Black Mass (6/10): Dealing with the devil

“If nobody sees it, it didn't happen.”

Black Mass is Scott Cooper’s follow up to his dark thriller, Out of the Furnace. This gangster film centers on the true story of one of Boston’s most wanted criminals, Whitey Bulger, an Irish mobster who served as an informant for the FBI against the Italian Mafia for many years, during which time he used the special treatment to get away with committing several gruesome crimes of his own and rise to the top. The film is extremely slow paced and it focuses on the small details of Whitey’s crime life, but it is also a breath of fresh air for its realistic portrayal of the gritty criminal life without sensationalizing these gangsters. The violence is real and gruesome and not something worth celebrating here. It does however prove why audiences love the more fast paced fictitious portrayal of these criminal, because it can become a dull exercise at times to portray these characters as real people. The greatest strength of Black Mass is without a doubt Johnny Depp’s portrayal of Whitey because it was exciting to finally see him play a straight role once again. He’s menacing without going over the top. The prosthetics were a bit distracting, but it was worth it to get to see Depp playing this older man. Black Mass tries too hard to remain authentic to the real life events and by doing so it becomes a dull procedural at times, but Depp’s performance makes it worth recommending. 

The film centers on Whitey’s relationship with a Boston FBI agent named John Connolly (Joel Edgerton) who struck a deal with him during the course of several years. Whitey was asked to snitch on the Italian mafia which would lead to more arrests for Connolly while Whitey was allowed to get away with his criminal undertakings. It was a win-win situation for both of them. The story then closely follows how Whitey went about doing his business with his entrusted men, Kevin (Jesse Plemons) and Steve (Rory Cochrane), performing gruesome executions while the police looked the other way. Meanwhile, Whitey’s brother Billy (Benedict Cumberbatch) was rising to the top of the Massachusetts Senate, but he doesn’t play a major role in the story. Other characters who are simply introduced but not given much to do are Whitey’s partner: Lindsey (Dakota Johnson), Connolly’s right hand man in the agency: John Morris (David Harbour), and Connolly’s wife: Marianne (Julianne Nicholson). The film uses these characters to explore some of the family dynamics and when it does it works to its advantage, but the film feels like it is missing some cohesiveness between each separate individual. Take for instance a scene where Whitey is sharing a meal with Lindsey and their son while he is explaining to him how to get away with hitting a boy in school who is bullying him. The scene works perfectly to give us a sense of how Whitey thinks and acts, but it doesn’t do anything for the film narratively and it feels like a separate scene all together. There are several moments like this that seem to be presented only as facts, but these facts don’t add up to much and it drags out the premise making us lose interest in the story.   

There are some great scenes where Depp is allowed to shine, but other than that the film does miss a lot of its targets. The talented cast is mostly wasted with Benedict Cumberbatch, Juno Temple, and Kevin Bacon given very little to do. Depp and Edgerton stand out since the primary focus of the film is on their relationship, but the side plots don’t work. While the film tries to focus on other characters it never feels connected to the main relationship that is so central to the story. Johnny Depp might garner some attention for his performance, but the film will quickly be forgotten come award time. 

Horns (5/10): A mishmash of genres

“Tell me! Tell me everything I need to know!”

Alexandre Aja has never lived up to his directorial debut, High Tension, but to give him credit he did manage to set the bar pretty high. I haven’t really enjoyed any of his horror films since then, but I have to admit Horns was quite a unique experience. It was nothing like his previous films, and despite being considered a horror film it isn’t really one. There aren’t any scary moments in Horns and there is actually quite a bit of humor. It is more of a dark comedy mixed with mystery as the lead character, played by Daniel Radcliffe, has to figure out who murdered his girlfriend while the entire town suspects he did it. Along the process he acquires a strange supernatural ability after waking up one night with horns on his head. These horns make the people around him confess their deepest and darkest desires to him. He can also manage to look at people’s past once he touches them. Using these abilities he sets out to find the killer, so you could say this is a superhero film as well. You could classify this film in so many genres because at times it felt like Aja didn’t know what kind of film he wanted to make. There were many tonal shifts and some of the genre changes felt forced. I was really into this film during the first hour because the premise hooked me and the story was interesting. I also found the weird sense of humor quite funny, but as the story progressed and some revelations were made my enjoyment faded rapidly. It just lost track of what it was trying to do and most of the genre switches felt displaced and misbalanced. The film also becomes tedious towards the end because it felt overlong at two hours. Perhaps the childhood flashbacks could have been eliminated to allow a better pacing because I didn’t feel they added much to the story. Horns had so much potential to be a better film but unfortunately it suffers from trying to balance several tones and loses its identity in the process.

Keith Bunin adapted the screenplay from Joe Hill’s book, which I haven’t read so I can’t say how faithful the adaptation is. What I can say is that Daniel Radcliffe gives a strong performance and his American accent is spot on. It is interesting to see the transformation his character goes through as he discovers the power these new horns give him. Radcliffe is proving to have a wide range as he has played some dark characters this past year trying to break away from his Harry Potter days. I wasn’t a fan of the supporting cast mostly because the dialogue in this film felt melodramatic and forced at times, but Juno Temple does give a solid performance. It was fresh to see her in this role as a sweet girl instead of the trashy trailer park character she has often played. We believe that this girl really is the object of affection of the townspeople.  The rest of the characters in this film are forgettable and no one really adds anything to the story. 

This modern day fable-like story has a nice visual style to it. The town where it is set is gorgeous and we are surrounded by this beautiful landscape which contrasts with the darkness of the story and the characters. Unfortunately Horns doesn’t just suffer from a mishmash of genres, but it also seems to have some inconsistencies with its premise. I can’t get in to details without spoiling the film but there was something about the revelation of the murderer that didn’t make sense to me. The other issue I had with Horns was that it never established some of the rules of what the horns could do. At times it seemed as if the people had to ask Radcliffe’s character for permission to perform their darkest desires, but at others they simply did them even when he was against them. So why would some people ask them if they didn’t need his permission in the first place? That was just a minor issue I had, but nothing that really took me out of the film. The first hour of Horns is really engaging and entertaining, but the final hour is a letdown.

My Review: Maleficent (6/10)

"Listen well, you all! The princess will indeed grow in grace and beauty. But before the sunset on her sixteenth birthday, she will prick her finger on a spindle of a spinning wheel, and she will fall into a sleep like death!"

Maleficent isn't a masterpiece and it actually has several flaws, but it was much better than I had anticipated considering the latest failed attempts at bringing a beloved classic fairytale to the big screen through live action. Snow White, Jack the Giant Slayer, Cinderella, Hansel & Gretel, Beauty and the Beast, all failed in their adaptations so I didn't have high expectations for Maleficent. They all seem to share something in common which is that they always incorporate a spin on the classic tale, and Maleficent is no exception as there is a big twist to the familiar story. They played it safe with the twist in Maleficent, and it was rather cliche, but it worked nonetheless. Despite not being a huge fan of this genre I decided to give this film a shot because I was looking forward to Angelina Jolie's comeback (her previous starring role in a feature film was in 2010's The Tourist alongside Johnny Depp). Jolie doesn't disappoint and she carries the entire film giving a strong performance. Many complained that they wished the film would've centered more on her character as a villain than a hero, but I actually enjoyed the duality in her performance and the struggle she faces while dealing with her betrayal. She owns this movie, but it didn't hurt that the she had a strong cast to work with; I loved Elle Fanning in her role as Aurora, Sharlto Copley as the ambitious King (if there was ever a film in which he could go overboard with his character this was it, but strangely he played it safe here), and of course I can't leave out Sam Riley who was great as Diaval. Perhaps I enjoyed this film more than others because I went into it with fairly low expectations, but compared to other recent fairytale adaptations this film is superior and one I'm sure the new generation will appreciate.

Maleficent is a retelling of Disney's classic animated film, Sleeping Beauty, although this time the screenplay written by Linda Woolverton centers on the villain. The film begins by introducing us to the young fairy named Maleficent (Isobelle Molloy) living an ideal and peaceful life in the Moors, which is full of magical creatures. On the other side of the Moors lies the human kingdom which is ruled by an ambitious King. One day Maleficent is warned by the forest guards that they have caught a human trying to steal a jewel from the Moors. Maleficent discovers that the thief is actually a boy named Stefan (Michael Higgins), who she kindly asks to return the jewel. She then escorts him out of the Moors, but when he returns the two bond and become good friends. As time passes the two fall in love, but their relationship doesn't last long once he becomes ambitious. The film jumps forward many years and now we follow the adult Maleficent (Angelina Jolie) as she continues to protect the Moors from King Henry (Kenneth Cranham) and his army. The adult Stefan (Sharlto Copley) happens to be serving the King now, and he and his men are ordered to kill Maleficent. Whoever does so will become his successor to the throne. Stefan heads to the Moors to warn Maleficent of the king's intention, but blinded by his ambition to become king he betrays her. This turns Maleficent's once pure heart into one full of hate and a desire for revenge. When Stefan becomes King, Maleficent curses his newborn infant Aurora and claims she will fall into a sleep like death once she turns 16 and only a true love's kiss will be able to break the curse.

The best thing Maleficent has going for it apart from Angelina Jolie's lead performance and the strong ensemble cast, is the fact that it was directed by Robert Stromberg who has a strong record as a production designer. Despite the fact that this was Stromberg's first feature film he has a lot of experience in the art direction department (actually winning two Oscars for his work in Acatar and Alice in Wonderland). Maleficent looks great and the art direction may be it's best asset. The visual effects and the fantastical creatures of the Moors are stunning. The screenplay may have its flaws and the story may fall into a predictable and cliched final act, but it always looks great. This may be yet another case of style over substance, but the cast elevate the material and make this a much better film than it has any right to be. The weakest elements of the film for me involve the portrayal of the three fairies who are tasked with taking care of Aurora and raising her. Those comedic moments felt a bit forced and the characters didn't have much substance to them. However, the scenes that Maleficent and Aurora share together are solid as Jolie captures the inner struggle she faces when she's confronted by Aurora's innocence and beauty. Sam Riley also shares some great scenes alongside Jolie and those were the best moments of the film for me. The film does suffer from a slow introduction and a weak final act, but the middle act was really strong and that is why I actually enjoyed Maleficent.

My Review: Killer Joe (5/10)

¨You ever hear of Joe Copper? He's a cop. A detective actually. He's got a little business on the side.¨

Director William Friedkin is mostly recognized for his work in the 70`s in The Exorcist and The French Connection. He hasn’t had another critically acclaimed movie since then although some of his movies have received a small fan base. Killer Joe is a neo-noir film with some excellent performances from the cast that critics have enjoyed and therefore put Friedkin on the map again. His film was adapted from Tracy Letts play of the same name. Letts worked with Friedkin in 2006 in the film Bug which didn’t receive too much attention. Killer Joe has made the top ten list of many critics favorite film of 2012 and I can see why. It is a very dark film, with some sadistic violence and dark humor as well. Several scenes, especially the ending, will leave you shocked and disgusted. Most critics found this film to be well crafted, but it hasn’t received as much love from audiences. As much as I wanted to like this movie, I was really disappointed with it. It was just too dark and sadistic for my taste. I don’t have a problem with violent films, I am a huge Tarantino fan, but this film is just an example of how difficult it really is to mix dark humor with violence, and although Tarantino makes it look really easy, it isn’t because Killer Joe is proof of that. I can see why many critics liked this movie, but I can`t say that I agree with them. It just wasn’t my taste. What I can agree on is the performance from the cast which is truly great, but I will get to that later.

The film takes place in a small Texas town where we meet a redneck family living in a trailer. Chris (Emile Hirsch), a drug dealer, has got in a fight with his mother after she stole his stash and now he is in a huge debt with some thugs. In order to pay off the debt he comes up with a plan that involves killing his mother and collecting her insurance money. Someone has told him that the insurance money would go to her younger sister, Dottie (Juno Temple) who lives with his father and step mother. Chris shows up at his father`s house one night and shares the plan with him. Ansel (Thomas Haden Church) who`s very naïve agrees to listen to the plan. Chris tells him about the insurance money and that he has heard of a contract killer named Joe (Matthew McConaughey) who he is planning on contacting. Together, Chris and Ansel meet up with Joe who happens to be a police detective during the day and a killer at night. He agrees to kill the mother as long as they pay him 25,000 thousand dollars up front. Since Chris doesn’t have the money and can`t pay him in advance, Joe decides to take innocent Dottie as his retainer. Chris and Ansel agree as well as Ansel`s wife, Sharla (Gina Gershon). The family is completely dysfunctional and they make it really easy for you to believe they would accept and do such a thing. Well of course something goes wrong in the transaction and all hell breaks loose in this pulpy dark film.

As good as Thomas Haden Church, Gina Gershon, Emile Hirsch, and Juno Temple are in this movie they are outshined by Matthew McConaughey`s performance as this sadistic but charming detective. He is that kind of guy who on one side seems really nice and charming but on the other you know he`s dangerous and won`t want to mess with him. This is perhaps one of his strongest performances although I really preferred his work in Magic Mike. There is no doubt this has been a great year for him as he has received a lot of recognition for his work in these films. It was good to see Gina Gershon back in a strong role as well as it had been a long time since she could prove her artistic talents. Emile Hirsh and Thomas Haden Church are always great and have found them pretty much dependable in everything. Juno Temple perhaps gets her best role here as well. The performances were my favorite part of this movie, but I really can`t say I enjoyed the story. I was shocked by several scenes and really found some difficult to watch. This isn’t one of those movies I would like to watch again and I definitely wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. It will not be among my favorite films of the year, and I hope to forget all about it by tomorrow.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com