Please, Seize This Ship

"Contraband"

Who remembers The Fighter?  It was the uplifting story of real life boxer Micky Ward.  He was a guy who was down on his luck both in life and in the ring and then turned his life around to become a champion.  The film came out in 2010, starred Mark Wahlberg, Christian Bale, and Amy Adams.  People remember this movie right?  I certainly do.  Not only did every actor in the film give a solid performance, but The Fighter also had a good script accompanied by some sound direction by David O. Russell.  I liked the film for these reasons and was pleasantly surprised to see that Wahlberg turned in a decent performance.  I thought maybe, just maybe he had turned over a new leaf and this would lead to a string of respectable films from the actor.  To my dismay, the film we get after The Fighter from him is the disappointingly standard, Contraband.

Chris Farraday (Wahlberg) used to be into some bad things with some pretty bad people.  Well now he has cleaned up his act and has a wife, Kate (Kate Beckinsale,) and two boys.  He seems to be living a fairly content life as an installer of home security systems.  Chris soon finds out though that he and his family's security is about to be at risk.  Kate's little brother, Andy (Caleb Landry Jones,) is all kinds of mixed up in the world of drugs.  Andy's boss, Tim Briggs (Giovanni Ribisi) is none too pleased with him after he dumps a rather large shipment of cocaine overboard before it could be seized by U.S. Customs.  Briggs demands to be reimbursed for the destroyed shipment to the tune of $700,000 from Andy in two weeks or else Chris's family gets it.  Realizing what he has to do, Chris joins a crew aboard a cargo ship and runs contraband in order to buy a large sum of fake bills made in Panama.  He then must bring back the funny money into the United States in hopes of saving his family before it’s too late. 

A rather mundane premise leads to a series of humdrum sequences accompanied by stolid, profanity filled dialogue.  Let me make something clear though, I don't have a problem with a screenplay full of swears.  I think characters that drop bombs whether they be F or otherwise is fine, but only if there is a purpose.  To say, "Well, that's just how people talk," is a poor excuse.  The language has to feel organic to film.  Look at films like Casino, Magnolia, or Pulp Fiction, the strong pervasive language that is spoken throughout the duration of those flicks I believe remains consistent with a purpose and has a specific reason to be written as such.  For Contraband, it feels as though the screenwriters already knew they wanted to write an R-rated film so they threw in a bunch of swears.

Besides their potty mouths, these characters never seem to hold our attention long enough to actually care about them.  The actors involved I suppose are giving it their best.  Hey, maybe it's just the way their characters are written, right?  Part of me would like to believe that, but there's another part that thinks they're just phoning it in.  Perhaps if Beckinsale's character showed some toughness, like her character in the Underworld films, instead of acting as eye candy for the 18-30 males in the audience and further serving as a punching bag for Ribisi's generic bad guy character, possibly then she would gain my sympathies.  And then there's Wahlberg's character who inexplicably continues to bail out Kate's brother who makes one poor decision after another.  Oh, but he does it because they're family.  That is a theme that is a little too cut and dry for me given the mediocre screenplay.  Lastly, there’s the unnecessary added drama in the third act that is supposed to heighten the suspense and put more pressure on Wahlberg’s character, but actually the event feels tacked on and  needless.  

Poorly edited and amateurishly directed, Contraband has the feeling of a B-movie that should have gone straight to DVD.  I know Wahlberg is a household name and clearly the success of the film was hinging upon his stardom.  Overall though Contraband could have been a much more enjoyable and entertaining film had the script been written with some brains and the actors attempted to give us something more to their characters than what was just written as a vague description on the page.  Wahlberg's career choices continue to baffle me.  He's really all over the map.  Will households ever sit around and talk about how good of an actor he is, I doubt it.  Wahlberg got lucky with Three Kings, The Departed, and The Fighter.  Perhaps the best career decision he made was becoming friends with David O. Russell.  I want to truly like him as an actor but he has yet to fully prove that.  This Contraband should have been chucked overboard too.      

Run Hanna Run

"Hanna"

What are some typical everyday things that the average, normal 16 year old girl would be up to?  Probably going to the mall, chasing boys they think are cute, and giggling the day away with their B.F.F.  These classic activities we associate with the teenage girl unfortunately do not apply at all to the everyday life of Hanna Heller (Saoirse Ronan.)  Hunting wild animals with a bow and arrow, knife, and hand gun, in a forest blanketed with snow; now that's more of Hanna's cup of tea.   

I first saw Ms. Ronan in a British World War II period piece called Atonement directed by Joe Wright.  At the time she was only 13.  Despite her age, Ronan gave a surprising good performance that earned her a Best Supporting Actress nomination at the Academy Awards.  Working with Wright once again, the young actress turns in another solid performance.  

Aside from her abilities as a skilled huntress, Hanna is also multi-linguistic, she wields incredible upper and lower body strength, and is ridiculously resourceful.  "Adapt or die."  That is what her father, Erik, (Eric Bana) tells her.  Erik has raised Hanna in the wilderness, away from society due to some shady circumstances involving himself as an ex-agent to the C.I.A.  Hanna wants to experience more in life.  All she has ever known is what her father has taught her and what she has read in books.  Well, the time has come for Erik's little bird to leave the nest.  By intentionally setting off a transmitter Hanna can alert the outside world of her whereabouts and complete her mission, kill Marissa Wiegler (Cate Blanchett.)  Marissa is still an agent of the C.I.A.  Erik and she have a history together.  Now that Erik too is back on the grid, Marissa can complete her mission, eliminate Erik. 

This is Wright's first attempt at an action film, so I suppose he didn't want to choose a script that contained much complexity.  The screenplay is the usual game of cat and mouse which is fine I guess considering there's not much else the film could go with considering its premise.  Erik's and Marissa's motives are clear but aren't that interesting.  I guess that is why they are supporting characters.  The character of Hanna is something to behold though.  She grabs your attention right from the opening sequence.  To see a the role of the teenage girl written in such a way that goes against all our assumptions of what we've seen before is fantastic to watch unfold on screen.

How do most people experience something for the first time?  I would say with their eyes.  And Wright does just that.  We see the world through Hanna's eyes.  Her brain is interpreting sights and sounds in a way no one else does.  Reading about the world in books while sitting in her log cabin next to a roaring fire place is one thing.  Now Hanna actually has to put her skills to the test.  She's got to figure out how to get to one place to another, interact with modern technology, interact with people other than her father, and all the while evade Marissa's hired goons.  It sounds like a lot handle, but she manages to take care of herself quite well.

Ronan is in just about every scene in this film and she is given plenty to do.  Not only is this a very physically demanding role but she also has to convey the innocence of child who is left to fend for herself.  The actor director relationship that she and Wright built together on Atonement has clearly matured and blossomed to create this flower of a character that comes with some serious thorns.  Ronan holds her ground well against Bana and Blanchett.  The scenes between Hanna and Erik are genuine.  I felt that there was a real sense of family with the father daughter relationship.  Bana and Ronan have good chemistry together that works well on screen.

Set to the pulsating Techno score composed by The Chemical Brothers with some well choreographed fight sequences, Hanna is a decent action film that gives the audience a fantastic, nontraditional hero to root for.  What the screenplay lacks in substance it makes for with its characters, particularly Ronan's performance as the lead.  Wright's undertaking of a genre that is unfamiliar to him pays off for the most part, at least more so than his contemporary drama, The Soloist did.  Even though I think period pieces are his forte, I like that Wright is trying out different genres.  He also clearly knows how to get a great performance out of Ronan.  They both have promising futures and I hope the two of them will continue to work together.  Hanna gives Ronan a strong role as the lead that she seemingly handles with ease.  As indicated by certain scenes and specific imagery, the film suggests it is like a modern day fairy tale.  Hanna might be a princess, but not the kind that needs rescuing.       

Greed is Good

"Wall Street"

I don't know much about the business of the stock market.  So I suppose there's a lot in the language of Oliver Stone's Wall Street that I probably missed.  Just like in Margin Call, the characters speak in tons of lingo and use terminology that is above my understanding.  But after having sat through the whole film, one can look back and realize that getting bogged down in the choice of words isn't worth the worry.  It's the themes of this flick that are significant and still prevalent throughout society today.  Greed, power, corruption, moral dilemmas, and business ethics all play apart in this tale of one man's rise and fall in a world full of business suites, beautiful woman, extravagant penthouses, and fat paychecks.

Bud Fox, (Charlie Sheen) like so many other Americans wants to become rich, successful, and live in the lap of luxury.  When we meet him though he lives in a crummy one bedroom apartment, struggling to pay his bills (and student loans,) going to his father (Martin Sheen) for money just to stay afloat.  Bud works at a piddly investment firm as a stockbroker.  He is a small fish in a big pond.  The shark that he aspires to be goes by the name of Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas.)  Bud's goal is to somehow woo Mr. Gekko.  By giving him some insider information about upcoming transactions that would then greatly inflate Gordon's bank account, Bud then could be shown the ropes of what it takes to become a successful stockbroker on Wall Street.  The question though is, how much of his own personal dignity is Bud willing to sacrifice at the hands of his mentor?

Gordon Gekko is a bad guy, there's no way around it.  But he is a business bad guy.  A certain charisma and likability follows him in every scene.  Douglas knows how to play this character with fantastic style, cunning smarts, and underhanded shrewdness.  Considering that Bud has a rather low opinion of his father, Gordon steps in as this paternal figure that he can look up to.  At the same time though Gordon and Bud's relationship isn't as cut and dry as it appears on the surface.  Gordon keeps Bud on this leash that changes lengths throughout the picture.  Bud is only willing to learn so many new tricks from his master before he then bites the hand (deservedly so) that feeds him.  

There is an interesting power struggle between the two characters.  Stone achieves this not only through Douglas' and Sheen's performances but also through Robert Richardson's camera movement.  Many scenes have this effective theatrical style of presentation to them.  I think this adds a dimension of realism by allowing us to be a part of the show.  Intimacy works in a film like this because the story is so contained to really only a few characters.  When Bud confronts Gordon over some shady (to put it mildly) business dealings, Richardson's camera acts as more than just a fly on the wall.

Oliver Stone has put together a somewhat dated but still very effective character driven piece with top notch performances from his two leads.  Wall Street gives us yet another glimpse into the seedy underbelly of corporate America.  While the screenplay is predicable I wasn't ever uninterested in what was going on.  Gekko is such a fascinating character to watch.  He clearly lives up to his last name.  The suave intensity Douglas shows us is wonderful but also conflicting to our morals.  I wanted to like him but I know that would be wrong, so wrong.  For a character to evoke so many different emotions in the viewer can sometimes be a good thing.  The complexities of Gordon Gekko are unique to the world of Hollywood villainy.  Greed knows no limits. 

How Does Mr. Hunt Like His Martini, Shaken or Stirred

"Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol" 

The Simpsons and Ratatouille, what do these two animated delights have in common?  Brad Bird.  Bird's skillful directing talents were immensely utilized in both productions.  The real question though was how would his pen and paper/CGI directing background transfer to a live action feature?  Low and behold we get the fourth installment to the Mission Impossible franchise, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol.  Each of its predecessors has had a different director with very different cinematic visions of bringing the popular 1960's television show to the silver screen.  I wasn't impressed with J.J. Abrams take on the third mission and was also getting quite tired of seeing Tom Cruise prove to us time after time that he is invisible.  The fact that Bird was attached to direct the fourth outing did get my attention though.  I wanted to see what he could bring to the table.

Ethan Hunt's (Cruise) team this time around consists of the beautiful Jane Carter (Paula Patton,) techno-geek Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg,) and U.S. government operative William Brandt (Jeremy Renner.)  Their mission, should they choose to except it, is to clear their names of a crime they did not commit.  An attack on the Kremlin leads to the Russians to believe that the IMF (Impossible Mission Force) was responsible for it.  Officially Hunt and his crew are no longer recognized by the agency but off the record the IMF secretary (Tom Wilkinson) tells them otherwise.  Hunt must find the terrorist who committed this act and make him answer for his crimes.  Oh and did I mention that the terrorist also has nuclear launch codes?

Alright so the plot is typical of what we've come to expect from a Mission Impossible film.  The stakes are going to be high, there's no question.  And because this is a Tom Cruise action flick we're going to see him do all these impossible stunts that continuously remind us that there is no stopping the soon to be fifty year old actor.  Yes, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol does deliver in all these areas in spectacular fashion.  The center piece of the film is when the team goes to Dubai and Hunt must scale the 2, 716 ft., 160 stories tall Burj Khalifa using only his physical strength (and some high tech gloves that allow him to stick to the tower.)  This is the signature highlight of the film.  Mr. Cruise does deserve our attention for this incredibly impressive stunt.

I mentioned the high-tech gloves; these are one of several uniquely clever but also ridiculous gadgets that show up throughout the film.  The gizmos may seem impressive at first but the characters rely on them too much.  Hunt and his team are part of the Impossible Mission Force.  So why are they constantly using devices that are essentially hindering their mission?  I felt like I was watching one of the Pierce Brosan James Bond films.  I want these characters to be using their smarts to solve problems.  I also want them to do more memorable, high flying stunts.

Bird's direction is fine but not necessarily noticeable, except for maybe the opening credit sequence.  Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol is several steps above Abrams' feature, I'll give it that.  It's a passable addition to the franchise but ultimately lacks any sort interesting plot or characters.  A screenplay involving more intrigue, double-dealings, and shocking reveals would have been more than welcome.  Except for the aforementioned Burj Khalifa sequence, the ante is not upped enough for this film to be a great sequel.  Cruise will eventually have to give up the action genre and go back to showing us his acting chops.  That is a mission he has yet to fully accept.     

There's No I in Team

"The Avengers"

They're finally here!  The Avengers is a film that has been four years in the making.  Iron Man was the first of four superhero flicks that was to kick off the origin stories.  The Incredible Hulk, Thor, and Captain America: The First Avenger soon followed.  We all knew it was leading to the assembly of one of the most elite teams ever in comic book history. 

The reason it was necessary for these superheroes to come together was because of Thor's brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston.)  Loki is looking to wield the power contained within this extraterrestrial cube that was previously discussed in Captain America's (Chris Evans) back story.  America's foe, Red Skull was unable to harness the cube’s power which ultimately led to his demise.  Decades later the cube found its way into the hands of the S.H.E.I.L.D. agency lead by eye patch wearing Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson.)  Loki needs the object because it will act as a gateway between our world and alien world.  The aliens who live on this world do not come in peace.  They will act as his army in hopes of eventually enslaving the entire human race.

The film has a pretty simple premise but keep in mind the material it’s based off of is from a comic book.  And that's why The Avengers works so well on a number of levels.  Evans, Robert Downey Jr., (Tony "Iron Man" Stark) and Chris Hemsworth (Thor) all have a very good understanding of their characters and how they should be played.  Each character's ego under normal circumstances takes up the entirety of his own film but The Avengers has all three of these characters.  How does director Joss Whedon accommodate the space for these three iconic superheroes?  He makes a feature that spans nearly two and half hours in length. 

I was pleased to see that Paramount let this run time fly because without it the film would suffer.  Whedon allows tons of time for the characters to breathe and take in the situation that is at hand.  Yes, we are familiar with these characters but they also need to get acquainted with each other.  This is no easy meet and greet though.  These guys do not get along with each other, they can barely stay in one room together, and see no reason to work together to defeat Loki.  We know this can't go on forever.  Some sacrifices are made and soon bonds start to form.

When I see Iron Man whizzing around the skyscrapers of New York, Thor summoning lightning from his mighty hammer, Captain America knocking down aliens left and right with his shield, and The Hulk doing what he does best (smashing) simultaneously all together in one scene, I can't but smile.  This is a great example of what a "fun" summer blockbuster should be.  Granted, the film is big, loud, and filled with an overabundance of visual effects, but I kind of don't care.

Never is The Avengers boring, dull, stupid, and most of all, insulting to its audience.  I'll say this though, it should probably be required to watch its four predecessors because those films really do set the tone for this film.  They would also familiarize you with the characters and their motives.  The Avengers made me further appreciate the work Evans, Downey Jr., and Hemsworth have put into each of their characters.  Also, even though Loki's character is clichéd, Hiddleston's performance is fantastic as he clearly owns every scene he is in.  Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Rener really are just along for the ride as their characters are supporting and nothing more than that.  Mark Ruffalo's performance as Bruce Banner is fine but I wouldn't say he added anything new to the character.  Not since Spiderman 2 did I feel like I was watching a comic book come life.  The Avengers gets it right and sets the bar high for its genre.  Well done gentlemen!    

Slicin' and Dicin' with Swords

"Immortals"

Flair, style, panache, call it what you will.  These are a few words used to describe the very distinctive imagery that director Tarsem Singh uses in all of his films.  Now to be fair up until the last six months, the music video now turned film director only had two films under his belt in the past twelve years .  The Cell and The Fall boasted some pretty impressive photography which, at least for a visual medium, is why film can still be considered an art form.  Eye candy aside, Tarsem's two previous films suffered from a lack of emotionally engaging storytelling.  His latest, Immortals, succumbs to this same fate as well.  

Actor Henry Cavill will soon be seen wearing that strapping red and blue spandex as he prepares to take on the role of Superman in the upcoming Man of Steel.  However in this film he grabs his sword and sandals as Theseus who is preparing to do battle against the tyrannous King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) who has declared war on all of humanity.  That's right folks, if you couldn't tell by the names of our hero and villain, Immortals is a film that takes place in ancient Greece.  A time ruled by larger than life gods who reside on the heavenly Mount Olympus.  Hyperion is furious over the death of his wife and child.  He of course blames the gods for his misfortunes and would like to see their reign come to an end.  The only way to do this though is to release the long imprisoned titans who are caged in the bowels of Mount Tataros.  Zeus (Luke Evans) makes it very clear to the other gods that they themselves must not interfere with the matters that most concern the mortals.  Looks like you're on your own Theseus.  

The motives for the characters are clear and to the point.  But there's nothing more to them or the plot for that matter.  Everything is simplified which leaves the screenplay lacking any sort of complexity or depth.  This is after all a story of revenge.  But give us some sort of character development.  I get it; Theseus can swing a sword, throw a spear, and shoot an arrow.  Same can be said about Hyperion.  This guy is brutal in every sense of the word.  His cruel, remorseless, barbaric behavior is ever present in each scene.  Rourke does a fine job convincing us that Hyperion is a bad guy.  Cavill also establishes that he is our hero.  These actors don't have anywhere else to go with the material that is given to them.  Their characters come off typical archetypes and nothing more.

The plot does a poor job of moving us along from one well done (and incredibly bloody) fight sequence to the next.  The dialogue feels forced and mandatory only so that we can get to lay witness these beautifully designed set pieces that will soon be drenched in massive amounts of carnage.  The violence is stylistically done but this film does earn its R rating.  The human body gets sliced and diced every which way with generous quantities of computer generated blood pouring out.  Lovers of 300 should have no problem stomaching the intensity of this picture.

Expertly staged, gorgeously designed, and fueled by a testosterone filled IV drip Immortals gives our senses a real rush that only Tarsem can bring the silver screen.   Unfortunately the film fails at just about everything else leaving us wanting more.  Immortals delivers on its action but as for story and characters, forget it.  I would like to think that Tarsem is still growing as a filmmaker and eventually he will find the right script that is best suited for his visuals.  In the meantime I'll just have to sit, watch, and endure costume designer Eiko Ishioka's exquisite costumes as they move across the screen.  Or admire Tom Foden’s meticulously constructed sets as they take us back to a time and place that we can only dream about.  It’s clear that Tarsem knows what a film should look like but needs to become a better storyteller.