Waltz, and yes, that's the actual character's name), is a computer programmer that works for a company called Mancom, led by a mysterious man (Matt Damon). Throughout the film Qohan is waiting for a phone call which supposedly will give him his purpose in life.  In the meantime he is in a bit of an existential crisis, so he pops in various CDs with a virtual therapist (Tilda Swinton), who ends up aggravating more than helping him.  Also, he always refers to himself in plural form (kind of like Gollum).  This movie is just weird for weird's sake.  Maybe I just didn't "get" it, but I honestly don't think there's much to get here.  It feels like a poor man's Brazil, which is unsurprising seeing as how Rushin admits that he learned how to write screenplays by studying Brazil.

The plot is intentionally vague, and maybe it was just the sound system, but I also had a hard time making out what exactly the characters were saying.  The film is much more interested in being a cerebral experience than having a cohesive narrative, and so much of this is re-hashed from, and less politically/culturally relevant than Brazil, which was released almost 20 years ago.  I just flat out didn't understand what Gilliam was trying to say or get at in this film, and I think it may be that it's difficult for him to get projects off the ground nowadays (just look at Lost in La Mancha), and took this job just to keep him going until he can get to Don Quixote, if it ever happens.  Just a jumbled mess of a movie that looks cheap and thinks it's profound.

Rating: C-

No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...