Robot & Frank (6/10): An original futuristic take on aging.

"The human brain, a lovely piece of hardware.”

Jake Schreier won the Feature Film Prize at Sundance in 2012 for this original dramatic comedy and it’s easy to see why. There are few films in Hollywood that deal with aging and when they do they are usually handled in an overly sentimental or poorly manner. By simply looking at the poster alone, I thought I knew what this movie was going to be about: an odd pairing of a grumpy old man refusing to accept the assistance of a robot but who would eventually get to befriend it and accept it. Robot & Frank however was nothing like I expected and the story had a very original premise with a strong central performance from Frank Langella. It also stands out in its depiction of the future, which seems much more believable and approachable than most futuristic dystopian movies. It is a simple movie that approaches the subject of aging in a rather simple but realistic manner. 

Frank (Frank Langella) is a former jewel thief who has served time in prison, but is now living on his own in an upstate New York town. His son, Hunter (James Marsden) takes long drives to come visit him during the weekends to check up on him and during one of those visits he brings him a robot (voiced by Peter Sarsgaard) to assist him. The robot specializes in healthcare, but Frank isn’t too keen about having him around. Not knowing how to shut if off he eventually gives in and allows it to do the chores in the house. During the course of the movie we realize Frank is beginning to have trouble remembering things (showing early signs of dementia), and that is why his family is concerned for him. His daughter, Madison (Liv Tyler), is a philanthropist who is always traveling to foreign countries but also tries to check up on him when she has a chance. Frank’s robot wants him to begin a new project in order to improve his health and it believes that Frank should take on gardening and establish a daily routine. But Frank has other ideas, he wants to plan for a new heist and he easily convinces the robot that it is a good idea. Susan Sarandon also has a supporting role in this film as a local librarian that Frank frequently visits, but there isn’t much of a romantic arc. The film is basically a dramatic comedy centering on the relationship Frank forms with his robot and how his family deals with his illness. 

Langella is the true stand out here and he carries this movie with his solid performance. There were moments were the pacing seemed to drag, but his character simply captivated me and got me through some of those patches. I had some issues with the ending as well, which seemed a bit too neatly wrapped for a film that basically was staying away from genre formulas and conventions for almost its entire runtime. But for a film that centers on a relationship between an old man and a robot it does feel quite fresh in that unlike with most sci-fi films, here there is no conflict as to if the robot will develop a consciousness or not. It never seems to be an issue here and he constantly reminds Frank that he is not alive. This isn’t a man versus machine type of movie, it is more interested in showing how technology can help improve our lives as is the case with Frank, although there are of course dangers implied with it, depending on how we use this technology. The screenplay focuses on that intimate relationship between Frank and his robot, and that ends up being the highlight of this film.        

Jeff, Who Lives at Home (5/10): Overly sentimental and preachy with a conveniently forced climax

“Stay pure of heart and you will see the signs. Follow the signs, and you will uncover your destiny.”

And with that opening title card we basically get what this film is all about: a 30 year old man living in his mother’s basement awaiting for a specific sign to discover his destiny while he sits back in his couch smoking weed. This was the Duplass brothers fourth feature film working together as directors, although with a much bigger budget this time around which enabled them to hire well known actors. Their screenplay has its sweet and funny moments, but you can’t help but feel the familiarity of the story. For a film centering on looking for signs and following them, this movie does so in a very predictable and obvious way with stereotypical characters. Jeff, Who Lives at Home also manages to wrap things up in a neat and convenient way so I really didn’t find anything about the story very unique or interesting. As a fan of Shyamalan’s Signs I did enjoy the references Jeff makes towards it and how it basically dictates his own personal life, but I was expecting some surprises along the way.

In the very first scene of the movie we are introduced to Jeff (Jason Segel) and in only a few seconds we know exactly what kind of person he is. He is a man child who hasn’t quite figured out what to do with his life, but he doesn’t seem too worried about it either. He is waiting for the signs to point him to his destiny. When he receives a phone call of someone asking for Kevin he immediately takes it as a sign that he should search for a Kevin instead of just discarding it as a misdialed call. A few minutes later he receives another call, but this time it’s his mother, Sharon (Susan Sarandon), who is calling him from her office and asking him to go to Home Depot to fix something in the house. Sharon is worried about Jeff, and she wants him to get on track with his life. She asks his brother, Pat (Ed Helms), to encourage him, but he is going through some marital problems with his wife Linda (Judy Greer). Pat isn’t the ideal husband and he doesn’t even consider asking Linda for advice when it comes to big decisions such as buying a brand new Porsche. This of course brings friction to their relationship. On his way to the Home Depot, Jeff sees a young teen wearing a jersey with the name Kevin on the back, so of course he takes it as a sign and follows him. These signs inadvertently lead him to the exact place where his brother Pat is and while the two are catching up they discover Linda is with another man. Could this be the reason why Jeff has been led to his brother? To help him discover if his wife is cheating on him? From this point on a series of casualties ensue.

The film relies on the strong chemistry between Segel and Helms, two very talented and funny actors. They both play characters they’re very familiar and comfortable playing, Segel the childish and naive slacker son, Helms the uptight and career driven husband. The highlight of the film is watching these two great actors interact with each other despite all the schmaltz. The subplot revolving around Susan Sarandon’s character and her secret admirer didn’t really tie up to the story and only seemed to serve as a filler for the feature length time. Judy Greer is also comfortable in her role here, but she doesn’t really get much to do here other than be the victim who her husband never really listens to. Despite some scattered funny moments which can be mostly attributed to the talented cast, the ending felt way too sappy and convenient and ultimately hindered my appreciation of the film. It simply tried to force the underlying message of the movie of destiny and it only added to the overall sentimentality of the film. The cinematography was also distracting at times with too many quick zoom-ins on the characters faces.

Dead Man Walking (9/10): A thought provoking spiritual drama.

“I want the last face you see in this world to be the face of love, so you look at me when they do this thing. I'll be the face of love for you.”

Dead Man Walking is a film that explores the unique and unexpected bond formed between a Catholic nun and a convicted murderer on Death Row. I know this doesn’t exactly sound as a compelling plot nor a crowd pleaser, but it was definitely a thought provoking film and surprisingly one of the best movies of 1995 thanks to the strong performances. Tim Robbins adapted the screenplay from Sister Helen Prejean’s nonfictional book of the same name, and he also directed this inspirational spiritual drama that avoids being one sided and preachy by approaching the material through several different viewpoints. Sister Helen Prejean may be an advocate for the abolition of the death penalty, but this film rather than take sides on the issue allows for both views to make their case and doesn’t seem to have a hidden agenda. Robbins could’ve taken the easy way out by making the convicted murderer more sympathetic, but from the very first scene he’s in, we know this is no saint and the film doesn’t shy away from what he did and the effect his actions had in the family of the victims. This is one of those rare films that approaches a controversial subject and succeeds at being balanced, which makes it a great tool for discussion.

Sister Helen is probably one of the most authentic Christian characters portrayed on film as she is purely empathetic towards everyone around her. She isn’t forcing her religion on this convict or trying to convert him, but rather finding a way for him to come to terms with what he did and find redemption by taking responsibility for his actions. She truly cares for this man, who isn’t exactly a role model, and there is never any judgement in her words. It is rare to find a spiritual character like this portrayed on film in such an honest way, and Susan Sarandon takes the strong material and delivers one of her best performances to date. She simply cares for everyone around her and she is trying to do what is right because she is committed to her beliefs, and she actually applies them which is a rare thing (not even Christian films seem to get this right at times). Sean Penn also delivers a strong performance as the convict, Matthew Poncelet, who every time he opens his mouth the less sympathetic he is, but it is evident he is trying to hide his true emotions and blame everyone else for what he has become. His chemistry with Sarandon is what carries this movie, but there are also several strong supporting performances. Margo Martindale is an actress that is often overlooked, but she deserves more recognition. She can effortlessly play a villain like in The Leftovers, or a loving and supporting Sister like she does here. R. Lee Ermey and Celia Weston play the resentful parents of the victim, and they share a great scene with Susan Sarandon that says a lot about her character. Tim Robbins hasn’t directed a better film and I think he owes much of the success of this movie to the strong performances along with his well written and thought provoking script. 

The Calling (5/10): Its greatest crime is that it doesn't offer anything new to the genre.

“I’ve never seen anything like this.”

With so many great TV shows about serial killers and police procedurals, it’s hard to find The Calling appealing. It’s getting more difficult to direct an engaging and suspenseful film in just a two hour period because these series have more time to explore the characters and allow us to engage with them. If directors want to have success with this genre it’s necessary to come up with either an intriguing and original story or give the film a unique artistic style. The Calling does neither of the two. This is director Jason Stone’s first full feature length film, and despite having Susan Sarandon in the star role there is very little about this procedural that feels authentic or new. Everything about this film feels recycled from other better movies or series and even the fact that the story centers on a strong female lead isn’t new anymore (Fargo is a film that easily comes to mind) and neither is its sombre tone. 

The film was adapted by Scott Abramovitch from Inger Ash Wolfe’s novel and it centers around a local small town detective named Hazel Micallef (Susan Sarandon) who really hasn’t had much to do during her years of service. She drinks a lot of alcohol to fight her depression and she continues to live with her mother, Emily (Ellen Burstyn) with whom she doesn’t seem to get along too well. One day she discovers a gruesome murder of one of the town’s old ladies and as she investigates the case she is convinced it’s the work of a serial killer. Hazel and her partner, Detective Ray (Gil Bellows), welcome a new and young officer, Ben Wingate (Topher Grace), who has transferred from a big city and is eager to help on the case. They discover that there have been a number of unrelated murders in nearby towns and that these killings all seem to be spiritual so they consult on the case with Father Price (Donald Sutherland). But as they get closer to the killer the more exposed they are. 

To be honest the film does do a decent job at building the suspense and keeping the audience interested in what is going on during the first half of the movie. Unfortunately the film loses its appeal during the second part and the resolution is far from being memorable. It’s unfortunate because the cast is rather strong and Sarandon delivers a solid performance, but her character is a walking cliche and one we’ve seen represented in movies many times before. The talented Donald Sutherland and Ellen Burstyn are completely wasted in this film and they could’ve been given much more to do with their roles instead of simply showing up a couple of times on screen. There simply isn’t anything here that makes The Calling stand out from other films in the genre, and that is its greatest crime.  

My Review: The Big Wedding (2/10)

"Would somebody just punch me in the face again?"

The best thing I can say about The Big Wedding is that it is only 80 minutes long. If it were 10 minutes longer I don't think I could've made it through the entire thing because it is such a forceful mess with cliches thrown all over the place. At least in other mainstream romantic comedies you have a main story that reaches its conclusion nicely wrapped up with a beautiful ribbon on top, but here you have like five different conflictive stories that magically reach their resolution in less than 10 minutes. Not even Houdini could pull off a trick like that. The entire film focuses on this one messed up family where each member is going through some difficult moment in their relationship and after hearing them ramble for 70 minutes they all peacefully find their resolution and live happily ever after. The Big Wedding is class 101 in Introduction to Mainstream Movie Cliches. What made things even worse is that director Justin Zackham (whose major film credit is writing the screenplay for The Bucket List) had an all-star cast to work with here and none of the characters felt like a real human being. Everyone played a one dimensional and stereotypical character. This is one of the laziest and most shameful movies of the year and I doubt many people will enjoy this "comedy."

Alejandro (Ben Barnes) and Missy (Amanda Seyfried) are a young couple preparing for their big wedding, which means that Alejandro's dysfunctional family has to come together for this special occasion. Alejandro was adopted and raised by Don (Robert de Niro) and Ellie (Diane Keaton) until they were divorced and Don's mistress, Bebe (Susan Surandon), moved in. Don and Ellie had two other children prior to adopting Alejandro: Lyla (Katherine Heigl) and Jared (Topher Grace). Apparently after their divorce Ellie abandoned the country and Lyla broke ties with her father. Now 10 years later everyone gets together for Alejandro's marriage. The only problem is that Alejandro has always kept close ties with his real mother from Colombia, Madonna (Patricia Rae), a devout Catholic who disapproves of divorce and therefor he has never told her anything about his adoptive parents separation. He asks Ellie and Don to act like a married couple and that pretty much leaves Bebe out of the picture thus creating a bit of chaos and building tension along the way. 

There isn't anything nice I can say about this movie so I will keep my review short. There are several other stories and things going on in this film that barely get touched on the surface or are simply used as a gag and not dealt with. Robin Williams plays the priest who is going to marry the couple (we've seen him play this same role in the past). Alejandro is not a catholic and doesn't want to lie to the priest about his beliefs because he doesn't think it would be right, but on the other hand he is capable of lying to his mother about his adoptive parents. I had an issue accepting this and I guess it was a main concern because at one point this is addressed in the film, but it is resolved rather lazily like pretty much every conflict that arose in the film. Everything just felt so fake that it was hard to really identify with any of the characters because none of them played a real human being. This isn't the way conflicts are resolved. Nothing about this film is recommendable, and what makes matters even worse is that such a talented cast was put to waste with this terrible screenplay. The Big Wedding is one of the worst films of 2013.

My Rating: 2,7/10

My Review: Snitch (5/10)

¨Every move I make or don´t make, Jason will have to live with for the next 10 years of his life.¨

Snitch is far from being a fast-paced action thriller like the trailers suggest. It is more of a dramatic thriller with some moments of suspense, but the film mostly takes itself seriously and moves at a very slow pace. The film is based on real events and in a way it criticizes the way America has handled its war on drugs. As much as I like The Rock (I think he´s incredibly charismatic and has made some great films) this role wasn’t made for him. He is good for action scenes or comedy, but I don’t think he was the right choice for a drama. This is the first film I´ve seen from director, Ric Roman Waugh, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Justin Haythe (Revolutionary Road and the upcoming Lone Ranger), and I wasn’t too impressed with his work. The film might be entertaining enough for a quiet night out, but it is completely forgettable. I doubt we will remember anything about Snitch by the end of the year because it is a very sluggish film. This wasn’t a very enjoyable film, but I can see fans of The Rock wanting to go see it.

After Jason (Rafi Gavron) accepts to receive a package of ecstasy sent to his house by his best friend Craig, he is arrested by the DEA who have set him up. Jason isn’t a drug dealer, but in order to get a lighter sentence, Craig decided to trick Jason into receiving the package. The DEA offer Jason the same bargain, but he refuses to set anyone up and therefore is sentenced to prison for 10 years (which is the minimum mandatory sentence for this offense). When his estranged father, John Matthews (The Rock) hears about the news from his ex-wife he decides to help out. He makes a bargain with the District Attorney Keeghan (Susan Sarandon) to go undercover and make an arrest so his son can have his sentence lowered. With the help of DEA Agent Cooper (Barry Pepper) and an ex-con employee of his named Daniel (Jon Benrthal) he is introduced to the underworld and begins taking huge risks for his son. John is willing to do what it takes in order to get his son out of jail.

The plot is pretty simple and the film feels authentic and true to life at times. The risks that The Rock´s character takes for his son are believable, but I thought that several things resolved themselves rather quickly for a film that was trying really hard to take itself seriously. I was disappointed with the final 15 minutes of the film, and the dialogue was a little too preachy. I had serious issues with the pace as well. I also thought there were several unnecessary action scenes involving shaky camera work (especially during the chase scenes). The film fails to really tackle the social issue it tries to raise at the beginning of the movie and by the end you feel like you are watching yet another forgettable thriller. I still give the film a little credit for at least mentioning the issue at the beginning of the film and trying to make us aware that we seriously have to change the way the DEA handles sentences for first time offenders.  

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Cloud Atlas (8/10)

¨I´m just trying to understand why we keep making the same mistakes over and over again.¨

Many critics have called Lana and Andy Wachowski´s new film, Cloud Atlas, ambitious and pretentious, but in my opinion it is a well made sci-fi film that is ahead of its time. Probably on a much lesser scale than 2001 or Blade Runner, but this film seems to have all the elements needed to become a cult film over time. Cloud Atlas is one of those movies you have to pay close attention to in order to understand where the plot is heading; it is definitely not for the casual viewer. It requires your time and patience, but if you stick with this film you will be rewarded by the end. This is by no means as good as Wachowski´s The Matrix (although it tries to remain philosophical), but it is much better than their recent work. Tom Tykwer (The Perfume) co-directed the film with the Wachowski siblings and it is without a doubt his best work yet. The film is unlike any other movie you´ve seen before as it connects six different stories over several centuries and connects them in some way or another. You could say it is kind of like Magnolia, but those stories take place during a similar time period, here the connections take place during the past, present, and future. Two parallel filming units were required for this monstrous production as the siblings directed three stories and Tykwer the other three. Cloud Atlas is based on David Mitchell´s award winning novel, and it was no easy task adapting it for the big screen. I think that their effort will be rewarded over time as it has the potential to become a sci-fi cult film.

The plot is a little difficult to explain as there are six separate stories happening over different time periods and in a way every story connects and overlaps with each other. The movie switches between one scene that can be taking place in 1849 to another in the post apocalyptic future. The first story takes place in the Pacific Ocean in 1849 as Adam Ewing (Jim Sturgess) is keeping a journal of his voyage while battling some sort of illness and being attended by Dr. Henry Goose (Tom Hanks), and at the same time helping a former slave, Autua (David Gyasi), escape from his oppressors. The next story takes place in 1936 as the composer Robert Frobisher (Ben Whishaw) is corresponding with his former lover, Rufus Sixsmith (James D´Arcy) about his experience working for the world famous composer Vyvyan Ayrs (Jim Broadbent). In 1973 the story centers around a journalist named Luisa Rey (Halle Berry) who is investigating a murder that took place in a nuclear power plant. In 2012 a publisher named Timothy Cavendish (Jim Broadbent) gets hoaxed by his brother and is forced to live in a nursing home while he makes plans to escape. In 2144 a clone known as Sonmi-451 (Doona Bae) participates in a revolutionary underground movement in New Seoul under the guidance of Hae-Joo Chang (Jim Sturgess). And finally in 2321 Zachry (Tom Hanks) is living somewhere in post apocalyptic Hawaii in a tribe that is being threatened by the blood thirsty Kona Chief (Hugh Grant). Every story is interconnected with each other as the actions of each individual impact one another in different time periods kind of like in a ripple effect.

The complexity of each story is the reason why the film is almost three hours long, but if you pay close attention and don’t get lost with all the flashbacks and flash forwards you might just enjoy this film. Cloud Atlas is pretentious for many because it is a little philosophical as it explains how we seem to cross our paths over and over again. Every actor in this film plays several different roles (as many as six) and we can see how each one shapes his or her future depending on the actions they take. The way the film was shot allows for the audience to experience a little sci-fi action (2144 segment), some comedy (2012 nursery home escape), some retro mystery (1973), and even romantic tragedy (1936). That is why this film is one of its kind. The sci-fi scenes were spectacular and the designs quite visionary in style. The film, although very exhausting, is exiting; and I had a great time. I understand why this is such a divisive film considering it is so complex and epic at the same time. The film does feel a bit disjointed and disconnected at times, but when it seemed to lose me it got right back in track again. I think this film was quite original and is worth your time if you are willing to put your mind to it. The performances weren’t as strong as I would have liked, but it is a difficult task to play six different characters at once. By all means check Cloud Atlas out; you will either love it or hate it.

    

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Arbitrage (8/10)

¨How much money do we need? Do you want to be the richest guy in the cemetery? ¨

Richard Gere has had a very respectable career as an actor, but in my opinion I think he has finally delivered his best performance in Arbitrage. This thriller would have been just an average movie if it wasn’t for Gere´s portrayal of a fund magnate in a lot of trouble who somehow manages to keep his cool. There is something about Gere´s performance in this film that stands out. As much as I tend to dislike these business millionaires and despite all the immoral decisions his character makes there was something about his performance that made me want him to get away with the crimes he´s committed. I found myself routing for the bad guy, and it was only plausible thanks to Gere´s performance. This is perhaps one of my top three performances of the year and I think Richard Gere should finally get some recognition for his work here. Young director, Nicholas Jarecki, has burst into Hollywood with this first feature film which has received a lot of praise from critics. I was really trapped by this thriller thanks in most part to Richard Gere because otherwise I really wouldn’t care for this character who on paper should´ve been very unlikeable. Jarecki also wrote the screenplay for this film and produced it so he is someone to keep an eye on in the future. The rest of the cast is alright, but Gere´s performance is just above par.

 

Richard Gere plays a hedge fund magnate named Robert Miller who is trying to sell his trading empire. When his daughter Brooke (Brit Marling) asks him why he wants to sell the company, he says he wants to retire and spend time with his family, but very soon we find out he has other reasons. His wife Ellen is played by the great Susan Sarandon and she´s always supportive of her husband´s decisions as long as they don’t affect the family. Robert and Ellen seem to have the perfect family, but soon we discover that Robert has a mistress as well. She´s a young French painter named Julie (Laetitia Casta) who Robert has sponsored in order for her to make it big in the artistic world. We soon find out that Robert´s perfect life isn’t so as he has problems closing the sale of his company and is in desperate need of doing so. One night, after having an argument with his mistress Julie, the two decide to go for a ride together and end up in a car accident. Julie dies and Robert afraid of what the media or his family might say flees from the scene and calls a contact of his to pick him up. Things begin to get worse for Robert as police detective Michael Bryer (Tim Roth) begins investigating the case and asking him questions. Despite how bad things are turning up for Robert, he seems to keep a cool and control of everything. He begins to feel the pressure but he does a good job at hiding it and continuing to move on.

Arbitrage is a very formulaic thriller, something goes bad for the main character and the tension seems to escalate as we move forward, but in the end it stands out from other thrillers because of Richard Gere´s performance. He manages to keep the viewer interested in his outcome despite doing very unlikeable things. It would be hard to relate to a character like this, but Gere makes it look so easy. In the end that is what I enjoyed the most about this film despite the fact that Susan Sarandon and Tim Roth are both very much underused here. They are great actors, but get very little screen time. As the tension escalates, so does the suspense so in my opinion Jarecki does succeed in creating this atmosphere and setting the mood of the film. Arbitrage could be a forgettable film by the end of the year, but something tells me that Gere´s performance will be remembered. He deserves some recognition for his work here and it would be great if he receives a nomination from the Academy. Arbitrage isn’t a perfect movie, but if you like thrillers or are a fan of Richard Gere then you have to see it.

    

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com