Side One Track One

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

After my last round of VOD torture, I can’t say I have much hope for the unknown films that end up in my drop-box. That said, after a brief internet search, it does seem that American Mary has garnered favorable reviews from the horror community. This still means little to me, but at least I know someone, somewhere has said something nice about this film.

The Reality:

You know, I was pleasantly surprised by American Mary. The story of a med-student forced down the path of illegal body modification was both gruesome (though tastefully so) and surprisingly delicate. Mary Mason (Katherine Isabelle) is a broke, surgical student with a knack for splitting tongues and putting horns on goth twins with more than a few dirty secrets hiding in the basement. When the secrets start bubbling to the surface things, as they always seem to, start to go wrong. American Mary is a solid little bit of horror anchored by a strong, sassy performance by Katherine Isabelle. Though The Soska Sisters, the directors, don’t shy away from some fairly brutal imagery, the majority of the horror floats about in the dark, almost morbid atmosphere they place their central character in. What American Mary does best though is that which the great horror films always do, it addresses an issue (here, the medical profession) greater than the confines of horror, but in a way that the most extreme of circumstances can be explored. The Soska Sisters do strong work in their debut, creating a world of dark and seedy bod-mod that seems both realistic and approachable.

The Lesson:

People who want their tongues split in half voluntarily are people too.

American Mary is out on VOD now.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

JJ Abrams has finally reassembled the crew of the Enterprise for the long awaited sequel to 2009′s Star Trek.

The Reality:

As though he knew making fans wait four years was a bit much, JJ Abrams’ Star Trek Into Darkness starts out quick and never lets up.  We wanted bigger and better, and that’s what he delivers.  Epic action scenes, characters in danger, a great sense of humor, gripping suspense, wild plot twists – it’s all packed in and perfectly arranged, and you, the viewer, get to sit back and watch it all masterfully unfold as you cheerfully shovel popcorn into your face (and maybe fist pump a little).

Sound like fun?  Well, it is.  Star Trek Into Darkness is an accessible, big budget sci-fi action effort that you will love (I personally had a blast).  It is, however, not really for those of you who are massive Star Trek fans.  Sure, the film is based on Gene Roddenberry’s beloved creation, but that’s mostly just a way to ease up the marketing team’s job.  Sorry, Trekkies, if you start campaigning now they might make the next entry for you.

The Lesson:

Sometimes even a great movie can still be a disservice to its core group of fans.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Baz Luhrmann is as decadent as any director has ever been, and F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby is about decadence.  This pairing sounds meant to be.

The Reality:

There are moments in The Great Gatsby where Baz gets it all right.  The screen is full of glitz and glamor, and the characters seem to glide around as they elegantly tell grand stories and passionately express their love for one another.  It really is impressive in all of the ways you want it to be.  Unfortunately, there’s also an equal amount of things that just don’t work.  The Great Gatsby has a clunky pace that often kills any momentum its built up, and I often found myself wishing I could hit fast forward.  Also, while the world seems to be raving about the soundtrack, I thought the modern selections were more awkward than innovative.  Why not just go ahead and set the entire thing in present day?  That would have at least provided Baz some flexibility to really play and explore.  Instead, he didn’t bother being adventurous at all, and because of this The Great Gatsby largely feels flat.  If you see it, make sure you do so matinee-style.

The Lesson:

It’s never great when Baz Luhrmann plays it safe.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Robert Downey Jr. is back as Tony Stark/Iron Man, but this time it’s with Shane Black (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang) as the director.  Trailers featuring the villainous Mandarin and a PTSD-riddled Stark hint at an edgy ride.

The Reality:

First of all, please note that I will not be spoiling any of the rather glorious plot twists that happen in Iron Man 3.  Go experience them!

Now, as for the film, it’s pretty damn fantastic. Shane Black’s effort looks and sounds like a proper Iron Man entry, but it really is a different sort of beast.  He strips Tony Stark of everything, puts him to work, and then allows you to see what kind of a man he really is.  In all honesty, I thought Iron Man 3 played out like a more light-hearted, accessible version of The Dark Knight Rises.  This is an approach that I didn’t even kind of expect, but I loved it.  I really think it puts the series in a place where it won’t only feel like something that’s setting up the next Avengers flick.  They can do actual standalone films that further develop the characters and add the sort of depth that’s rarely found in billion dollar blockbusters.

On a final note, Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyenth Paltrow are stellar throughout the entire film.  There’s been some talk of their run as these characters coming to an end, and I really hope that doesn’t happen.  At this point they will be nearly impossible to replace.

The Lesson:

Marvel is making can’t-miss films right now.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Matthew McConaughey is a possibly dangerous man who befriends two kids.  The film is directed by Jeff Nichols, who did the rather good Take Shelter.

The Reality:

Mud is one of the best “coming of age” movies that I’ve seen in a long time.  The formula for these sort of films is pretty standard – they follow a person and/or a similarly-aged group of people as they go through something that helps them figure out how to grow up/live happy/whatever.  Mud, however, is centered around a boy and a man who end up using their sudden friendship to right their lives.  It’s an interesting dynamic, and director/writer Jeff Nichols does a nice job of crafting their odd pairing into something that you feel an absolute need to root for.  Consider this one highly recommended.

The Lesson:

Jeff Nichols is close to being able to sell a movie just with his name.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Tron Legacy director Joseph Kosinski gets back into theaters with a Tom Cruise-lead live action take on Wall-E.

The Reality:

Oblivion is a movie heavily influenced by pretty much anything sci-fi that’s come along before it.  So much so in fact that I think the only thing in the film that I’m willing to give credit to Joseph Kosinski for is the much advertised Bubble Ship.  Aside from that, there’s nothing!  Somehow, though, this doesn’t work against it.  While so much of Oblivion seemed familiar, and despite the fact that it was easy to predict what was going to happen next, I still found the film to be a rather entertaining time.  If you just want to see sci-fi on a big scale, the kind that isn’t concerned with taking itself too seriously, then you could certainly do much worse than Oblivion.

The Lesson:

A lack of originality isn’t always a bad thing.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Danny Boyle is back on the big screen after taking a break to direct last year’s Olympics.  He brings with him James McAvoy, Rosario Dawson, and Vincent Cassel in what appears to be a stylish psychological thriller.

The Reality:

Slumdog Millionaire, 127 Hours, the Olympics – these are all serious endeavors, so it doesn’t even remotely surprise me that Trance feels like Danny Boyle just having a good time.  Right from the beginning of the film he essentially begins a test to see how clever you are, to see if you can avoid getting lost in the maze that he’s rapidly guiding you through.  It all makes the film into a rather entertaining and interactive experience, and I really can’t wait to see it again.

Side note, I forgot how good James McAvoy can be.

The Lesson:

Danny Boyle is a treasure.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Jackie Robinson gets a biopic, but it’s out in April instead of Oscar season.  This just screams mediocre.

The Reality:

To be honest, I really just wanted to write “42 swings and misses!” and then leave it at that.  After all, the film does try to hit a home run with the story of Jackie Robinson, and it does totally whiff on the opportunity.  But still, I suppose that wouldn’t be any fun, so let’s talk about the film.

If there’s anything a good biopic needs, it’s depth.  42 doesn’t have any, and because of this the film mostly just drags along for two hours.  I wanted it to give me more drama, or information, or hell, even just some more baseball would have been nice.  Instead I felt like I was skimming Jackie Robinson’s Wikipedia page, and that’s just sort of sad.  #42 deserves better.

One last thing, Harrison Ford’s take on Branch Rickey is borderline comical.  The guy may have been a weird combo of mumbly and animated, but Ford’s delivery of it is so odd.

The Lesson:

Details are what make or break a story.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Derek Cianfrance (Blue Valentine) directs Ryan Gosling and Bradley Cooper in a film that looks like it will probably be the saddest thing ever.

The Reality:

The Place Beyond The Pines is all show.  It looks nice, the acting is top notch, and the story itself is interesting enough, but the film comes off as hollow.  I blame this on the subject matter being a bit too ambitious for director Derek Cianfrance.  His mission to explore the decisions that fathers make and how they affect their sons is an admirable one, but he doesn’t do anything expect point and repeatedly say: “see, that thing he did is totally why this other thing happened.”  That’s certainly one way to present something, but in this instance, it makes The Place Beyond The Pines feel heartless.  See it only if you want a cold slice of drama.

The Lesson:

A well made movie is not always a great movie.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Jurassic Park is a brilliant film. Get over it. The fact that they’re retrofitting it for 3D and re-releasing it back in to the wild may not be my most preferential treatment of the material, but if it means a chance to see it again on the big screen in all it’s T-Rex glory, I say fuck yeah.

The Reality:

Yup, Jurassic Park (in 3D or not) is an awe-inspiring film. My date to the movie turned to me afterwards and said, “Spielberg just makes it look so easy.” We’re in an age of film where just about anything can make it on the big screen and time and time again these hugely budgeted fantastical films are overwrought, completely boring slabs of crapola.” If Jurassic Park came out today I’d fear the same of it, but in Spielberg’s very capable hands, JP becomes not just a thrilling action ride (and I’ve seen this movie 50 times and the first appearance of the T-Rex still sent shivers down my spine) but an almost perfectly paced, perfectly economized bit of film.

Even the moments pre-dinosaurs with Sam Neill and Laura Dern (also, what a strange world the 90s were where Laura Dern and Sam Neill headlined a big budget actioneer) at the dig-site or conversing with Jeff Goldblum (playing some amazing and hilarious mixture of Fabio, Lenny Bruce, and Richard Dawkins) or Neill’s inability to fathom hanging out with the kids – Spielberg and David Koepp build the suspense of the park while genuinely feeding us bits of information that events further down the line will hinge upon. It isn’t rocket science, but if you ever want to make a big budget monster flick turn on JP for a while, it’s a textbook example of how to do so. And then, the dinosaurs. Once the action kicks off and Neill and the kids are fleeing from every imaginable sort of dinosaur threat imaginable, all of the elements blend seamlessly together. The connection that builds between Dr. Grant and the kids, the relationship between Dr. Sadler and Dr. Grant, the sadness John Hammond faces as he watches his dream collapse around him plus various attacks by prehistoric monsters that are riveting and feel real and not hatched in some 19 year olds supercomputer. Am I nostalgic as fuck for a film that made me love movies when I was 11? Yes. Do I think this is a detriment to my judgment of the film? No. This is a great film and if you don’t believe me, you have no soul and should probably be an insurance agent.

Oh yeah, there’s 3D in the film and for the most part it’s barely noticeable and you kind of think to yourself, “It’s nice that the 3D thing got this film back on the big screen” and then Lex falls through the heating vent at the end and the raptor jumps at to try and eat her and the whole audience goes “Oh shit!” and then you say, “Yeah 3D!”

The Lesson:

How did this franchise end up so bad? This movie is so good.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Fede Alvarez takes a shot at directing a remake of Sam Raimi’s cult horror flick from 1981.  Wait.  Who the hell is Fede Alvarez?

The Reality:

The neat thing about the Evil Dead redo is that it just refuses to end.  I know that probably doesn’t sound like a good thing, but I do actually mean it in a positive way.  Just when you think the movie is done with something, it goes another step or six forward.  Were you totally grossed out by what you just saw?  Well, you better suck it up, because it’s about to get worse.  Oh, think you have the latest twist figured out?  You don’t.  The film is just getting started at winding the plot around your brain.

Some of you are going to want to quickly bow out of such a manic ride, but those of you that commit to what director/writer Fede Alvarez put together will have a blast.  His version of Evil Dead is fun, loud, disgusting, and perhaps most importantly, inspired.

The Lesson:

It’s probably time for a sub-genre of horror that’s simply titled FUCK YEAH.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

It’s a strange thing how curious I’ve always been about the original Stephen Sommers-helmed G.I. Joe film because it doesn’t look particularly good and didn’t, for its time, have a very reliable team behind it. Chalk it up to my father’s stern refusal to never purchase the much coveted action figures I wanted as a child, but the film has lodged itself in my “want” pile and this, this second possible G.I. Joe masterpiece, has wedged itself right next to it. Will it be good? I doubt it. Do I or any of the other 40-year old teenagers who will be dressed like Storm Shadow or Snake Eyes care? No.

The Reality:

G.I. Joe: Retaliation is like a giant bong hit of super sticky-icky weed. As soon as it pile drives in to your lungs the room gets kind of fuzzy and you might cough a couple times and feel a little squinty but then that sweet sweet THC starts a dank parade through your bloodstream and everything is looking up. The Rock and the dude from Magic Mike totes hanging out with guns? Yes! Super-secret underground prison besieged by explosive motorcycles and tiny boom-boom flies? Better believes. Ninjas, ninjas, ninjas, ninjas, ninjas and then a few more ninjas (all dressed in the most rainbow of outfits)? Fo’seriously. At this point, in being stoned allegory world, the Bob Hope (that’s weed) starts plateauing a bit and you might be feeling paranoid, might be thinking, “Weird, that this ninja storyline is just glued on to all the rest because clearly director John Chu loves himself a ninja,” or maybe, “Why does Adrienne Padlecki look like she herself might have been chiefing a few from the old Bongzilla?” or possibly “Ray Stephenson is a badass but Ray Stephenson with a Southern accent sounds like a cabaret dancer” or maybe even “Why did they show the end of this movie in the trailers?” And then that deep dark stick-ick is making a concentrated effort to escape pod it from your blood stream and you’re lethargic and even a little bored and you just want to grab a hot dog and hit the snooze button a couple times. Which in G.I. Joe Retaliation land means the plot unravels, things makes less sense, and when the ending lands, it does so with little grace or interest. G.I. Joeeeeeeeeeeeee!

The Lesson:

This movie was just about everything I wanted in a film with characters named Firefly and Storm Shadow.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

I haven’t loved everything that Drafthouse Films has released, but I’ve been challenged and entertained and shocked and generally interested by bits and pieces of all of them. The trailer for Graceland, a Filipino thriller by Ron Morales, is darkly beautiful and a I love a good kidnapping film, so expectations are high for this gem.

The Reality:

Graceland is a taut, uncomfortable thriller, that loses itself in the final act. Marlon Villar (Arnold Reyes) is the driver for political figure Manuel Chango (Menggie Cobarrubias), a rich, corrupt man who has a penchant for girls, young ones. While driving Chango’s daughter and her best friend (his own daughter) to school, a kidnapping occurs, someone dies, and because of circumstantial evidence, Marlon is pushed in to a precarious space between lies, truth, and just doing the right thing. For almost it’s entire running time, Graceland is a well made thriller that very handily uses the dirty locational aspects of the Philippines to the utmost advantage. Marlon, without giving anything away, gets put in hot water pretty quick, and the rest of the film follows Marlon trying to save his own ass while keeping the pieces of the puzzle from falling down around him. At the same time director Ron Morales manages to make it a film about the seedier sides of the sex trade in the Philippines. There are no good or bad characters in this film, just people pushed to the limits by the terrible things we do as human beings. If the film was just that, just the story of Marlon Villar and a very bad bad situation, this would be a great film, but in the final moments Morales makes a decision that dispels almost everything that’s come before it. It feels tacked on and in a damaging way, and it leaves what could a great little thriller, feeling empty and not thought out.

The Lesson:

If you have a great story with great characters, you don’t need to fall prey to a big ending.

Graceland is out on VOD today.

The Impression:

Stoker is the debut from Korean super-director Chan-wook Park (Old Boy, Thirst) and as much as I’m excited to see someone as interesting and depraved make the jump across the pond, the Hollywood grind is rough on foreign directors and I worry that Mr. Park will lose his voice in the process.

The Reality:

Stoker is a very strange, very atmospheric, very beautiful film that almost entirely works. India Stoker (Mia Wasikowska) has lost her father in a terrible car accident, leaving her to the machinations of her sex-pot mother (Nicole Kidman) and the recently arrived, and very creepy, Uncle Charles (Matthew Goode). From the get go, things aren’t right in the house of Stoker, Kidman’s Evelyn seems only barely affected by the death of her husband, and the father of her child, and has untoward interest in the deceased’s brother. Uncle Charles seems like a borderline sociopath with just a little too much interest in his blood relation. This is, for the most part, the coming-of-age story of India Stoker, and Park realizes this, teasing out the sexual awakening of Miss Stoker as a parallel to the other, more murderous urges she might discover. It’s a tangled web he weaves, all near-incest, and nearer-murder and at times it feels like the structure of the story gets lost in Park’s desire for beautiful shots and even more beautiful compositions. And on that front Stoker soars; this is a gorgeous film. Every piece of furniture, every outfit, every edit is chosen for utmost beauty and looking away for a moment is your loss. Does the soulless world of Hollywood dampen Park’s star? No. This is 100 percent the work of the director, for better or worse, and I wonder if American audiences will be able to gel with the loose narrative structure Park imposes on the film. Regardless, it’s a strong first outing for the director, and hopefully not his last.

The Lesson:

Hollywood doesn’t make automatons out of each and every director who makes there way from a foreign land. Phew.

People are doing traditional-style reviews all over the web, so we decided to try something different.  In each “breakdown” we’ll take a look at what a film’s marketing lead us to believe, how the movie actually played, and then what we learned from it all.  Read on!

The Impression:

Chan-wook Park (Oldboy) makes his English language debut with some help from Nicole Kidman, Mia Wasikowska, and Matthew Goode.  Naturally, the movie looks twisted.

The Reality:

I think my favorite thing about Stoker is that at no point did I feel like Chan-wook Park was trying to soften up his style for the mainstream audience that the film will surely draw.  The movie is intense, twisted, and it messes with your head just enough so that you leave the theater conflicted about the whole damn thing.  Good thrillers don’t come along enough, so do yourself a favor and check this one out.

By the way, Nicole Kidman is a real force in Stoker.  Her confused, lonely, and desperate character expresses everything through her eyes, and I was really impressed with how Kidman just owns every scene she’s in.

The Lesson:

It’s still fine to trust anything that says “From the Director of Oldboy” on the poster.