Change Your Image
iamstephenbourne-568-171804
Reviews
Parker (2013)
Parker a clunker
Review: Parker (2013) USA, 118 minutes, Rated 14A (ON) 13+ (QC) Reviewed 01/13, © Stephen Bourne
Jason Statham is out for blood and back for revenge as Parker, a for-hire criminal left for dead in Ohio by his heist team when he won't agree to use the thousands of dollars they've just stolen to fund hitting a West Palm Beach jewel auction worth millions. In Florida, disguised as a house-hunting Texan oil baron, Parker meets divorced and deflated rookie real estate agent Leslie Rodgers (played by Jennifer Lopez) who quickly figures out what Parker's really after and offers to help for a cut of the take.
This offering from director Taylor Hackford had so much going for it: A great cast led by Statham, who's tailor-made for this role. A gritty crime story full of intriguing twists and wonderful low-lifes. Punchy dialogue and action handed to screenwriter John J. McLaughlin on a silver platter. With all of that, Parker should be an intensely riveting flick for big screen action-lovers. Unfortunately, it's not.
The movie is adapted from prolific American crime author Donald E. Westlake's 2000 novel Flashfire, the 19th in his 24-book Parker series begun in 1962 with The Hunter. Several Hollywood films have either been based on or inspired by Westlake's Parker books over the years. Point Blank (1967) starring Lee Marvin, and Payback (1999) starring Mel Gibson were both based on The Hunter, for instance. However, this 2013 adaptation of Flashfire is the first where the main character is actually named Parker. And, according to Westlake's youngest son Paul who blogs about his father's lit legacy, this movie is "mostly true to the book." I guess that's code for all the book's good bits were left out.
Parker, the film, drops the ball at virtually every instance of potential greatness. Continuity gaffs abound. The editing is hackneyed, completely botching key scenes that should feel intense but instead are laboriously boring. You have characters shooting guns mere inches from each other yet repeatedly missing their targets, making those scenes laughably nonsensical. McLaughlin's script merely has Statham spit out the same tired lines heard from his past few features, to the point where it's easy to forget this is a new release. On-screen moments with a deathly ill-looking Nick Nolte as Parker's trusted mentor Hurley, and Emma Booth as Parker's clothing challenged girlfriend Clare don't much help this forgettable stinker.
Frankly, the only notable highlight is Jennifer Lopez' obvious efforts in actively fleshing out her character throughout as being more than a contrived and vapid one-dimensional role. It has little to do with the main story, but the subplot between her and Bobby Cannavale as lovesick local Sheriff Jake Fernandez is a refreshing treat. Sure, fans have seen better performances from Lopez, but it's clear what you see here is her natural talent shining through despite the lazy screenplay and lame editing.
You'll find the usual info, photo gallery and video sections at the nicely designed official website, as well as a series of free games that include Safe Cracker Cash Grab, Parker's Escape Driving Game, and Parker's Revenge shooter game. The games are definitely a highlight of the site, well worth checking out.
Statham fanatics will likely keep this boring, poorly cobbled actioner in theatres much longer than it deserves. However, apart from Lopez' comparably impressive performance, you won't see anything you haven't seen before or really need to pay the price of admission to sit through. Yawn. Reviewed 01/13, © Stephen Bourne.
Parker is rated 14A by the Ontario Film Review Board for occasional gory/grotesque images, coarse language, sexual references, nudity in a non-sexual context, occasional upsetting or disturbing scenes, embracing and kissing, tobacco use, violent acts shown in clear, unequivocal and realistic detail with blood and tissue damage, and is rated 13+ by la Régie du Cinéma in Québec.
Zero Dark Thirty (2012)
Maya's Apocalypse
The last nine years of the CIA's decade-long War on Terror manhunt for Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden following the 9/11 attacks on the United States is the specific focus of Oscar-winning duo director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal's often lumbering dramatic account of compelling factual events.
The film stars Jessica Chastain as CIA officer Maya, newly assigned from Washington to the Pakistan-based US intelligence team charged with the singular purpose of distilling the flow and fog of intel surrounding Al-Qaeda's enigmatic network towards bringing closure to a wounded nation and justice to the most wanted man in American history during that time.
Zero Dark Thirty is an oftentimes slow-moving, intellectually meticulous patchwork procedural drama sporadically punctuated by the grit of intense chase scenes and brutal violence. Yes, the torture of a detainee depicted shortly after the pitch black cacophony of audio from that horrific September day in 2001 is jarring and inhumane, and decisively sets the tone for what plays out during the next hundred-plus minutes. Remove the film's 9/11 hyperbole, however, and any horror flick worth its salt is far more violent than what's seen in this picture. For the most part, you merely witness the burdensome daily grunt work Maya experiences in doggedly constructing plausible evidence that may lead to tangible results under the collective din of her country's shattered emotions, panicked blood lust and the chill of cautious politics.
This is an investigative drama framed within the context of recent historical events, from 2003 until the assassination of Osama bin Laden by United States Navy SEALs on May 2, 2011, yet this fact-based film's closing credits actually do acknowledge events and characters were fictionalized or invented for the purposes of telling the story. Despite the innumerable populations of CIA personnel devoted to this manhunt worldwide, that a lone figure named Maya ultimately delivers the, uh, apocalypse to bin Laden's doorstep pretty much screams that aspects of Boal's screenplay are concocted Hollywood clichés enhanced by facts. And, that's fine. It never claims to be a documentary. It's entertainment. Barely.
Boal's screenplay isn't particularly overwhelming or crackling with memorable dialog, unfortunately. Given the subject matter and news that he and Bigelow were granted unprecedented access to relevant classified information, I expected much more from the script and characters. The film editing seems uneven as well, leaving you sitting through over-long shots of silent, empty moments that I guess are supposed to mean something to somebody, somewhere at some point. Maybe. Yes, I got that the burning aircraft near the end bookends the burning aircraft we all saw on 9/11. Sorry, it's too indulgently artsy to be necessary. And, while this feature showcases a wealth of wonderfully understated, believable performances, Chastain's starring efforts feel almost robotic and bland throughout. Sure, her character does follow an interesting arc of subtle transformation from being a visibly shaken observer to a coldly obsessed casualty of her job, but it's definitely a struggle maintaining interest in what happens to Maya as this film progresses - to the point where it's almost a relief when the Navy SEALs finally drop in on Osama's Pakistan compound in the final act.
The official site at zerodarkthirty-movie.com includes the usual info, videos and photos sections, as well as a features page that offers a three-part covert ops memory-testing game. The splash page also serves up a couple of extra links: One to a separate tumblr site of related news articles scraped from the web and a second link to EA's Medal of Honor Zero Dark Thirty Map Pack charitable tie-in for gamers. Not a whole lot going on there, really.
The term Zero Dark Thirty apparently means half an hour after midnight in military slang. 30 more minutes of Zero Dark Thirty left on the cutting room floor might have saved it from feeling so unnecessarily plodding, but the real tragedy of this post-9/11 drama is that there's more to do with marketing hype and timely controversy during awards season at play in filling seats with paying moviegoers than this picture offering you a compelling screenplay worth your time and that does justice to those actually involved in this real life story. Disappointing. Reviewed 01/13, © Stephen Bourne.
Zero Dark Thirty is rated 14A by the Ontario Film Review Board for scenes containing some grotesque images in a fantasy, comedic or historic context, coarse language, sexual references, nudity in a non-sexual context, occasional upsetting or disturbing scenes, tobacco use, and violent acts shown in clear, unequivocal and realistic detail with blood and tissue damage, and is rated 13+ by la Régie du Cinéma in Québec.
More reviews: moviequips.ca
Follow: @moviequips
Not Fade Away (2012)
Bye and bye
Rising talent John Magaro stars in TV director David Chase's debut big screen feature as New Jersey middle class teen Doug caught up in the fervor of Rock & Roll during the 1960s, fueled by the British Invasion to drum and then sing for his high school pals' five-man American R&B cover band and pursue their dreams of fame against the snarky disappointment of Doug's stoic father Pat (wonderfully played by James Gandolfini).
It's fairly clear early-on that Not Fade Away is a true labor of love bordering on cinematic autobiography for director and screenwriter Chase. It captures specific moments in American history from a baby boomer music-lover's very personal level, and Magaro impressively takes his character through this journey of awkward self-discovery and hero worship of The Rolling Stones to Bob Dylan. His performance is often stunningly underplayed, making Doug completely believable here as a kid just trying to make his life worth something. Kudos also go to Bella Heathcote (previously seen in Dark Shadows), stepping in as Doug's upper class hometown love interest Grace.
Unfortunately, all of the great acting seen in this 112-minute picture really isn't enough to distract you from how undercooked and uneventful Chase's screenplay is. Sure, there's some interesting dialog sprinkled throughout. Doug wondering aloud about the Brits knowing the Blues and bringing it to the States - where the Blues came from - is a priceless moment. Yes, the soundtrack is amazing. Leadbelly. Bo Diddley. The Stones. Awesome. Paying moviegoers will likely want to love it, but probably won't because nothing particularly memorable happens to any of these characters. It doesn't even matter if you accept Not Fade Away as Chase's take on his early years as a wannabe rock star or not. Aside from the peripheral high points already mentioned, this is an unnecessarily boring small movie over-all.
There's not much served up at this flick's official website (notfadeawaymovie.com) either: A gallery of photos, a videos section, story and cast info, links to Facebook etc, and the soundtrack available on iTunes. Forgettable.
While it's easy to predict big things from John Magaro in the near future after seeing this movie, the same can't be said for the movie itself. Wait a couple of minutes for Not Fade Away to appear on the IFC channel, if you're interested in taking a mildly novel wander through this tumultuous decade in US music history. Otherwise, you're better off saving your time and cash letting Not Fade Away do just that: Fade away. Yawn. Reviewed 01/13, (c) Stephen Bourne.
Not Fade Away is rated 14A by the Ontario Film Review Board for coarse language, slurs, sexual references, partial or full nudity in a brief sexual situation, illustrated or verbal references to drugs, alcohol or tobacco, crude content, substance abuse, embracing and kissing, fondling, implied sexual activity, tobacco use, and restrained portrayals of non-graphic violence, and is rated G by la Regie du Cinema in Quebec.
More reviews: moviequips.ca Follow: @moviequips
Les Misérables (2012)
Accent aigu...
Hugh Jackman stars as embittered parole-breaking 19th century French ex-convict Jean Valjean turned benevolent factory owner and wealthy town mayor Monsieur Madeleine, adopting and raising a child from the slums of Paris while evading re-imprisonment at the hands of police inspector Javert (played by Russell Crowe) during the rise of France's post-Revolution 1832 June Rebellion, in this surprisingly undercooked but visually impressive stage-to-screen adaptation of Brit stage producer Cameron Mackintosh's 1985 English version of Alain Boublil and Claude-Michel Schonberg's 1980 French musical based on famed French writer Victor Hugo's 1862 novel Les Miserables. Yes, all the characters are French, yet they all have British accents here. #odd
Both Jackman and Anne Hathaway pull in incredibly disarming stellar performances here. Hathaway plays emotionally shattered fired factory worker Fantine who falls into prostitution to continue supporting her estranged and impoverished young daughter Cosette - the famed poster child of Les Miserables, played here by feature first timer Isabelle Allen. It's literally gob-smacking how effortlessly Jackman and Hathaway elevate this theatrical work beyond its big screen flaws and oftentimes relentless lyrical dialog to a superior cinematic level of characterization during their scenes. Top marks also go to cinematographer Danny Cohen for capturing those master class moments. Awesome!
However, there's a dilemma. Those performances are exceptionally wonderful and probably wouldn't have been seen otherwise, but the film Les Miserables as a whole has problems. The storytelling is weak and disjointed. Primary supporting characters are barely fleshed-out. Deeper motivations are oversimplified or glossed over, as though you don't need this movie to actually tell you what's going on or why you should care. How, for instance, does Javert, a prison guard in the opening scenes, become transferred as a policeman to Valjean's tiny grubby town later on? Was he fired? Reincarnated? Does it matter? Has anyone here read the book? Quick, Google SparkNotes! Hush, another crying big face is singing on-screen:
I dreamed a dream this film was prime; My hopes were high but then (sniffle,) I saw it...
I realize this picture is adapted from the hugely successful, self-proclaimed longest-running stage musical to date, where large portions of Victor Hugo's richly detailed manuscript were likely already chopped out or shorthanded to accommodate the songs while offering a run-time those in the loge would sit through nightly, but Crowe specifically was robbed here. Compared to Jackman, it's fairly obvious that Crowe was either given little more than a stock heavy's wisp of a character outline to work with beyond the wardrobe and tunes or the majority of what this hugely capable screen actor poured into his purposefully antagonistic role ultimately fell victim to overindulgent deletion in editing. Maybe he should have cried more to gain scenes, I don't know. Co-cast members Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, and newcomer Samantha Barks aren't treated much better throughout, as adult Cosette, her love Marius, and his secret admirer Eponine respectively. Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen appear to be the only other survivors, hamming it up all teeth and elbows through their comedic relief scenes as The Thenardiers.
The blame for how poorly cobbled this offering of wasted opportunities is over-all lays squarely in the lap of director Tom Hooper, who obviously couldn't be bothered to earn his paycheck using the wealth of his entire cast's talent matched with the power of filmmaking to balance out what came from the stage production, and over-ride screenwriter William Nicholson's clear inability (or fear) to reintroduce elements from Hugo's original material to make this movie something more - oh, I dunno - appropriately cinematic: Solid story. Strong plot points. Rich characters. Compelling dialog. Little things like that. Something more than adding mud and horses to the mix. Hooper might as well have had Cohen shoot the London musical on-set/location without these parachuted celebs. Barks' reprised Eponine, and Colm "Broadway/West End Valjean" Wilkinson's Bishop of Digne cameo aside, at least that stage cast could have enjoyed a cut of the film's 61 million USD budget. After-all, they were good enough at playing their roles to make the show so popular for so long that UK studio Working Title Films came a-knocking, right?
Comparing movie to movie - and there are many film versions of Hugo's "Les Miz" to choose from - just check out the four-time Oscar-nominated Les Miserables (1935) starring Fredric March as Valjean and Charles Laughton as Javert. That classic's adapted from Hugo's novel; it's not a musical, but watch it and you'll immediately realize how outrageous the hype for this comparably empty, prolonged music video of catchy tunes and missed notes truly is.
Sure musical-lovers, go see Les Miserables if taking in a star-studded matinée version of the internationally renowned stage musical suits your budget better than buying tickets to the actual theatrical production might (if available.) At 157 minutes in length, it's also probably faster seeing it than reading Hugo's novel. Just don't be surprised if - beyond the memorable tunes, amazing sights and incredible performances from Jackman and Hathaway - you spend most of this screening wishing for far more developed supporting characters and fundamentally cohesive storytelling normally expected at the movies, and you realize maybe you should have read the book or seen another film version of Les Miserables beforehand. Or, instead. Reviewed 12/12, © Stephen Bourne.
More reviews: moviequips.ca Follow: @moviequips