# 544 - MONSTERS (2010)

MONSTERS (2010 - THRILLER / SCI-FI / DRAMA) **** out of ***** or 8 out of 10

(Better forget about that Mexican vacation, folks...)



CAST: Scoot McNairy, Whitney Able

DIRECTOR: Gareth Edwards

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good arguments against sending NASA space probes to collect alien life - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: Ah, traveling. Is there a more wonderful thing in the world? You get to see new places, meet new people, have grand adventures, and broaden your horizons so that you end up a more worldly, enlightened individual. The flip side of traveling is that you have to sometimes endure the unexpected. Sometimes that can be something as simple as a hotel with a bathroom so small you could plant both palms and both feet squarely on each of the four walls - and hover over the floor without touching it. Other times, it can mean getting lost in a strange city with wonky GPS instructions sending you driving back and forth along the same deserted stretch of urban road, like a particularly-fucked-up episode of THE TWILIGHT ZONE. And then there's our next review, MONSTERS, which unequivocally takes the cake when it comes to "Unexpected Shitty Travel Developments."

You see, MONSTERS is set in the "near future" after some dumb-ass scientists from NASA have sent a space probe to collect alien life forms previously detected by satellite (or something). Clearly, these imbeciles have either never heard of real-life Astrophysicist Professor Stephen Hawking's warning against making any attempts to contact aliens - lest we be colonized or wiped out - or have chosen to outright ignore it. If the latter is the case, then bad idea, assholes. Very bad idea.

Sure enough, when the NASA space probe re-enters Earth's atmosphere, it promptly explodes and rains down its extra-terrestrial cargo samples onto - are you ready for this? - Mexico. And much like a farmer who falls off his horse and spills a bunch of seeds on the side of the road, things begin growing not much later. Except in the case of MONSTERS, we're not talking about tomato bushes or raspberry plants suddenly sprouting unexpectedly. Nope, what we have in MONSTERS are, well, monsters. Monsters who are 200 - 300 feet tall and look like the one-night-stand-threesome children of a giant crab, a giant spider, and a giant squid. As I said: really bad idea, assholes...

Flash forward six years or so, and we discover that the area that was "infected" by the extra-terrestrial debris from the space probe explosion has been designated as the, uh, "Infected Zone." This is basically most of Northern Mexico, folks. In response, the United States has erected a massive wall along the U.S-Mexico border to keep them pesky aliens out - and I ain't just talking about the two-legged, illegal, terrestrial ones. I'm also talking about the gargantuan, 300-foot tall, spider-crab-squid-looking ones. Who are, let's face it, illegal as well since they are not even from Earth. Meanwhile, Southern Mexico is basically a chaotic whirlwind of damaged cities and swirling military patrols, intent on keeping the "creatures" contained within the Infected Zone.

In the middle of all of this madness are our two leads. First, we have our hero: photojournalist Andrew Calder (Scoot McNairy), who has come to Southern Mexico to photograph the destruction of the creatures, who are apparently gradually expanding their roaming territory. He also hopes to get some pictures of actual live creatures so he can finally win a Pulitzer or Emmy or something. Next, we have our heroine: rich heiress Samantha Wyndon (Whitney Able), who is also the daughter of the president of Andrew's magazine. Apparently, Sam is down in Mexico traveling solo to, I guess, "find herself" before she marries her choad fiancee. Sweetie, that's fine and all. But did you have to pick the one place on Earth filled with monsters as big as the Chrysler building? Girl, we need to talk...

Sure enough, word spreads that all ferries back to the United States (that bypass the Infected Zone) will be shutting down within the next 48 hours because of increased fighting between the creatures and the military. If Sam misses the last ferry, she will basically be stuck in Mexico for the next 6 months - caught in the cross-fire. I bet Sam now wishes she'd just opted for a hiking trip through Norway or train trek through Italy instead. Too late now. Anyhow, Andrew is notified by his office to track Sam down and escort her ASAP to the nearest port with a ferry still running. Needless to say, Andrew is a little pissed off that he has to take time away from taking pics of big-azz monsterz and play babysitter/escort to some chick who, while a complete hottie, probably wasn't using her head when she planned her vacation.

Unfortunately, after a night of partying with Tequila and hooking up with the wrong chick, Andrew gets not only his and Sam's passports stolen - but also her ferry ticket back to the (relative) safety of the U.S. I should also point out the opportunistic Mexican ferry operators charged Sam about $5,000 for the ticket. To say that Sam is just a little pissed off at Andrew for his bonehead move wouldn't exactly be an understatement. Now, it appears that Sam and Andrew have only one option left to them if they want to make it back to the U.S. before all hell breaks loose between the creatures and the military: travel through the Infected Zone to the U.S.-Mexico wall - and enter that way. You know, just like an illegal alien?

Will it work? How can Andrew and Sam make it through hundreds of miles of jungle and river potentially filled with unknown, mysterious creatures? Will they make it to the wall safely? Will they develop mutual respect and regard for each other as they make their perilous journey? Will they even fall in love? What about Sam's engagement to her choad fiancee? And most importantly, what is waiting for them on the other side of the wall?

Let's just say that moving out of the Americas and into Europe is starting to look better and better, folks...


BUT SERIOUSLY: When we heard that GODZILLA was going to be re-made yet again, our interest level was very low. The last Hollywood version of the oft-filmed monster saga starred Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno back in 1998 and while it wasn't as bad as most people say, it still wasn't anything special. The problem with many big-budget monster movies is the human element often gets overlooked, and by "human element" we mean actual sympathetic characters and interactions between them. Many writers often substitute lame comedy for humanity, and such was the case with GODZILLA 1998. It had very little staying power because you didn't really care about anyone onscreen.

JURASSIC PARK was one of the few big-budget monster movies to avoid this pitfall, and it was because of director Steven Spielberg's reliably human touch (best captured in the "ice cream" scene between Laura Dern and Sir Richard Attenborough's characters). Even though the dinosaurs were undeniably the star of the show, Spielberg and his writers knew not to ignore the human players - and gave them enough dimension and nuance to keep us engaged in their plight. Quite frankly, when we heard of the new GODZILLA remake, we were sure it would be closer to GODZILLA 1998 than JURASSIC PARK.

That is, until we heard that British director Gareth Edwards would be directing. After that, we were on board 100%. You see, Gareth Edwards got the GODZILLA remake gig because of his work directing MONSTERS, a micro-budget sci-fi/romance/thriller that has been described as "a cross between LOST IN TRANSLATION and JURASSIC PARK." This is a very apt description, as MONSTERS combines the action and dread of a monster movie with the quietly intimate feel of a love story. In this film, Edwards wisely puts equal importance to character dynamics as he does to the threat of the aliens in their midst - and the result is a movie that is a full-blooded suspense-thriller, but yet somehow also lovely, lyrical, and melancholy. We felt that if Edwards approached GODZILLA in the same way he handled MONSTERS, then we could very well have a classic film on our hands this summer when it is finally released.

MONSTERS was made guerilla-style on a shoe-string budget. Basically, Edwards reportedly took his two leads and a skeleton crew and traveled all over Mexico, shooting scenes on the fly, and using a lot of improv and locals for extra. The result is a raw, real, immediate feel that is often missing from more polished entries with much-higher budgets. It also helps considerably that Scoot McNairy and Whitney Able are a real-life couple with genuine chemistry. Edwards has said that he wanted a real couple because he wanted that immediate connection to be palpable to audiences. Well, it worked, because the evolution of Andrew and Sam's connection is made compelling by McNairy and Able, largely because of their natural intimacy and talents. Not surprisingly, McNairy and Able have since married, and McNairy has gone on to bigger productions like ARGO and NONSTOP.

There are many scenes detailing the touching development of Andrew and Sam's relationship, to include: (1) the "night-life-party" sequence on the eve of Sam's initial ferry departure; (2) a somber scene at a candle-light vigil for fallen victims of the battle between the military and monsters; (3) a nice moment where Andrew adjusts the bandage on Sam's hand, which kind of marks a turning point in their relationship; (4) a lovely sequence on top of a Mexican ruin where their deceptively light conversation hints at deeper themes; and last but definitely the best: (5) the climax at an isolated Texas gas station where the various threads of the move finally dovetail in the most hypnotically-gorgeous way... well, you'll just have to see.

Finally, strong praise must also be paid to Jon Hopkins' beautiful music score, which combines dread, terror, sadness, yearning, and hope - and goes a long way in giving MONSTERS its uniquely surreal, dreamily-intimate feel that is a marked difference from many other monster movies. If Gareth Edwards can bring even just a fraction of MONSTERS' combo of ethereal atmosphere and pulse-pounding suspennse to his remake of GODZILLA, then that will be enough for us to actually go see it.

# 543 - NONSTOP (2014)

NONSTOP (2014 - THRILLER / MYSTERY / ACTION) ***1/2 out of ***** or 7 out of 10

( Tower, we have a problem...)



CAST: Liam Neeson, Julianne Moore, Scoot McNairy, Michelle Dockery, Nate Parker, Corey Stoll, Lupita Nyongo, Anson Mount, Linus Roache, Jason Butler Harner, Quinn McGonagle, Corey Hawkins, Omar Metwally.

DIRECTOR: Jaume Collett-Serra

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good arguments to take a ship the next time you go international...




IT'S LIKE THIS: Ah, traveling. Is there a more wonderful thing in the world? You get to see new places, meet new people, have grand adventures, and broaden your horizons so that you end up a more worldly, enlightened individual. The flip side of traveling is that you have to endure the actual, um, traveling. As in: crowded airports, endless TSA lines, delayed flights, and passengers sitting next to you who just won't mind their own goddamn business. The last time I flew very recently, I actually I had to say the following to a total stranger sitting next to me, who was intent on prying into my personal affairs and would just not lay off: "My parents raised me to always say 'please' and 'thank you.' But they also taught me not to suffer fools gladly. So hear this: Please leave me the hell alone or I will report you for harassment and have the flight attendant move you - or me - to another seat. Thank you."

Needless to say, it worked. At least I didn't have to get the Air Marshal involved.

Which leads me to our next review, the "killer-on-an-airliner" thriller NONSTOP, which doesn't exactly glamorize the job of being an Air Marshal. Compared to what the hero of this flick goes through and endures, being a fisherman on an Alaskan fishing boat looks downright cozy and inviting, in comparison. Not to mention appetizing: freshly caught King crab vs. crappy (and ridiculously expensive) packaged airline food? Hmmmmmmmmm.... tough choice. But I digress... Anyhow, our protagonist is stoic (and alcoholic) Federal Air Marshal Bill Marks (Liam Neeson). Bill is set to work a NYC-to-London transatlantic jaunt that has your usual mixed bag of passengers and crew.

Our colorful gallery of supporting players includes: (1) Jen Summers (Julianne Moore), hyper-inquisitive businesswoman who has a real jones for window seats - and might even have a bigger jones for our boy Bill; (2) Tom Bowen (Scoot McNairy), laid-back dude on his way to Amsterdam who's got that whole "sexy nerd" thang going; (3) Nancy Hoffman (Michelle Dockery), gorgeous Lead Flight Attendant who looks amazingly like Lady Mary from DOWNTON ABBEY (oh, wait a minute...); (4) Zack White (Nate Parker), techno-geek brutha on his way to London for a big interview; (5) Austin Reilly (Corey Stoll), NYPD dick (in every sense of the word) on his way to England because his "fairy brother is marrying some guy with a British accent" (way to be tolerant, Aus, you'll make a great brother-in-law); (6) Gwen Lloyd (Lupita Nyongo), second-in-command flight attendant (after Lady Mary, er, Nancy) who looks amazingly like that hottie who won Best Supporting Actress this year for 12 YEARS A SLAVE (oh, wait a minute...); (7) Jack Hammond (Anson Mount), second-in-command Air Marshal (after our boy Bill) who is not the kind of Air Marshal I would want on my flight (two words: drug problem); (8) Travis Mitchell (Corey Hawkins), rapper-brutha who has a thing for taking surreptitious pictures of women's tits with his cell phone (so?); (9) Captain McMillan (Linus Roache), cool and confident pilot; (10) Co-Captain Rice (Jason Butler Harner), shy co-pilot who has a serious woody for our hot Lead Flight Attendant Lady Mary, er, Nancy; (11) Dr. Fahim Nasir (Omar Metwally), kindly and resourceful Middle Eastern doctor whom the prejudiced among you will immediately start suspecting to be the bad guy; and last but definitely the smallest: (12) Becca (Quinn McColgan), adorable 8-year old traveling by herself to fulfill the rule that says an "Airline Thriller" is not an "Airline Thriller" unless there's some brat on-board to complicate things.

There's a bunch more passengers and crew, but the above dozen (plus our boy Bill) are the ones to keep your eyes on. The fun starts when Bill gets a text on his phone that goes something like: "'Sup, dude?" You're probably thinking that's no big deal since most of us get texts like that all the time from our buddies, right? Well, let's just say that the network that Bill's phone is on is a secure Federal grid that shouldn't be accessible to anyone but the Air Marshals. And since it isn't Jack Hammond, who else on the flight is sending taunting messages to our boy Bill? In other words... pop quiz, hot shots: if a passenger needs help, you call the Air Marshal - but if an Air Marshal needs help, who does he call? The Ghostbusters? Probably not.

Before long, the congenial tone of the text messages turns threatening. As in "'Sup again, dude. By the way, I'm going to start killing one passenger every twenty minutes unless you wire $150 million into the account I just gave you in my last text. Peace out, bro." You know... something like that. And you thought those Alaskan fisherman had problems. Not one to suffer fools (or bad guys) gladly himself, our boy Bill recruits the help of our two hot leading ladies Jen and Nancy in tracking down which passengers are using their cell phones during key moments. Who knew that airline cabins had hidden cameras up the wazoo? And I though SLIVER's scenario was just fiction. I'm going to have to put on a show on my next flight. Par-tay!

Wait, where was I? Oh, that's right: our boy Bill and his two Bond Girls, er, Bill Girls, Jen and Nancy - all trying to catch the bad guy. So... our heroic trio's snooping on the video cameras reveals a laundry list of potential bad guys (and girls) who were using and checking their phones more than usual. Unfortunately, before Bill can shake down these jackasses, Captain McMillan interrupts his sleuthing to tell him that the account number the killer gave Bill is actually in... Bill's name. In effect, Bill just basically gave instructions to transfer the $150 million into his own account. Uh oh...

So... what the actual fuck is going on here? Why is the account actually in Bill's name?. Is Bill being set-up by the real killer/terrorist? Or is Bill doing a "Catherine Trammell from BASIC INSTINCT" routine on everyone? In other words: is he really the bad guy who is trying to pull off an extraordinary con on everyone? Or is someone else really the killer/terrorist? If so, who is it? One of Bill's loyal helpers, Jen or Nancy? Is it Gwen? Tom? Dr. Nasir? Austin? Zack? Captain McMillan? Co-Captain Rice? Travis? Or is it... OMG... is it really... Becca? Is it possible this unaccompanied 8-year old is the real mastermind behind this whole thing?
Wouldn't rule it out. I have seen some crafty 8-year-olds in my time. Never underestimate them. That's what they are counting on, folks...


BUT SERIOUSLY: The "Airline Thriller" is an interesting sub-genre within the Thriller Genre. Just like any other cinematic category, there are strong entries (UNITED 93, DELTA FORCE, DIE HARD 2), interesting-but-ultimately-flawed entries (PASSENGER 57, FLIGHT PLAN), and downright silly ones (SNAKES ON A PLANE, TURBULENCE). Where does NONSTOP place in the pantheon? Happily, the answer is: close to the upper end of the ladder.

NONSTOP isn't going to win any Best Picture awards, but it is a solidly-good thriller that entertains and keeps you guessing until near the end. In some ways, NONSTOP reminds us of Agatha Christie "closed mysteries" like DEATH ON THE NILE, MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS, EVIL UNDER THE SUN, and AND THEN THERE WERE NONE. They are called "closed mysteries" because they unravel in confined locations where a murderer strikes again and again - a murderer who hides among a large number of suspects. In DEATH ON THE NILE, the confined location was a cruise ship. In MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS, it was a train. And in EVIL UNDER THE SUN and AND THEN THERE WERE NONE, it was an isolated island.

In NONSTOP, the location is an airliner over the Atlantic, halfway between New York and London. Director Jaume Collet-Serra does a good job of maintaining a taut atmosphere of growing dread and tension. The script has a lot of misdirection that cleverly throws suspicion on just about everyone in the cast, and while the ultimate resolution of "whodunit" could have been more powerful, it is still a surprise and one that most people won't see coming. We sure didn't. While the script treads close to borderline-ridiculous territory in some parts (especially in the third act), Collet-Serra always manages to do a course correction in the nick of time and return the narrative to the semi-plausible.

By now, Liam Neeson has perfected the role of the "Tough, Stoic Older Leading Man" which he started in TAKEN, followed up in UNKNOWN (also directed by Collet-Serra), and then tweaked in TAKEN 2. What he does differently here, though, is make Bill Marks more vulnerable than the other somewhat-similar leads he's played in the past. This comes in handy in making us care about not only Bill's battle to save the airline and its passengers, but also his own bid for redemption from a past filled with personal tragedy and professional mistakes.

As good as Neeson is, though, NONSTOP belongs not just to him, but also to those around him. Any airline film (thriller or not) is bound to be, by its very confined nature, somewhat of an ensemble - and the men and women who play the passengers and crew of the flight are a solid, vivid bunch filled with interesting faces. Julianne Moore and Michelle Dockery lead the supporting cast, and they are sharp as Jen and Nancy, the two women who become Bill's allies in unraveling the mystery. Moore brings not only classic American no-nonsense attitude to her role, but also a hint of mystery that makes you think Jen just might not be so innocent or trustworthy, after all. Dockery is similarly strong as Nancy, the British lead flight attendant who combines cool composure with unexpected fire and guts. It's great to see Dockery, so famous as Lady Mary in DOWNTON ABBEY, tackle this more contemporary character and succeed. Go, ladies!

Lupita Nyongo, who recently won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar this month for her unforgettable turn in 12 YEARS A SLAVE, is a warm presence as Gwen, Nancy's second-in-command. Corey Stolls, Nate Parker, Omar Metwally and Corey Hawkins are spot-on as the various passengers who may or may not be the bad guys, while Scoot McNairy continues his upward career trajectory from ARGO and MONSTERS as Tom Bowen, the innocent Amsterdam-bound slacker tourist who may be in over his head. It's nice to see the talented McNairy finally getting his Hollywood due. Brit thesps Linus Roache and Jason Butler Harner are their dependable selves as the pilots who get caught in the cross fire. Then there's the sweet and adorable Quinn McGonagle who doesn't get as much to do as little Becca, but is still a welcome presence.

Ultimately, NONSTOP is solid entertainment that successfully combines elements of the Action, Thriller, and Mystery Genres - and will keep you on the edge of your seats for most of its running time. Sometimes, that's all you can ask for in a movie.

# 542 - DIVERGENT (2014)

DIVERGENT (2014) ****1/2 out of ***** or 9 out of 10

(Sign me up for Dauntless, please...)



CAST: Shailene Woodley, Theo James, Ashley Judd, Kate Winslet, Ansel Elgort, Miles Teller, Zoe Kravitz, Jai Courtney, Tony Goldwyn, Maggie Q.

DIRECTOR: Neil Burger

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good arguments to sign up for any faction with Theo James and Shailene Woodley in it - straight ahead...









IT'S LIKE THIS: If the movies are to be believed, then we are totally fucked. In movies like THE HUNGER GAMES, THE HOST, ELYSIUM, OBLIVION, TOTAL RECALL and many, many others, our future is shown to be a dystopian, lawless wasteland of ravaged nations and cutthroat societies filled with mercenary power figures and barbaric citizens. Our latest review, DIVERGENT, takes a slightly kinder view - but not by much, folks...

You see, in the world of DIVERGENT, it is 200 years or so after a cataclysmic world war - and society has had some relative order restored - but at a price. That is, the world is now based on a strict system of "factions." Put simply, everyone has to join one of five groups: (1) Abnegation, the selfless faction that preaches modesty and selflessnness and service to others; (2) Amity, the peaceful faction that farms the land and does all things agricultural; (3) Candor, the outspoken faction that always tells the truth and therefore make the best lawyers and judges; (4) Erudite, the brainy faction that champions logic and knowledge and are jealous of the Abnegation faction who run the government; and last but definitely the most bad-ass: (5) Dauntless, the ballsiest of all the factions who provide the security and police services for the entire society.

In this world, you must choose your faction at the age of 18 during a fancy-schmancy ceremony. But only after you have been given an "aptitude test" that determines your predisposition for any one faction. The test identifies which group you should join. Such as: if you are kind and modest, it will tell you to join Abnegation; if you are good with manual labor and rugged, it will tell you to join Amity; if you are frank and outspoken, it will tell you to join Candor; if you are a snobby brainiac, it will tell you to join Erudite. And if you are an asshole with a death wish, it will tell you to join Dauntless. Oh, there's also a sixth test result, but it is a very rare one that people only whisper about - because getting it is basically a very,very bad thing. This very rare and very feared test result is called... Divergent. To be "Divergent" is to be suited to more than one faction, meaning you are "multi-talented." Which, to the powers-that-be, means that you cannot be controlled. And therefore you must be eradicated.

Enter our heroine Beatrice "Tris" Prior (Shailene Woodley). She grew up in the Abnegation faction, to loving and modest parents (Tony Goldwyn and Ashley Judd). And although she has always secretly admired the brave Dauntless faction, she fully expects to follow Mom and Dad's footsteps as modest civil servants. Except when she gets her Aptitude Test, Tris discovers that she is... Divergent. Oh, holy shit....
Tory (Maggie Q), the mysterious testing attendant, tells Tris to never reveal to anyone that she tested as a Divergent. She tells Tris to pick any faction - and hide within it and never tell anyone her true test resuts. Unfortunately, Tris picks the Dauntless faction, which Tory says is a mistake because the training may reveal that Tris is Divergent. And once that particular cat is out of the bag, it will be over for Tris. Very over.

As if that wasn't bad enough, Tris has to deal with the rigors of Dauntless training, which is just a little bit more enjoyable than root canal surgery without anesthesia. Let's just say that bruises are an everyday occurence in this training program. Actually, make that an hourly occurrence. It doesn't help that some of Tris' fellow Dauntless trainees are competitive assholes, like jackass Peter (Miles Teller), who grew up in the Candor faction (mystery solved). Fortunately, Tris has some much-needed moral support in the form of new pal Christina (Zoe Kravitz), who gives our heroine some nice sisterly advice.

There's also Tris' suprise guardian angel. He is none other than the ridiculously handsome Four (Theo James). Four is one of Tris' Dauntless trainers, and let's just say that he's got a serious woody for her. Oh, sure, he tries to be all gruff and mean and surly and standoffish to her, but I know a stolen "I-want-to-fuck-the-shit-out-of-you-so-bad" glance when I see one. And, boy, does our boy Four keep tossing our gal Tris these little looks. To be fair, she gives the same looks right back at him. Can you blame her? After all, Four looks just like Theo James and if I were Tris I would be milking that pipe, 24/7.

Before our hottie leads can get into some serious rumpy-pumpy, though, Four gets wind of some sinister rumblings going on in the Erudite faction. Remember them? The Brainy Assholes? Well, as I mentioned before, the Erudites want to take control of the government from the modest Abnegators. Presumably, so they can force everyone to read more books and stop giving each other smoldering, "I-want-to-fuck-you-so-bad" looks (yes, I'm talking about you two, Tris and Four). To make matters even more sinister, Tris' brother Caleb (Ansel Elgort) chooses the Erudite faction, effectively making him one of the bad guys...

So... is there a coup attempt brewing in the Erudite faction? Are they planning to use one or more of the other factions to help carry out their dastardly deeds? If so, which one? Abnegation? Amity? Candor? Dauntless? And what about Tris' true nature of being a Divergent? What if someone finds out that she has more than one talent? Will she be endangered? And why is Four so protective of her? What do all those looks convey? Could he possibly be... oh, my god... could he also be... Divergent? Will these two Divergents get together and, uh, diverge each other all night long until they can't walk straight the next day?

My, it's getting hot in here....


BUT SERIOUSLY: With the successful release of TWILIGHT and its equally-successful sequels, all based on "Young Adult" novels, many similar books were rushed into production to capitalize on this new and suddenly-hot trend. Of all the movies based on YA books that followed in TWILIGHT's profitable wake, only THE HUNGER GAMES and its sequel have seen success, easily surpassing that of the TWILIGHT movies. All others have essentially fizzled, with THE HOST, THE MORTAL INSTRUMENTS, BEAUTIFUL CREATURES, WARM BODIES, and VAMPIRE ACADEMY all barely making a dent at the box office.

And now comes DIVERGENT, based on the bestselling trilogy by Veronica Roth that includes "Insurgent" and "Allegiant." The burning question is whether DIVERGENT will follow in the successful footsteps of THE HUNGER GAMES and TWILIGHT - or crash and burn like everything else that followed in their wake. Happily, the answer is the former. While DIVERGENT will likely not make as much as THE HUNGER GAMES and TWILIGHT because it is coming out late in the cycle of "Young Adult Adaptations" (or YAA), it is still currently doing terrific business at the box office, raking in around $56 million in its first three days (starting this past Friday). While critic reviews have been middling, audience polls at Cinemascore show a stunning A+ score - which shows the disparity between professional critics and regular moviegoers. Frankly, I loved DIVERGENT, and it is actually better than THE HUNGER GAMES, and much, much better than TWILIGHT.

Part of the reason DIVERGENT is faring much better than all the other YAA movies that have failed is because at its core is a compelling central idea: the need to belong vs. the need to be who you are. The world that director Neil Burger and novelist Veronica Roth have created is a vivid one that easily illustrates the concept of factions and the importance of being part of one - but also the burning need to be true to yourself. Even those who have not read the novels will very easily follow along and should find the idea of being married to one group for the rest of one's life - or risk alienation and exile - to be a very interesting one.

This is the reason I prefer DIVERGENT over THE HUNGER GAMES and TWILIGHT: its concept is fairly original. We've seen TWILIGHT's "human-loves-vampire" story done in many previous horror films and thrillers, and nothing about its execution was original. Similarly, THE HUNGER GAMES's concept of humans hunting each other as televised sport is a direct riff of BATTLE ROYALE, with elements of THE RUNNING MAN, DEATH RACE 2000, THE TENTH VICTIM, ESCAPE 2000, THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME and many others. It is in its execution that THE HUNGER GAMES acquits itself: it's a gritty, emotionally-involving experience that is constantly anchored by Jennifer Lawrence's star power.

With DIVERGENT, however, we get an original premise as well as a dynamic execution. The idea of society being divided into five factions that one must choose and pledge into as a teenager is a great metaphor for "finding yourself" - a rite of passage that we all must go through, but is particularly relevant for teenagers today. Is it any wonder why the books by Veronica Roth became bestsellers? The themes that she tackles are ones that everyone can relate to. We can understand the need and pressure to find our own paths through the world and locate our own niches, more readily than we can undertand werewolves, vampires, and wilderness survival games.

DIVERGENT is also brought to bracing life by director Neil Burger and a terrific cast that is well-chosen, right down the line. Miles Teller, Zoe Kravitz, and Ansel Elgort as solid as the various pledges while Ashley Judd, Tony Goldwyn, Jai Courtney, and Ray Stevenson are equally riveting as the older members of society and the various factions. Kate Winslet effectively underplays in her villainous role of Jeanine Matthews, the Erudite leader who is willing to sacrifice anything and everything to keep order. Winslet wisely refrains from turning Jeannine into a cartoon villain, and instead paints her as a woman who has to make some hard choices to further her own agenda. Some critics have said that Winslet could have been more "evil" but we believe the best villlains are the ones who have some humanity in them. Maybe we will get to see Jeanine be more Machiavellian in the next two movies.

The best aspect of DIVERGENT, however, are its leads and the central romance that burns between them. One of the major weaknesses of THE HUNGER GAMES movies is their lack of chemistry between the leading lady and her two male leads. Jennifer Lawrence is smashing as Katnis Everdeen, but she has very little spark with either Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) or Kale (Liam Hemsworth). This served to undercut the effectiveness of those movies whenever they tried to be "romantic." With DIVERGENT, we have no such problems - because Shailene Woodley and Theo James are one steamy couple. This is one thing that most critics are in agreement with. In fact, there is a wonderful scene late in DIVERGENT where Four (Theo James) silently and secretly grasps Tris' (Shailene Woodley) hand in a crowded train. This simple gesture in this one scene alone packs more emotional power than all of the "romantic" scenes in either of THE HUNGER GAMES movies.

Shailene Woodley is one of my favorite actresses, ever since I saw her confident yet vulnerable turn as George Clooney's rebellious daughter in THE DESCENDANTS. She reminds me of Jennifer Lawrence but a lot more vulnerable and open. Woodley's Tris is different from Lawrence's Katniss in THE HUNGER GAMES. Tris is supposed to be a much more innocent and tentative character who finds her way to her calling as a warrior. Katniss already starts out as a wily hunter and becomes even more so because of the scenario she is dropped in. With Tris, we get to see a fighter created from scratch - and that is a more compelling spectacle. Woodley nails all of Tris' levels: modesty, compassion, vulnerability, courage, determination, and even some unexpected wit and humor. She is amazing, and we can't wait to see her continue Tris' journey in INSURGENT and ALLEGIANT.

As great as Woodley is here, though, we already knew about her significant talents from THE DESCENDANTS and THE SPECTACULAR NOW. Her leading man, however, is an unknown talent who takes a global center stage with this movie - and it's a smashing debut. Prior to this role, Theo James' most famous (or infamous) role was that of Kemal Pamuk, Lady Mary's (Michelle Dockery) ill-fated Turkish lover in Season One of DOWNTON ABBEY. James had supporting roles in the last UNDERWORLD movie and in Woody Allen's YOU WILL MEET A TALL, DARK STRANGER, but this is his first lead role in a big Hollywood film - and he basically scores a major goal that puts him squarely on Hollywood's map as a major talent to watch.

James has the same mysterious star quality that actors like Russell Crowe, Andrew Garfield, and George Clooney have: an almost supernatural charisma that is effortless and not based on handsome features (although that doesn't hurt) but, rather, an ability to command the room without saying a single word. Watch James' eyes in every scene: they seem to be speaking a language of their own. Indeed, much of the chemistry between Four and Tris is based on glances and gestures, and James' expressive dark eyes deliver ever last silent word with precision. Woodley has stated that the DIVERGENT production auditioned hundreds of actors before finally hitting gold with James, who is part-Greek, part-British. No other actor who tried out for the part could quite nail the combo of "strong-and-formidable-yet-fragile-and-vulnerable" which the role of Four required. Happily, Theo James is tailor-made for the part, because he is more than just a handsome face. Or as James himself once said in an interview: "I sometimes get a part because of how I look, but hopefully I keep the part because of how I perform." Amen, brother. We look forward to not only Theo James continuing the evolution of Four in INSURGENT and ALLEGIANT, but also other projects that will no doubt showcase his talents even further.

In the end, DIVERGENT is probably the best (to us, anyway) of all the YAA movies. It leaves TWILIGHT in the dust, and while it may not have the grit and pedigree of THE HUNGER GAMES, it is still a more compelling and emotionally-engaging experience. Along with THE LEGO MOVIE, DIVERGENT is the best movie of 2014. Critics may disagree, but that Cinemascore of A+ clearly shows that DIVERGENT is hitting a chord with mainstream audiences. Go, Tris and Four!

# 541 - MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN (2014)

MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN (2014) **** out of ***** or 8 out of 10

(Who's your Doggie, er, Daddy?)



CAST: Voices of Ty Burrell, Max Charles, Ariel Winter, Allison Janney, Stephen Tobolowsky, Stephen Colbert, Leslie Mann, Zach Callison, Lauri Fraser, Stanley Tucci, Lake Bell, Tom McGrath, Patrick Warburton.

DIRECTOR: Rob Minkoff

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good arguments for non-conventional families - straight ahead...



IT'S LIKE THIS: There's that old chestnut that goes, "Every boy should have a dog." Well, if our next review is any indication, we should come up with a new one that says, "Every dog should have a boy - for a son..." Yes, folks... you read that right. Our next review is MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN, a cinematic adaptation of those old-school cartoons that used to run with THE ROCKY AND BULLWINKLE show or something. Our heroes are Mr. Peabody (Ty Burrell), a white dog with a terrifyingly advanced intellect, and Sherman (Max Charles), a boy with a, well, normal intellect. To make things even more surreal, Mr. Peabody the Smarty-Pants Dog is also Sherman's adoptive father. Wait until the right-wing zealots clamoring against gays adopting kids hear about this set-up. They're going to go right through the fucking roof.

Anyhow, to say that Mr. Peabody and Sherman make up a rather uncoventional family is kind of like saying dogs like to pee on fire hydrants: a wee bit stating the obvious, no? Nevertheless, Mr. Peabody is the perfect father to our young Sherman. It doesn't hurt that they live in a glass penthouse so sweet that our jaws dropped down into our laps the second we saw it. If I could be guaranteed to live in a spread that awesome, I would let a rabid crocodile be my father. Yup, it appears to be smooth sailing for our canine father-human son combo, indeed.

Until the day Sherman bites a fellow classmate, that is. Before you judge our poor Sherman and call him a, well, rabid dog who needs training, let me share with you some extenuating circumstances: he was teased and bullied by the wicked witch-in-training named Penny Peterson (Ariel Winter), and he basically just gave her the karma she deserved by chomping her goddamned arm. Unfortunately, the dense school principal (Stephen Tobolowsky) doesn't see it that way and basically calls in Mr. Peabody and tells him that a social worker will be investigating his fitness as a father. And let me just say that this particular civil servant is a real pill. She is Ms. Grunion (Allison Janney), and she is as gracious and elegant and kind as her name suggests - which, basically, is zilch.

To show the world that he is a good father, Mr. Peabody invites not only Ms. Grunion to his suh-weeeeeeet penthouse for dinner, but also the Peterson family, which - in addition to the aforementioned bitch-tyke Penny - also includes Daddy Peterson (Stephen Colbert) and Mommy Peterson (Leslie Mann). While the adults (and dog) mingle in the living room, Sherman is forced to entertain Penny. I don't have to tell you that this is an undertaking that is about as easy as trying to get a demented mongoose to give up the snake carcass it's guarding. Or is it a demented snake and a mongoose carcass?

Whatever. The point is Sherman is so desperate to make Penny feel comfortable that he does the very thing that Mr. Peabody told him not to do: he tells her about "The Way-Back." And by "The Way-Back", I don't mean directions back to her fucking house, which would be ideal but then this would also be one short movie. Nope, The Way-Back is a time machine that Mr. Peabody invented which he uses to teach Sherman about history and other subjects. Except now, Sherman uses it to impress some stupid chick whom he really should have just thrown out the window the minute she arrived. Men...

Predictably, madness ensues as Sherman and Penny travel back to Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, Ancient Tuscany, and other historical ports-of-call. Now, Mr. Peabody must not only try to give the Petersons and Ms. Grunion a good impression, but he must also save those brats Sherman and Penny - as well as seal a time rift that the dumbass time-traveling duo have inadvertently created. Will Mr. Peabody succeed? Or is the world doomed because Sherman didn't have the balls to tell Penny to take a hike and get out of his sight? And even if they save the world from the time rift, how will Mr. Peabody and Sherman deal with - gasp! - Ms. Grunion?

Five words: Good luck with that, boys...


BUT, SERIOUSLY: Our last review was the wonderfully imaginative, creative, and innovative family adventure THE LEGO MOVIE. That movie took an unoriginal concept ("A Hero Will Rise") and gave it a gloriously atypical and bracingly fresh execution. The result was a cinematic experience not quite like any other. Our next review, MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN, goes down the same path: it's concept of reckless time travel creating disastrous consequences that must be resolved is nothing new, but the particulars of its execution are where its originality shines through.

At the heart of the story is an uncoventional family in the form of a canine father and a human son - and how that family unit comes under scrutiny. MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN is aptly titled because, well, once you get past the razzle-dazzle and visual fireworks of the time travel plot, this movie is really about them and their bond - and how hard they fight to maintain it. There's a lovely montage that shows the evolution of their relationship, from the moment Mr. Peabody found Sherman as a baby left in an alley, to the adoption process, through Sherman's early years, and finally to the present. The song "Beautiful Boy" plays over this sequence - and vividly shows us the emotional core of the story: the love between a father and son.

Another great aspect of MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN is the appreciation for history that it promotes. The friend I went with mentioned afterwards that it would be great if kids everywhere would read more history books because of this film. It certainly does a terrific job of painting in vibrant colors and striking animations the various eras that Mr. Peabody, Sherman, and Penny visit. Whether we follow them to Greece, Egypt, France, or Italy, the settings and characters are all unforgettable and compelling. Tom McGrath is particularly hilarious as a lunk-headed Odysseus, and the "Trojan Horse" sequence is especially funny. So is Stanley Tucci as a scatterbrained Leonardo Da Vinci during the "Mona Lisa" sequence.

Ty Burrell, Max Charles, Ariel Winter, Allison Janney, Stephen Colbert, Leslie Mann, Zach Callison, Lake Bell, Laurie Fraser, the aforementioned McGrath and Tucci, and many others voice the various colorful characters with flair and wit. Like THE LEGO MOVIE, the story is bolstered not only by strong lead characters and performances, but also a raft of equally sturdy supporting players. Both these films have a strong ensemble feel to them because of the stellar voicing across the board.
MR. PEABODY AND SHERMAN rates just a tad below THE LEGO MOVIE because it lacks some of that movie's delightfully loony and unpredictable tone. Nevertheless, it is still a sweet, soaring adventure that not only espouses the wonders of history, but also celebrates family and fatherhood in all the many unexpected forms it takes...

# 540 - THE LEGO MOVIE (2014)

THE LEGO MOVIE (2014 - COMEDY / FAMILY / ADVENTURE) ****1/2 out of ***** or 9 out of 10

(Well, I'll be damned...)




CAST: Voices of Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Morgan Freeman, Will Arnett, Will Ferrell, Channing Tatum, Billy Dee Williams, Dave Franco, Cobie Smulders, Will Forte, Alison Brie.

DIRECTOR: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good reasons to never underestimate a seemingly-silly idea - straight ahead.



IT'S LIKE THIS: In our last review, THE SECRET OF WALTER MITTY, we discussed Deceptively Awesome Trailer Syndrome. This is a not-so-rare condition (unfortunately) in cinema wherein a trailer is so breathtakingly terrific that it completely fools you into the thinking the movie it advertises is going to be one helluva ride. Sadly, that helluva ride is often in the slow lane. Except you don't realize this until you have lined up outside the theater, bought your tickets, and have plunked your asses down in the crowded theater with dozens of other idiots who were similarly hornswaggled by the smoke-and-mirrors ad campaign.

At the opposite end of the cinematic spectrum is Surprisingly Awesome Movie Phenomenon. That's basically when a film has lukewarm trailers and posters that make it look like yet another run-on-the-mill experience, only to turn out to be, well, fucking awesome. Our latest review, THE LEGO MOVIE, is a prime example of that happy cinematic fluke. Let's just say that I wasn't exactly floored by the previews for this flick. I mean, they weren' bad - but they weren't exactly inspiring me to note the movie's release date in my day planner, either.

And so, when a good buddy said he was dying to see THE LEGO MOVIE and wanted me to go with him, I looked at him like he just told me he'd contracted herpes - and wanted desperately to make out. In short: "Thank you, but not in this lifetime." It didn't help that the last film said buddy dragged me to just two weeks early was the gargantuan pile of excrement called ANCHORMAN 2 starring Will Ferrell - and Ferrell was also providing his "voice talents" for THE LEGO MOVIE. Not the most auspicious of signs, folks. However, wanting to give my buddy the benefit of the benefit of the doubt, I allowed myself to be dragged to the cinemas.

And, well, let's just say that I stood corrected. THE LEGO MOVIE, folks, is awesome. But more on that in the BUT SERIOUSLY portion of our review. For now, let's talk about this movie whose trailers led me to severely underrate it. Basically, it's STAR WARS or THE LORD OF THE RINGS or THE MATRIX told in Lego Land (and I don't mean the park in San Diego or wherever the hell): we have an ordinary guy who himself is underrated by everyone he meets, who turns out to be, well, the chosen one who is destined to vanquish some colossally powerful asshole. I guess in that regard it's also like THE MATRIX - but with lots and lots and lots of Lego bricks flying everywhere.

In this story, our unsung hero is not named Luke Skywalker or Frodo or Neo. His name is Emmett (Chris Pratt). Yes, just Emmett. Is it any wonder his fellow Lego people don't notice him? Not exactly Chosen One-sounding, is it? Anyhow, Emmet is some sort of laborer or builder (big surprise) who doesn't seem to be especially gifted - until he accidentally finds some mysterious "Red Piece" that is supposed to kickstart a revolution. And whoever finds it is supposed to be "The Master Builder", AKA, The Chosen One. And this Master Builder is supposed to topple the evil emperor known as Lord Business (Will Ferrell), who has hatched a nefarious plan to glue all the pieces of Lego Land together to keep things from changing. You know, just like your basic dictator.

At any rate, it soon shakes down that boring ol' Emmett is The Master Builder simply because he basically tripped over the Red Piece. This is met with disbelief by feisty rebel WyldStyle (Elizabeth Banks) and wise man Vitruvius (Morgan Freeman). Apparently, they were expecting the Chosen One/Master Builder to be, well, less of a doofus. Unfortunately, they really don't have time to question Emmet's "selection" because Lord Business basically unleashes all of his minions to chase down Emmett, WyldStyle, and Vitruvius to retrieve the Red Piece and secure his Lego Kingdom from coup attempt.

Fortunately, our intrepid heroes find allies who are even bigger goofballs than Emmett (if that is even remotely possible): (1) Batman (Will Arnett), everyone's favorite Caped Crusader but a lot less smart than the live-action action version played by Christian Bale; (2) Han Solo (Keith Ferguson), everyone's favorite galactic bad boy but a lot less, uh, bad-ass than the live-action version played by Harrison Ford; (3) Abraham Lincoln (Will Forte), everyone's favorite founding father but a lot less serious than the live-action version played by Daniel Day Lewis; (4) Gandalf (Todd Hansen), everyone's favorite old-fart sorcerer but a lot less annoying than the live-action v ersion played by Sir Ian McKellen; (5) Green Lantern (Jonah Hill), everyone's favorite nondescript superhero, but a lot less hunky than the live-action version played by Ryan Reynolds; (6) Superman (Channing Tatum), everyone's favorite Man of Steel, but equally as hunky as the live-action one played by, well, take your pick; and last but definitely the weirdest: (7) Unikitty (Alison Brie), a freakishly cute combination of a cat and a unicorn and is so perpetually perky and upbeat you just know she's going to go lose her shit big time at some point.

So... will Emmett, WyldStyle, Vitruvius and the rest of their posse triumph over Lord Business? How can they hope to vanquish him if he controls the entire LEGO universde? Do they have a secret weapon? Or does Lord Business have a Trump Card of his own? What secret lies beyond the boundaries of LEGO Universe? And will Emmett be able to use it for the greater good? Or is LEGO universe doomed to be superglued together and remain forever the same?

Time will tell. Just dont' underestimate the power of a Master Builder. Ahem.


BUT SERIOUSLY: One of the biggest complaints I hear from friends and family about the problem with movies these days are the lack of any real surprises or original ideas. I usually tell them that given how far along the Art of Cinema is, it's unrealistic to expect anything 100% original at this late stage. The only original ideas left are probably ones that wouldn't please mainstream audiences, so the best we can hope for, I tell them, is a previously-used idea but given original, fresh execution. Such is the case with our latest review, the wonderfully disarming and unexpectedly terrific THE LEGO MOVIE.

At the heart of the THE LEGO MOVIE is the classic "hero's quest." This is a timeless template that goes as far back as the ancient mythologies of Greece, Rome, Norway, Japan, and every other culture you can name. Essentialy, this scenario follows a humble person who unexpectedly finds himself/herself on a mission larger than anything ever encountered before - and must rise to the occasion and step up to heroism. Movies like STAR WARS, WILLOW, THE LORD OF RINGS, THE MATRIX, THE KARATE KID, ROCKY, and - most recently - THE HUNGER GAMES films have used the "hero's quest" as narrative spine. In that regard, THE LEGO MOVIE is not original, since it peddles the same premise of a "nobody" becoming a very important "somebody" who saves the world. It is in its execution, however, where THE LEGO MOVIE is truly original.

The whole story unfolds within the Lego Universe, and uses a sometimes-fluid, sometimes-choppy combination of CGI and stop-motion animation. What's great about this approach (once you get used to it) is how "raw" and "real" the events feel as you watch them play out. The slick, polished look that marks every single Big Studio animated release is missing here - and that is actually a good thing. THE LEGO MOVIE has more of an impact because it doesn't feel like yet another perfectly-rendered "cartoon." And this rough-edged look is entirely appropriate for the film, because it adheres to its story universe's rules. The effect is like, well, watching a child play with Legos - and that is (SPOILERS) absolutely germane to the twist towards the end of the film.

Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Morgan Freeman, Channing Tatum, Alison Brie, Will Forte, Will Arnett, Todd Hansen, Jonah Hilll, and many others lend their voice talents to the various "plastic" characters. Also welcome is the irreverent humor that directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller bring to the proceedings, which is a combination of snarky and sweet. Will Arnett's Batman, in particular, gets the lion's share of the yuks which play well to both the kiddies and adults.

Special mention, however, must go to Will Ferrell, who not only brings the right combo of menace and mischief to Lord Business, but also (SPOILER) plays a cameo himself in the film's brilliant climax, which champions the power of creativity and thinking outside of the box. Or, in this case, out of the Lego box. I am not a fan of Ferrell's over-the-top, stridently grating star turns in ANCHORMAN 1 & 2 and TALLADEGA NIGHTS, but here he shows how funny and effective he can be when he channels and disciplines his talents. Yet another surprise in a very surprising movie.

Finally, kudos must be given to THE LEGO MOVIE's creators for concealing a trenchant message about following your own lead and not fearing the unconventional - and wrapping it within a colorfully ribald and constantly engaging package. Along with the equally dynamic DIVERGENT (review coming), this film preaches the dangers of categorization - and promotes the power of being true to yourself and letting others do the same. Surely, there is no better message to pass on to our kids in this day and age.

# 539 - THE SECRET LIFE OF WALTER MITTY (2013)

THE SECRET LIFE OF WALTER MITTY (2013 - COMEDY DRAMA) **1/2 out of ***** or 5 out of 10

(Focus, Walter. Focus!)



CAST: Ben Stiller, Kristen Wiig, Sean Penn, Shirley MacLaine, Adam Scott, Kathryn Hahn.

DIRECTOR: Ben Stiller

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good reason to get your damn head out of the clouds - straight ahead.




IT'S LIKE THIS: Ah, the Deceptively Awesome Trailer... has there ever been a bigger pain in the ass in the history of cinema? I think nyet. In case what you are wondering what that is, it's exactly as the name suggests: a trailer is so spectacularly awesome and stupendously enticing that it does an awesome job of hiding the fact that the movie it advertises is, well, merely okay, at best - and fucking awful, at worst. Our next review is a prime example of a film that suffers from Deceptively Awesome Trailer Syndrome.

The flick is THE SECRET OF WALTER MITTY, and when the first trailers started appearing in late summer/early fall, we were hooked. The reality, however, is very different, folks. But more on that later in the BUT SERIOUSLY portion of our review. For now, let's explore the life of the mega-space cadet known as Walter Mitty. Actually, to call this dude a space cadet may be an insult to space cadets all over the world, who may actually be sharp as a tack in comparison. because when Walter doesn't so much go off into his own little world, as he does into his own goddamned cosmos. His fantasy life is that fucking elaborate. If there was a Gold Medal for daydreaming, he'd nail it - hands down.

Which begs the question of how this chucklehead got the high-pressure job of Photographic Layout Department Head of Life Magazine in the first place. Basically, he and his crew are in charge of the photographs that make it into each issue and there is very little room for error. However, considering Walter usually has an elaborate fantasy every, oh, 10 seconds or so. It's a wonder his department makes their deadlines, at all. But, hey, whatever.

Anyhow, as out story begins, LIFE is getting ready to go all online, which means that the entire magazine will be restructured, and they are getting ready to publish their last hard copy issue. As such, they need a spectacular shot to make the cover before the publication goes 100% web-based. Enter Walter best pal Sean (Sean Penn), who is basically the man that Walter secretly wishes he could be: adventurous, talented, brave, and enterprising. Sean has been circling the globe taking pictures for LIFE's final issue, and sends back a slew of negatives to Walter's department in NYC. He includes a note saying that "Slide 25" is the one that should be used for the cover of the final issue.

The only problem is when Walter and his subordinates open the envelope with the negatives, it turns out that the only slide that is missing is, you got it, "Slide 25." To say that Walter is a bit chagrined is like saying the 49er fans were just a little pissed off about not advancing to the Super Bowl. Facing pressure from the ravenous exec in charge of the restructuring, Ted Hendricks (Adam Scott), Walter embarks on a real-life adventure (as opposed to one in his fucking head) to track down Sean and find out what happened to the mysterious "Slide 25." His journey takes him from Greenland to Iceland where he gets to: (1) jump into the freezing North Atlantic and get chased by sharks; (2) skateboard through rural Iceland; (3) barely escape an exploding volcano; (4) play soccer in the middle of a Central Asian desert; and (5) scale the Himalayas as if he's been doing it all his life.

All together now: yeah, right.

Will Walter find Sean and retrieve the missing slide before the magazine's deadline? Or will Sean continue to elude him? Will Ted Hendricks nix the whole idea and go with another picture - and another Photo Layout Department Head? Or will Walter redeem himself, save the day, and win the heart of Cheryl Melhoff (Kristen Wiig), the girl he's been jonesing after all these years? Will she cure him of his daydreaming?

Put it this way: if she does hook up with Walter, she better not get into any car he drives. Three words: Interstate pile-up. Or is that two words? Who cares.

BUT, SERIOUSLY: A very loose remake of the 1947 film starring David Kaye, Virginia Mayo, and Boris Karloff, THE SECRET LIFE OF WALTER MITTY has a great idea at its core that never quite comes to life. The trailer works wonderfully, because it is able to show us the themes of the film in 2.5 minutes. However, stretched out to feature-length, that idea flounders and becomes less effective - largely due to a flawed script and the miscasting of Ben Stiller as Walter Mitty. Stiller directed this film, as well, annd one wonders if maybe he took on too many hats.

As a director, Stiller is fine here. He has a good visual style and knows how to pace the film. It's in front of the camera where he stumbles. Stiller can be expressive when he wants to be, but here he turns Walter Mitty into too much of an unreadable cipher, so much so that it's hard to lock step with him. And for this kind of story, one that asks us to go on an emotional journey with its hero, that is almost fatal. If you don't connect with a character, why should you care what happens to him? Better for Stiller to have remained behind the camera and had someone else - someone more emotionally transparent - fill the lead role.

Another weak spot is the script, which piles on the whimsical fantasy sequences until they become repetitive and almost boring. When we watched this, I remember glancing at my phone several times during Walter's extensive reveries. After the third fantasy, it all starts to become rote. The trailer worked because these sequences didn't overstay their welcome in it. In the film, they all but stop the action, and each time it gets harder to get back on track.

That's too bad, because the idea of a someone who lives in his head forced to finally get out of it and into the real world has real potential. If the script had minimized the fantasy sequences, this flick might have scored higher. As it is, it's merely average - even with a bright supporting cast that includes Kristen Wiig, Sean Penn, Shirley MacLaine, Kathryn Hahn, and Adam Scott.
That trailer, however, gets **** out of ***** / 8 out of 10.

# 538 - ANCHORMAN 2 (2013)

ANCHORMAN 2 (2013 - ALLEGED COMEDY) *1/2 out of ***** or 3 out of 10

(And the Worst Movie For 2013 Award goes to....)



CAST: Will Ferrell, Paul Rudd, Steve Carrell, Christina Applegate, Brian Fantana, David Koechner, Meagan Good, Dylan Baker, James Marsden.

DIRECTOR: Adam McKay

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good reason to never watch another Will Ferrell movie ever again...



IT'S LIKE THIS: Relationships are all about compromise. This is never more true than when it comes to choosing which movie to see as a group. Obviously, everyone has their own ideas about what constitutes great entertainment, and even more obviously a consensus must be reached before the tickets are purchased. Sometimes, compromise works out, as it did recenly when a buddy dragged me to see THE LEGO MOVIE (review coming), which I was sure would blow cat chow chunks. To my surprise it was the best movie, so far, of 2014. Good thing, too, because THE LEGO MOVIE makes up for the colossal pile of steaming shit that he dragged me to right before.

The movie is ANCHORMAN 2, and if you ever wanted to see a prime example of First World waste, it's this "movie." How else to explain sinking millions of dollars ($50 million, allegedly) into something that essentially had a roll of smeared, crusty toilet paper for a script? How else do you explain the millions of people who helped make this "movie" a hit? Wouldn't all the money involved have been better spent on, I don't know, sponsoring needy Third-World kids through Christian Children's Fund or Save The Children? Or even just a really fun pub crawl? Anything but making this piece of crap? Or sitting in a theater being subjected to it?

I have seen bits and pieces of ANCHORMAN and didn't get the point of it. I have a healthy sense of humor and appreciaton of the ridiculous and edgy, but the "humor" in the first ANCHORMAN flick just flew right past my head. It felt like watching a bunch of developmentally-disabled douchebags enjoying a joke only fathomable to them - and us being forced to pay to watch them. The "humor" in ANCHORMAN 2 is even more non-existent, if you can imagine such a staggering scenario. The "plot" follows idiot egotist anchorman Ron Burgundy (Willl Ferrell) and his posse of similarly choad-like buddies: dingbat Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd), loon Brick Tamland, and nutjob Champ Kind (David Koechner).

This time, we have to watch as Ron and his hapless wife Veronica Corningstone (a completely wasted Christina Applegate) get their relationship tested when she gets a promotion and he gets a demotion by going back to San Diego to work at Sea World or some crap, where he was originally foisted onto the unsuspecting world. Talk about giving California Boys a bad rap. We're supposed to care about Ron and Veronica getting back together and surmounting the obstacles created by their "careers." Frankly, all I could think of was "I could be watching paint dry right now..."

So... here goes: will these two dimwits reunite and reaffirm their "love" for each other? Will Ron's "pals" help out somehow? And what happens when Ron acquires a "rival" in the form of the impossibly handsome and impossibly toothy Jack Lime (James Marsden)? And what happens when ruthless network exec Linda Jakson (Meagan Good) starts giving Ron some major googley eyes? Will Veronica just stand by and let her man get swept away by another woman?

One word to Linda: girl, really?

Okay, that was two words. But the woman must be fucked in the head to go after Ron "I am idiot" Burgundy...

BUT, SERIOUSLY: There's not much to say, folks, except that this movie is quite bad. Sure, the technical and production values are top-notch, since $50,000,000 buys you top equipment. However, the script is pure trash. I have heard of people walking out in droves from the theater, and I have to wonder if the decision to release the (dear lord) extended cut of ANCHORMAN 2 this weekend was to help with the box office. I almost walked out myself, but I didn't was because of loyalty to my friend. I did joke that I will never forgive him for subjecting me to the travesty of this flick. For most of the film, it feels like you are watching people goofing around instead of professional actors working from a solid script. If they were engaging in improv, well, they were doing it badly.

I have never understood the appeal of Will Ferrell. This is a guy whose idea of comedy is yelling his jokes as loud as he can and browbeating you into laughing. Obviously that old chestnut about comedy being all about timing is lost on him. Ferrell is tolerable in tiny to small doses (WEDDING CRASHERS and OLD SCHOOL), but when he is the star of the show, he is insufferable. He sank a potentially-great soccer film with his mugging and horrendous overacting (KICKING AND SCREAMING) and was the reason I stayed away from TALLADEGA NIGHTS and SEMI-PRO.

To be fair, though, Ferrell has been improving lately in his co-starring roles. I actually didn't mind him in THE OTHER GUYS, opposite Mark Wahlberg. Of course, this could also be because Wahlberg is great in comedies and elevated Ferrell's game. He was also surprisingly fun in THE CAMPAIGN, opposite Zach Galifanakis. Again, this could be because he was sharing the spotlight with a strong comedian. He seems to be okay when paired with someone with real comedic talent and a good script. However, in ANCHORMAN 2 he and his co-stars Paul Rudd, David Koechner, and Steve Carrell are lost at sea with a lousy screenplay.

It's just painful watching these normally-engaging guys mug shamelessly and histrionically. The whole movie seems like outtakes and not the real thing. The only potentially-funny sequence is the part where Ron attends a family dinner at Linda's house, who are African-American, and proceeds to offend everyone with his stereotyping. This whole scene feels like it belongs in another, better movie. It's the only reason that ANCHORMAN 2 doesn't get an "Utter Crap" rating (*).
Pass. Big time.

OSCARS 2014!! (and Spring 2014 Review Schedule...)

Hello, folks...

Just a quick note to say howdy. Sorry for the delay in getting the first of the 2014 reviews posted. It's been a busy but rewarding early 2014, and there just didn't seem to be enough time in the day. At any rate, we are getting caught up. With the posting of NOMADS and POSSESSION, the former a personal favorite and the latter a recommend, we are ready to get back into the swing of things. Please expect the below reviews to post very soon, until the end of March - then we begin our Summer 2014 reviews with the release of CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER in the first week of April (?). Yup. Summer is starting earlier and earlier...


# 538 - THE SECRET LIFE OF WALTER MITTY (2013)

# 539 - THE LEGO MOVIE (2014)

# 540 - ABOUT LAST NIGHT (2014)

# 541 - ANCHORMAN 2 (2013)

# 542 - JACK RYAN: SHADOW RECRUIT (2014)

# 543 - THREE DAYS TO KILL (2014)

# 544 -POMPEII (2014)

# 545 - NONSTOP (2014)

# 546 - DIVERGENT (2014)

# 547 - VALENTINE (2001)

# 548 - PITCH PERFECT (2012)

# 549 - ADMISSION (2012)

# 550 - THE STENDAHL SYNDROME (1996)

# 551 - SPHINX (1981)


And live from our Oscars 2014 party, here are our predictions for the Top Five Awards:

BEST ACTOR: Matthew McConaughey for DALLAS BUYER'S CLUB

BEST ACTRESS: Cate Blanchett for BLUE JASMINE

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Jared Leto for DALLAS BUYER'S CLUB

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Lupita Nyong'o for 12 YEARS A SLAVE

BEST PICTURE: Either 12 YEARS A SLAVE or GRAVITY. The award should go to 12 YEARS A SLAVE, but GRAVITY may win it because it was a flashy hit. Oh, well...

Ciao, folks.... have a wonderful, wonderful March!

# 537 - NOMADS (1986)

NOMADS (1986 - SUPERNATURAL THRILLER/MYSTERY) ****1/2 out of ***** / 9 out of 10



CAST: Pierce Brosnan, Lesley-Anne Down, Anna Maria Monticelli, Adam Ant, Jeannie Elias, Alan Autry, Nina Foch, Hector Mercado, Mary Woronov, Frances Bay.

DIRECTOR: John McTiernan

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some damn good reason to "not look too closely" - straight ahead.




IT'S LIKE THIS: If there was ever a movie to preach the merits of not working as an ER doctor, it's this one. Our next review is the undiscovered, low-budget "diamond-in-the-rough" supernatural thriller NOMADS, which starred Pierce Brosnan in his REMINGTON STEELE heyday, and was directed by John McTiernan before he graduated to helming pricier blockbuster fare like PREDATOR, DIE HARD, THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER, THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR (remake), and LAST ACTION HERO. Okay, alright, I wouldn't brag about that last one, but that is another story.

Anyhow, NOMADS gets started with a typically chaotic night at a typically chaotic Los Angeles emergency room. One of the attending doctors is the lovely Eileen Flax (Lesley-Anne Down), who is on the tail-end of a 36-hour shift. Yes, folks: thirty-six hours. Bet you lazy assholes out there complaining about the TWO WHOLE HOURS of overtime you had to work last weekend will now kindly shut the fuck up. You know who you are. After you see what Dr. Flax goes through, you will never ever whine again about your shift.

So back to our lovely Eileen who, as we mentioned before, got the raw end of the deal when it came to her work schedule. She only has about four more hours to go on her (oh. dear. lord) 36-hour shift before she can go home to continue unpacking her apartment. You see, Eileen just got divorced and moved to L.A. from Boston, where her ex-husband lives and is clearly a tool of the greatest magnitude since he voluntarily parted with a chick who looks like Lesley-Anne Down. Dumb. Ass. Sweetie, you're better off in Cali. Take my word for it.

Unfortunately, any hopes Eileen had of sailing through the rest of her shift unscathed are cruelly dashed when her next patient is wheeled in to the ER. He is none other than Pierce Brosnan. Well, someone who looks a hell of a lot like him, anyway. But also bug-eyed and screaming in French as though a red-hot poker with diamond studs was just shoved up his ass. Zut alours! Mon Dieu! Eileen tries to do her job, but our hot French mystery patient just keeps muttering madly in French: "N'somp pas. S'on des inuat." Or something like that.

Well, I'll just cut to the chase and tell you folks that it all ends pretty badly: our Frenchie McFrench patient has a seizure and grabs our good doctor and whispers something into her ear. Right before croaking right there on the ER floor. For her part, Eileen shrugs off the whole thing as yet another crackhead freaked out of his gourd and moves on to her next patient. Just another night in the ER, no?

No. Not even close. You see, it turns out that Frenchie McFrench was not just some crackhead who looked like Pierce Brosnan. He was actually a highly-respected French anthropologist named Dr. Jean-Charles Pommier. Who looks like Pierce Brosnan. Remember how in our last review of POSSESSION, we talked about The Sexy Scholar/Scientist cliche in movies? You know, seriously fuckable hotties-with-titles like Dr. Christmas Jones and Dr. Will Rodman? Well, Dr. JC Pommier is yet another one of that unique (but not always believable) breed.

Right now, you're probably wondering why Pierce Brosnan is top-billed, but yet his character dies within, like, two minutes of the opening credits. Patience, young Jedi. You see, soon Eileen starts having "visions" and "flashes" to Jean-Charles final days, as if she is reliving his last hours. She also finds out from her foul-mouthed colleague Cassie (Jeannie Elias) that "N'somp pas. S'on d'es inuat" actually translates to "They are not there! They are Inuat!" What the fuck is an "Inuat"?

Well, Eileen doesn't have to wait long to find out. A friend from Boston does some research for her and she finally finds out what Inuat are: Nomads. According to an ancient myth, Nomads are roaming, malicious, evil ghosts who are capable of taking human form, are attracted to places where horrible deaths occurred, and generally go unnoticed by most people. Those unlucky enough to "look too closely" and see the Nomads, however, are soon targeted and, eventually, killed. Hence, Jean-Charles' insane muttering of "N'somp pas. S'on des inuat." What he was actually telling Eileen in the ER was: "They are not there! They are Nomads!"

Soon enough, Eileen realizes through her flashbacks of Jean-Charles' last two days that he stumbled upon the existence of the Nomads in the modern burg of L.A. - and was hunted by them. Now, because of the telepathic link Jean-Charles made with Eileen before he died, the Nomads may also know about her. Will she be able to escape them? Will Jean-Charles' heartbroken wife Nikki (Anna Maria Monticelli) be able to help her? Or are these two women the next targets of the... Nomads?

Let's put it this way: these ghosts make the ones from THE GRUDGE look like Disney characters. My advice to Eileen and Nikki: run, ladies, run...



BUT, SERIOUSLY: Last fall, we reviewed 51 thrillers that were examples of the Gialli sub-genre. Gialli are Italian thrillers or American/British thrillers that bear heavy influences of the original Italian Gialli. One of the categories was SUPERNATURAL GIALLI, films that have the traditional Gialli trademarks but have a more supernatural bent. Our latest review is a great example of an American Supernatural Giallo. NOMADS has an eerie, other-wordly atmosphere to it that just absolutely drips with doom and foreboding. This is no small feat since the film is set in sunny L.A. - not the gloomy countryside or a dark house. NOMADS turns the sun-drenched and neon-lit streets of Los Angeles into an environment choking with dread. It also feels distinctly European in its somber and methodical build-up to a bone-chilling finale, further reinforcing its link to Italian Gialli.

Like a lot of the original Gialli (especially Dario Argento's classic Supernatural Giallo INFERNO from 1980), NOMADS tells the story in a fractured, surreal way that doesn't spell everything out. Like INFERNO, which also revolved around humans who pay the price of investigating the origins of a supernatural urban myth, this movie may require multiple viewings to pick up on all the layers and pieces of the puzzle. Some folks with short attention spans may be confused or even bored by NOMADS, but those who like their thrillers and mysteries to be challenging and genuinely intriguing will love this film. Once you have pieced everything together, the film makes perfect sense on its own terms.

Pierce Brosnan, Lesley-Anne Down, and Anna Maria Monticelli are all terrific as the three leads. Brosnan made this movie at the height of his REMINGTON STEELE tenure on TV and years before he took on the role of James Bond, but he already showed here that he is more than suited for the big screen. Brosnan evokes sympathy for Jean-Charles and his French accent is (to my ears anyway) quite acceptable. Anna Maria Monticelli is heartbreaking as Nikki, the wife that Jean-Charles leaves behind who finds herself targeted (along with Eileen) by the Nomads. Monticelli has a nice, warm chemistry with Brosnan which goes a long way in building sympathy for the supernaturally-besieged couple they play.

This movie, however, belongs to the exceedingly lovely Lesley-Anne Down. Down was one of my biggest cinematic crushes growing up, and she's terrific here, playing Dr. Eileen Flax with a compelling mix of shy tentativeness, gutsy smarts, and dry humor. Like Brosnan and Monticelli with their characters, Down must create sympathy for Eileen on the fly, since the script is quite taut and all-business. She does this through eloquent non-verbals and expressions, ably conveying Dr. Flax's confusion, terror, courage, and resourcefulness. The character is one of my favorite movie heroines.

Some folks tell me that they don't understand how (or why) Jean-Charles was able to transfer his memories to Eileen before he died. Isn't the answer obvious?, I ask them. Look at the title of the movie - then think about Eileen and Jean-Charles' backgrounds: both are European, both are recently transplanted to L.A., and both are essentially nomadic themselves. Nikki even tells Jean-Charles (in a flashback) at one point that their move to L.A. is the first permanent home they've had in over a decade because of Jean-Charles' work as a traveling anthropologist. Meanwhile, Eileen's recent divorce from her husband has forced her to move to L.A. to start over. It's this shared status as strangers in a strange new land that bond Jean-Charles and Eileen and leads to that fateful "mind-meld."

It's also interesting to note how the traditional Italian Gialli element of an American in a foreign land who is thrust into a deadly mystery is inverted in this American Supernatural Giallo. Here, all three of our leads are foreigners in America who find themselves in the middle of a very dangerous situation that is not of this world. And the atmosphere that writer-director John McTiernan brings to NOMADS is truly remarkable. I can't think of a film with a more oppressive and sinister ambiance than this film, and considering we are always in the middle of sun-drenched L.A., that is a remarkable achievement. Bill Conti's truly ominous and mournful score also further underscores the sense that another world could possibly co-exist with ours - sometimes right in front of our eyes without us knowing.

Then there's that ending, which is easily the best thriller/horror movie twist ending I've ever seen. That's all I'm going to say. Suffice it to say, NOMADS is a hidden gem that deserves to be released on Blu-Ray. It's foreboding atmosphere and creepy aura would be even more effective.

TRIVIA: Arnold Schwarzenegger was so impressed with NOMADS and then-unknown director John McTiernan's talent and style, that he immediately hired McTiernan to direct a little movie called... PREDATOR. Which led McTiernan to another little movie called... DIE HARD. And this led to THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER. And the rest is history...

# 536 - POSSESSION (2002)

POSSESSION (2002 - ROMANCE / MYSTERY / DRAMA) *** out of ***** or 6 out of 10




CAST: Gwyneth Paltrow, Aaron Eckhart, Jeremy Northam, Jennifer Ehle, Trevor Eve, Tom Hickey, Toby Stephens, Holly Aird, Lena Headey.

DIRECTOR: Neil LaBute

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and improbably gorgeous "academics" straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: Ahhh... The Sexy Scholar/Scientist. Is there a more boner-inducing and ridiculous cliche in cinematic history? In case you haven't been to the movies much, allow me to explain. The Sexy Scholar/Scientist is a movie character who can be male or female and: (1) has a Ph D or Medical Degree; (2) is an expert in some highly technical scientific field or arcane academic area; (3) usually gets pulled into some intrigue or seriously dangerous twists and turns; and most important of all: (4) could easily pose as a dripping-wet centerfold for Playboy or Playgirl. Partay!

Some great examples of The Sexy Scholar/Scientist in popular film include: (1) Dr. Christmas Jones (Denise Richards), the nuclear-hot nuclear scientist from THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH who also had a rack that you could set furniture on; (2) Dr. Julia Kelly (Nicole Kidman), the nuclear scientist from THE PEACEMAKER who was kind of like Christmas, but with a much more work-appropriate wardrobe (three words: no hot pants); (3) Dr. Bruce Banner (Eric Bana), the genetics wiz from THE HULK who would turn into a hulking green giant (as opposed to, you know, the jolly one) when pissed-off; (4) Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz), the biochemist who found herself runnning for her life in the Philippines alongside a genetically-enhanced super-assassin in THE BOURNE LEGACY; (5) Dr. Erica Baron (Lesley-Anne Down), the brilliant and gorgeous Egyptologist from SPHINX who uncovered a lost Pharaoh's tomb and ended up targeted because of it; and (6) Dr. Will Rodman (James Franco), the seriously hunky neurobiologist from RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES who developed a wonder drug that enhances intelligence but causes a bunch of apes to go, well, ape-shit.

To this steamy list, we must add the leads of our next review, the romantic mystery POSSESSION, based on the dense bestseller by A.S. Byatt. They are: (1) Dr. Maud Bailey (Gwyneth Paltrow), snooty but sexy British professor who specializes in Victorian poetry; and (2) soon-to-be-Dr. Roland Mitchell (Aaron Eckhart), Yankee literature grad student who uncovers some seriously racy love letters that implicate two revered poets from centuries ago, who no one even thought knew each other - let alone trading bodily fluids with one another. Let's just say that these two look like they walked off a photo shoot for the Nerd Issue of GQ or Vogue magazine or something.

It all starts when Roland uncovers the letters stuck between the pages of an old book on the poems of the late (very late) Randolph Henry Ash (Jeremy Northam). Going into Hardy Boys mode, Roland soon posits that the letters were written to the late Christabel LaMotte (Jennifer Ehle), a bisexual poet who lived during Randolph's era. But why would Randolph, a famously faithful husband, be carrying on with a woman who had a female live-in lover, Blanche (Lena Headey). Was a little sumthin-sumthin going on back in the Victorian era? Hmmmmmm....

This is exactly what Roland would like to know. The trail leads him to the doorstep of Lincoln University in rural England, where he meets the aforementioned hottie Dr. Maud Bailey, who looks a lot like a very annoyed Gwyneth Paltrow. You see, it appears Maud is something of an expert on Christabel's works and life - and is even related to her by blood. As you can imagine, Roland telling Maud that her revered great-great-great aunt was probably porking around with a guy everyone thought was the Victorian equivalent of Mr. Rogers doesn't exactly go over well with our chilly ice princess from Lincoln U. Nevertheless, she agrees to accompany Roland on a cross-country (and cross-Channel into France) detective hunt for the missing pieces of the love (lust?) story from long, long, long ago.

So why did Randolph begin an affair with Christabel? What else will Roland and Maud uncover as they dig deeper and deeper into the past of these two poets? Will they make a connection of their own? And what happens when Maud's sketchy ex-boyfriend and Roland's academic rival Fergus (Toby Stephens) gets wind of their discovery? Will Fergus enlist the aid of unscrupulous American professor Mortimer Cropper (Trevor Eve) and try to steal the scandalous love letters? How did the Randolph-Christabel romance end? And how will the Roland-Maud affair turn out?

Well, considering they're all nerds (albeit extremely hot ones), I'm thinking they will just talk each other to death...



BUT, SERIOUSLY: In past reviews, we've talked about how adapting novels into films is a very tricky proposition. What may work in literary form may not work cinematically, and whoever is tasked with transferring a story from book page to silver screen needs to know the inherent limitations of each medium. Many terrific books have turned into less-than-stellar movies because either the source story was an inherently literary one that didn't translate well into cinema without necessary adjustments that weren't made - or the wrong elements (wrong director, star, music) hindered the film. POSSESSION is a vivid example of the latter.

The book by A.S. Byatt that this film is based on is one of my favorites. It was most definitely a literary novel that was rich with detail and thick with understated emotion and atmosphere. When I heard at the turn of the millenium that it was being turned into a film, I was quite excited. My excitement waned, however, when I heard that American director Neil LaBute, known for sharp, unsentimental examinations of American masculinity like IN THE COMPANY OF MEN and YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS, had been tapped to direct. LaBute's previous work were some of the most unromantic and cynical I have ever seen. While most of them are quite good, he was just not the director I would have tapped to bringing A.S. Byatt's novel - a moving story about a burning passion that transcends time and distance - to colorful movie life.

Another misgiving I had about the project were the leads. Aaron Eckhart, a frequent LaBute collaborator, was tapped to play Roland Mitchell. I wasn't sure if the rugged, thoroughly American Eckhart could play a British scholar convincingly, but as it turned out, LaBute (who adapted the novel) had turned Roland's character into an American, ostensibly to tailor it to Eckhart. Also, Gwyneth Paltrow (another American) was chosen to play Maud Bailey, who was to thankfully remain British in the film. Now, for the record, I love Paltrow but we'd already seen her play the "Patrician British Beauty" in films like SLIDING DOORS, EMMA, and SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, and to see her play yet another variation on the role in POSSESSION seemed like old hat.

Sure, enough, the movie is imbalanced because of these ill-fitting elements. Technically, Eckhart and Paltrow are competent in their roles. However, in Eckhart's hands, Roland doesn't come across as a convincing scholar, whether American or British. It is crucial for us to buy into the character's drive and passion to find out more about his literary idol's secret affar, but the fire just isn't there. Mainly because Eckhart seems more like someone pretending to be a scholar just to get Maud in the sack.

Speaking of Maud, Paltrow hits all the right notes of initially-chilly distance and gradually-melting reserve. But, like I said, we've been on this journey with her several times before, folks, and by now it feels a little mannered and routine. I would have vastly preferred to have seen a true British Rose like Kate Winslet or Saffron Burrows play Maud. That would have been a fresher, more unexpected experience.

Eckhart and Paltrow's miscasting might have still worked if they had any kind of chemistry at all. As written in the novel, Maud and Roland were initially attracted to each other's minds and their shared passion for uncovering the hidden link between Randolph and Christabel. Their intellectual connection soon became an emotional one, and we ended up with two strong romances: one in the past, and another in the present. In the film, however, there is almost no heat between Maud and Roland, at all. They seem to be going through the motions of not only the scholarly detective work, but also their "slowly-budding romance." It's just not there between Paltrow and Eckhart, folks, and the movie suffers because of it.

Fortunately, LaBute does get one important thing right: the romance between Randolph and Christabel that exists in the distant past. Indeed, POSSESSION comes to life everytime we flash back into the Victorian era. Using flashbacks, LaBute does a nice job of weaving and linking the "secret romance" from long ago with the events unfolding in modern-day England and France. However, the main reason the plot thread between Randolph and Christabel works is the reverse of why the one with Maud and Roland stumbles: the actors involved have real chemistry. Jeremy Northam and Jennifer Ehle, both Brits, bring fire and passion to their roles. There is a dual sense of wistfulness and playfulness to their interactions, as Randolph and Christabel recognize they probably can never truly be together, but must make the most of their stolen moments.

Were it not for this vibrant and quietly powerful thread, POSSESSION would rate on the average mark and no more. Some sleek production values and an evocative musical score also help. However, the wrong director and miscast leads prevent this film from being the classic adaptation it could have easily been. Had someone like Ridley Scott or the late Anthony Minghella (THE ENGLISH PATIENT) had been given the reigns, and a couple like Kate Winslet or Joseph Fiennes been given the roles of Maud and Roland, this movie would have been just as good as the book. As it is, it's merely a cut or two above average.