JAKastner Reviews

Sideways (2004)

The Moose Hole - 'Sideways' is Like Life Itself

[9/10 · 10 February 2005]

The story for Sideways, though concentrating itself within an entirely different time period and character actions, vaguely resembles the philosophical critiques described by Voltaire in his novel, Candide, minus the social commentaries, though argument could be made for that as well. On the one hand you have Miles, a two-year divorcée who always seems to have an adverse view of the world, even when it feels as if he may finally be receiving that little break for once. Despite the opportunity to be with a woman presenting itself to him, it feels as if he can not bare to expose himself to another woman out fear of rejection and the universe punching him in the stomach one more time. On the opposite end of the spectrum is Jack, Miles' old college roommate and best friend, who happens to be on his way to becoming a married man for the first time. With almost the exact opposite philosophy as his melancholy friend, Jack is always searching for a good time and views nearly every situation with a positive spin to it, even if, logically, there should be none. If life happens to throw him a curveball, thus knocking him down off his high horse, he simply picks himself off the ground, dusts the dirt off his pants, and then hightails it after the next short skirt that comes waltzing by his line of sight. What Sideways demonstrates, the novel Candide as well, is that as human beings we need not apply to either one of these extremist theories on how we should view the world but rather we should instead discover a compromise in between in which we continue life being happy and content with what we have.

Paul Giamatti, having been backhanded by the Motion Picture Academy once again, performs brilliantly in the role of Miles Raymond, a man who goes out to wine country to give his best friend his last hoorah and ends up finding himself in the process. As with Jack, certain audience members may find Miles to be a bit too pessimistic and cynical of his view of the world to find him all that likable. But what needs to be remembered is that this is the nature of Miles' character and as the story digs deeper into his personal failures and dead-end streets in his life, the more understanding we become of his current philosophy in life. There is this immensely romantic sequence within the film in which Maya discusses the feeling she has or the thoughts she develops in her mind whenever she drinks a bottle of wine. As she delivers this exceptionally beautiful piece of dialogue, Miles appears nothing short of captivated by her words, feeling as if she has already grasped who he is inside. And then comes the precise moment in that scene where you will want to grab Miles by the shoulders, slap his face around a bit, and shout, "Kiss her you moron" only to no avail. Jack, played hilariously by Thomas Haden Church, is without a doubt one of the most unlikable characters you will come across. He is loud, crude, embarrassingly sexually promiscuous, and arrogant beyond all pretension. But those rather coarse traits aside, he does happen to have his moment in which, once you are able to get past the excessive profanity and sexual innuendos, he speaks quite profoundly on certain subjects as when he attempts to have Miles lighten for once in his life after he finds out his wife has remarried. Virginia Madsen, in the role of Maya, is nothing short of breathtakingly eloquent and beautiful in this film, performing admirably opposite Paul Giammati and never once playing off dialogue as clichéd as it would sound coming from anyone else with less experience then she has.

Overall, no matter how young or old you happen to be, whether you are male or female, you will be able walk away from Sideways with a new view on life, on how we need not be overtly optimistic or pessimistic but instead be content with what life gives us and work with it while we still have time. For those moviegoers who have yet to even approach what one would call the 'prime age-range' for a midlife crisis, the film's underlying themes on the 'crossroads' in our lives and how we should view the world are still particularly poignant and divulge valuable lessons that can easily be applied in the future. Praise is well-deserved for this generation's new odd-couple, Paul Giammati and Thomas Haden Church. Each of their characters has individual qualities, whether they be good or bad, that play off so brilliantly off each other that it is purely entertaining to watch them interact on screen. And sure, there are bound to be those audience members who have failed to grasp the concepts developed in this film and will therefore complain about how there was no "true" ending, just a lousy cliffhanger. In the same light as the conclusion to Mile's unpublished book, the ending is whatever you want to make of it to be. There is no right or wrong answer, but if we follow what has happened to Miles' up until this point, we can as debate over what we would want to happen. As in true life, not everything is certain and Sideways' ending is exactly that.

Million Dollar Baby (2004)

The Moose Hole - 'Million Dollar' Bust

[3/10 · 29 January 2005]

The story for Million Dollar Baby is darn near impossible to define in precise terms. What starts out as not only an engaging and exhilarating boxing drama but also an emotionally stirring divulgence into the belief of second chances quickly, and all too suddenly, shifts gears into a pure propagandist piece. Why did things have to go so disturbingly wrong? The first two-thirds of the film showcased some of the most heart-warming, breathtaking, and all-out inspirational boxing sequences this side of Raging Bull. Truly an Oscar tour-de-force from everyone involved. And then they had to go about and kill it, so to speak, with a conclusion that felt as if someone had side-checked the audience into a brick wall.

Clint Eastwood, in the role of the hard-shelled – are not all his characters that way – boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, was mainly nominated for his performance due to his marquee name – Giamatti deserved it more – but the character itself is too wild for even the most Hollywood of clichés. It is both an appalling and disturbing sight to see critics and the public alike applaud a performance in which Eastwood comes in at the end of the film through the hospital wing like the "Angel of Death" to secretly kill a woman he raised as if she were his own daughter. Perhaps audience members were given the wrong perception on the real daughter that left him. Maybe she was the only one with the true sense about her. If you knew your father would end up doing what he did to Maggie, would you not leave him? Hilary Swank is obviously on tap to receive the Oscar for Best Actress this year at the Academy Awards for her performance as boxer in training Maggie Fitzgerald, but does she truly deserve the honor or rather is there a serious lack of true competition against her? Should she receive kudos for training excruciatingly hard for the role and floating gracefully around the boxing ring like a true woman champion? Sure, she deserves every bit of it. Should she be the one to receive two golden statuettes in such a short period of time while taking lead roles in such trash as The Core and The Gift? Not so sure about that one. Maggie also acts as a rather crude insult toward anyone from the South – in fact her entire family could actually be brought into this discussion while we are at it. In Million Dollar Baby, every individual who happens to be from the southern region of the country is portrayed as either a know-nothing country bumpkin, complete with inbred appearance, or a worthless piece of white trash that will never amount to anything in this world. This is the typical cliché of both Hollywood and the liberal establishment in general. They love it so much it kills them to see over and over again – if only.

Overall, Michael Moore occultists, more accurately those left who have yet to buck up the nerve to take their Kool-Aid following the reelection of Bush-Hitler, can at most find some consolation in the fact that at least some left-wing propagandist piece could walk away with a golden statuette on Oscar night. Already the fringe leftists have a pathetic excuse for their bumbling actions claiming, "But at least Frankie was not cruel enough to do the deed while she was sleeping. Was it not the most touching moment when they said their good-byes before the end?" Sure, perhaps someone could try explaining that one to the family of the victim of the next teenage girl that is humanely raped and murdered after her attacker had already threatened to kill her to begin with. Straight out, euthanasia is nothing more then a gussied up word used by liberal elitists to cover-up the act of cold-blooded murder, accepted only by the slack-jawed idiots churned out by donkey universities who can not put two-and-two together. "But", they stutter "should we truly allow those who are confined to wheelchairs, unable to move a single limb, live out the rest of their purposeless lives in utter agony?" Following that sense of logic, Christopher Reeve, in spite of whatever Brother John Edwards may believe, should have been put of his damn misery years before he actually died. This should not be a complex issue to get through anyone's head, no matter how thick they may be. Your life does not belong solely to you, it belongs to the creator. God created you specifically in his image with a purpose in this life, though we may not know it at the time, and he will take you from this world when he feels it is your determined time. You do not have the privilege of making that decision for him in any event. In spite of what some radical liberals may tell you, man is not higher up on the chain-of-command then God himself. Anything to the contrary is absolute sacrilege. In addition to that, Baby promotes the ideal that if you are able to reach the zenith of your life, the one true shot at the big time, that even if you fail doing so you will have achieved your purpose in this world and you may therefore die with a sense of dignity having nothing left to live for. Perhaps that one could be explained more clearly to Eastwood, whether he actually wins on the big night or not, by taking a quick pot-shot to his head on his way to the limo. After all, does it not make sense for him to practice what he preaches? Million Dollar Baby is positively insulting, bordering on the line of being flat-out slanderous, both to Catholicism and the dignity of humanity in general. There should be no respect left for Clint Eastwood, either in the realm of films or politics, after this travesty.

The Aviator (2004)

The Moose Hole - 'The Aviator' Soars!

[9/10 · 16 January 2005]

The story for The Aviator resurrects the aberrant life of Howard Hughes and presents it in the grandiose, nostalgic, and mythological style that only Martin Scorsese could have achieved so seamlessly and effectively all at the same time. In spite of its lavish three-hour time length, the film's flow and consistency is never once interrupted by abrupt slow periods, nor does it ever outpace its audience's ability to divulge information at a reasonable pace. Already at this point it is leaps and bounds ahead of the bumbling monstrosity that was Gangs of New York. And although the first few minutes of the picture in which Hughes' mother bathes the young boy in a tub of water in a dimly lit room and speaks to him of avoiding the disease-filled residence of a neighbor may seem a bit awkward when it first starts out, given time it will be made all the more understandable as eloquent symbolism to the sporadic nature of Howard Hughes.

Howard Hughes, whether he be the man, the legend, or quite possibly a combination of the two, truly is the focus of this picture and Leonardo DiCaprio, having been snubbed in years past for his roles in both Titanic and Gangs of New York, captures brilliantly the eccentric aviator's maverick personality and from the very first scenes instantly grapples the attention of his audience in much the same way as Hughes would have wanted it done. Whether or not he receives a golden statuette this time around, let alone receives a nomination at the Academy Awards ceremony, DiCaprio, in the short years since his breakout performance in the smash-hit Titanic, has built up quite an impressive resume none-the-less, especially given that he has actually demonstrated true acting potential rather then simply riding the wave of pure publicity and hype. Cate Blanchett, an especially gifted actress who has rounded up in recent years particularly well-deserved acclaim from critics for her roles in The Lord of the Rings trilogy and Veronica Guerin, reflects perfectly the extraordinary, if not often curious, nature of the late-Katharine Hepburn. Alan Alda, famous for his portrayal of Hawkeye Pierce in the acclaimed television series M*A*S*H, proves that in all his years in the glitzy Hollywood business he has failed to lose his touch, giving a brilliantly stark performance as the conniving Senator Ralph Owen Brewster. In a particular scene in which the senator invites Howard to a luncheon meeting in a last ditch effort to avoid a public hearing and have him fold on the refutation of his new aviation bill, he appears as though he takes pleasure in tormenting Hughes' now apparent mental condition, going so far as to pick up a glass at the last minute and place a smudge mark on it directly in Hughes' line of sight. Splendidly Hughes, refusing to be baited and racking his bodily functions to fight back the affects of his mental condition, stuns Brewster by drinking straight out of that glass and forces him to be on the defensive, a position no one, let alone a senator of the United States Congress, finds comfortable. Surely not everything that Hughes did, most notably taking money from the government for projects he never completed or delivered and bribing military contractors, can be defined as just but he can not be blamed entirely for that given that those were the sign of the times. If anything, this investigation brought about a change in the way the aviation industry would be dealt with and Hughes' stern rebuttal of Brewster's true intentions single-handedly restored the idea of capitalism in yet another branch of the U.S. industrial system.

Overall, The Aviator, in much the same light as its subject of discussion, is larger then life itself and for what seems once in a blue moon on the screen that does not go aggressively against it, ensuring its rightful place as the film to beat this awards season. The film ends rather abruptly with Hughes standing directly in front of a grungy bathroom mirror, repeating the phrase "…wave of the future", and should the audience feel angered or disappointed by this conclusion then Martin Scorsese will have successfully pulled off his desired effect. True to form, the life of Howard Hughes' was never the same again from that moment on. For the mythic man who had done so much in his lifetime up to that point and at the same time had far more yet to accomplish, Hughes' condition spiraled out of control, reducing him to live in total obscurity in one of his several casinos in Las Vegas, dying of kidney failure. That, ladies and gentlemen, is truly the disheartening conclusion to the eccentric, yet majestic, life of Mr. Howard Hughes. The man who perhaps was greatly overshadowed by the legendary figure he helped create and whose shoes he could not fill. Scorsese, a man always willing to be daring and take a risk when it comes to the exact look and feel of a particular film, brilliantly – how many times can that be said of him – captures in each year that is represented the accurate visual style of the color film of that time period, whether it was the old-fashioned Cinecolor or the two-strip Technicolor film. And as the story progresses, the film's appearance matures and fills out more, giving The Aviator a visual quality all its own, setting its miles apart from the competition. Undoubtedly this film will not be everyone's cup of tea, as disappointing as that may be to hear given as how apparently masterful it is, but rest assured that given the proper number of viewings and a through understanding of the life and time of the man who was Howard Hughes, it will be easy for anyone to see as to why this will be the film that gives Scorsese his absurdly overdue Academy Award this year.

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004)

The Moose Hole - Anderson's Most Ambitious Adventure To Date

[8/10 · 16 January 2005]

Internationally renowned oceanographer Steve Zissou is about to embark on his most ambitious adventure to date. He is vividly determined to avenge his partner's death by tracking down the elusive and mysterious Jaguar Shark, should it even exist at all, that ate his best friend during the filming of their last documentary together and destroy it. Joining the rest of Team Zissou for the voyage are a young co-pilot from Kentucky named Ned Plimpton, who may or may not be Steve Zissou's son, and a magazine journalist sent to interview the documentarian for a cover profile. Unfortunately, the expedition does not go as smoothly as might have been planned. Steve not only has to deal with his co-producer and estranged wife, the brains behind the operation, but also a severe lack of funding, pirates, a kidnapping, and a near mutiny. The story for The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou may appear to an unfortunately substantial majority of the viewing audience as an ambitious retelling of the classic sea-legend of Moby Dick but thankfully Anderson's noble storyline effort has far more heart then that. Simply put, this is about a man who comes to the realization that he is a failure in life, both as a scientist and as a family man. Zissou's redemption near the end of the film is that he never was what the commercialization or even his own personality on screen built him up be beyond that of a vivid storyteller. That is who Steve Zissou is to Steve Zissou. And, though it may not seem like much to some people, it is a decent enough existence for him and he comes to accept it, be it requiring the loss of a close friend to fully comprehend this revelation.

True, his name included within the title of the film automatically deems him the focus of the feature in the eyes of an awaiting audience, but beyond the simplistic, Bill Murray's sarcastic nature and suppressed appearance defines the character of Steve Zissou and gathers the full attention of those who come to the understanding of Wes Anderson's brilliant screenplay. After losing his best friend to the mysterious Jaguar shark, Zissou's world comes crashing down around him and failure confronts him in almost every aspect of his life. His explanation to Ned as to why he did not want to become a father to him, or to anyone else for that matter, may strike some people as overtly harsh at first but as one digs deeper into the failure of Steve's life that he is just coming to realization of, it eventually becomes quite reasonable and even acceptable. Owen Wilson, who has become yet another staple of a Wes Anderson film, works well opposite Murray in the role of Ned Plimpton, or as he is later called Kingsley Zissou, a man who may or may not be Steve's only son. The conversations the two of them have throughout the film, the most notable being the scene where Ned tries to come up with a nickname to call Steve, opens the audience up to the difficulty they have establishing a relationship together as family. Cate Blanchett, who by sheer luck for the role became pregnant right before shooting began on the film, radiates on screen, both literally and figuratively, as magazine journalist Jane Winslett-Richardson who comes aboard this voyage to interview Steve Zissou. Several moments of comic relief, possibly the only instances where members of the audience bored with the rest of the film may recall enjoying, come in the form of Willem Dafoe as Klaus Daimler. Despite there being a clear abundance of odd-ball characters aboard Team Zissou, Steve being among them, Klaus stands clearly above the rest of the supporting cast, offsetting the film's more seriously toned atmosphere and message.

Overall, and with all joking aside, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou is without a doubt writer/director Wes Anderson's most ambitious adventure to date as few beyond his consistently increasing circle of cult followers, and quite possibly even a meager amount within, will judge the face value of the film beyond what is skimmed on the surface. The problem with films such as this one is they tend to perform better, critically and financially, in two key areas – one, as a word of mouth picture (sadly to say, this film failed to receive much of a substantial backing despite sold out shows in New York and LA), or secondly, strictly as a DVD or VHS rental. The Life Aquatic, and, to be honest, most Wes Anderson films in general, is one of those rare films that require numerous viewings with careful attention to details and specific lines of dialogue in order to fully obtain the emotional direction and deliberately embedded message the filmmaker is attempting to express. In all likelihood, The Life Aquatic will end up being a financial failure for Touchstone Pictures, given the fifty million dollar production budget and its less then impressive opening weekend numbers in wide release, but in giving them credit there are few studios this year that can stand proud and claim that their film was a noble financial failure if anything else. Yes, the pacing of the film is gradual and not everything that is touched on thematically in the film is laid out on a silver plate for everyone to indulge in but perhaps that is reason enough why this film should be appreciated more then it has been. Those that walk away from this film appreciating it not only for its breathtaking cinematography and creative backgrounds but also for its ingenious style of direction, brilliant use of dialogue, and thematic messages that require actual thought, will give The Life Aquatic more then any money in the world could.

Meet the Fockers (2004)

The Moose Hole - 'Focker'ed Up!

[6/10 · 16 January 2005]

The story for Meet the Fockers no where near meets the magnificence or the brilliant humor of the original. Unlike Meet the Parents, in which the filmmakers simply ran with newfound ideas and allowed the storyline to flow consistently with little interruption, the sequel forces too much down the throats of its audience. It acts in the same way as the finale to The Matrix trilogy did in that the fanfare had built up so many ideas and theories as how it should be done that by the time it was released, no matter what would have been done or not, it was bound to disappoint someone. Sadly enough, this is the card Meet the Fockers is dealt having been released so long, nearly four years, after the original surprise hit.

Both Robert De Niro and Ben Stiller return to the roles they made famous four years ago, Jack Byrnes, the ultra-conservative recently retired CIA agent, and Greg "Gaylord" Focker, the male nurse vying for Jack's daughter's hand in marriage. They work well together once again but not quite at the level they did in the original film. Perhaps since the audience knows how they act against each other already, there are not that many surprises left and therefore less tension and humor to present to the audience. Seeing the Focker family in all their humiliating glory is the most prominent reason why this film should never have made it off the drawing board. Sure, it is quite humorous to simply imagine all the possibilities that could have been developed from this group, but when actually taking the initiative and presenting them in fresh and blood forms in front of our faces, it turns out not to be quite as pleasing as we would have thought. Choosing Dustin Hoffman for the role of Greg's father, Bernie Focker, a former lawyer and stay-at-home father, may have seemed like quite an odd choice at first, especially considering he has not had much experience in the way of flat-out comedies such as this, but now we can see why the decision was made – the man is absolutely hilarious. Who knew a talented actor such as Hoffman had this sort of comedic talent inside of him? After witnessing his performance in this film, he should seriously consider doing more of these types of films as he works quite well at least in this character. Bernie acts as a direct representation of some of the best, if not the most blundering, aspects Greg possesses. He always seems to be doing his best to please everyone but no matter what he does or how hard he tries, it perpetually ends up going badly or embarrassing for someone. The exception here is that Bernie is more cool, collected, and sound about these types of situations then Greg is. For some reason or another, everyone on the planet, Ben Stiller above everyone else, thought Barbra Streisand should play the role of Greg's mother, Roz Focker, the sexual therapist for the elderly, in the highly anticipated sequel. Whether they truly desired to see her perform once again on screen for the first time in nearly nine years or if they had to seriously consider the most annoying and embarrassing liberal hippie and her name just kept automatically coming up, the point remains the same the she works only in limited capacities. Barbra, in a way representing the film as a whole, is laughable, but not so funny as to make her performance all that memorable or worth the price of repeated admission. Most of her jokes are sexual in nature and though some of them are decent gut-busters to begin with, they grow quite old as the film drags on until a certain point where they are no longer funny and are just disgusting.

Overall, the sequel to the 2000 comedy smash-hit is not quite as horrific as the filmmakers certainly could have made it, but neither is it as exhilarating and original as the first film was either. Here is yet another prime example as to why Hollywood should be prevented from being so God damn greedy as to ruin a practically pristine and memorable stand-alone film as Meet the Parents with an unnecessary and vapid sequel. After such dismaying disasters as The Whole Ten Yards and Analysis That – another film starring Robert De Niro – you would think that studio executives would have gotten that message not to bite off more then they can chew. Meet the Fockers is so testable that it should be placed on a pike in front of the entrance of every movie studio in the state of California as a constant terrifying reminder that there are some things in this world that should never be tempered with – tangible stand-alone films most of all. Honestly, the only audience members that may ever receive personal satisfaction from this lack-luster sequel in any way whatsoever will be hardcore conservatives knowing that from now on they can refer to Barbra Streisand, the queen of the banshees in Hollywood, as Mother Focker, which is worth more then anyone will know. But considering they would have to endure seeing at least twenty minutes worth of footage with her cleavage blazoned on the screen, not to mention paying money to gouge out their own eyes, they do themselves a favor and not waste their money, or their eyes, on this. True, not all of Meet the Fockers is a complete disaster. In fact it does offer quite a few laughable moments but unfortunately most audience members will find themselves forcing a laugh rather then just letting loose as real comedies should have you do.

A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004)

The Moose Hole - A Truly Fortunate Experience

[9/10 · 16 January 2005]

The story for Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events is a practically flawless presentation of some of the most cultivated content, though still stylized enough to be categorized as a family-oriented feature, aimed for the pre-teenage set this side of the Harry Potter fantasy universe. Even with that in mind, that material is still enriching enough to spark a certain amount of constructive debate among its desired audience base. All of this is assured of course given that you are not one of the crazed novel enthusiasts who howl and moan every time a mere sentence is altered from the text. It is always more appropriate that you go into these sorts of films without any prior knowledge of the previously released texts as this sort of thing can only lead to nick-picking, a terrible and annoying habit which ruins the viewing experience for everyone involved – those members of the Harry Potter, and to a lesser extent The Lord of the Rings, sects know exactly what this means.

As was the case with Dr. Seuss' How The Grinch Stole Christmas, there will undoubtedly be critics of Jim Carrey's amplified antics in the role of the villainous Count Olaf, no more so then from the fanatic fan-base of the literary series, clamoring that his interpretation of the character offset his truly monstrous nature and intentions as the novels indicate. Yes, Carrey does give about an amusing quality to Count Olaf, or maybe that is only do to the workings of the young orphans against him that we find so entertaining. In either case, crucial scenes such as the one where he is show slapping Klaus for speaking up against him in front of his acting troupe demonstrates the character's truly malevolent nature which must be despised and scorned rather then mock. This becomes even more evident when children take into account the idea that Count Olaf is attempting to kill his own relatives – no matter how distant – for his own profitable gain. Meryl Streep, an Academy-Award wining performer entirely unfamiliar with the realm of family-oriented productions such as this, takes to the role like a total natural with no question to her magic implored in the role of Aunt Josephine. And what is more is that she does this without having to be as drunk as a skunk as she was at the recent Golden Globes ceremony – Alright, that was not exactly an evaluation of her performance but rather a well deserved jab that has been in quite seclusion for quite some time waiting for the appropriate moment to be let loose. Jude Law, who without question has become the Colin Farrell of 2004 after appearing in what would seem like twenty films this year alone, gives to the narrator of Lemony Snicket a composed, mystifying, and regularly witty voice that could not have been delivered as respectively as he does here.

Overall, though literary zealots may whimper and wail over the very thought of even the tiniest aspect of the franchise changing in this feature film adaptation, what to them may seem like a series of unfortunate events might, in fact, be the first steps of an even greater and more whimsical franchise ahead. One of the most marvelous aspects this film manages to present successfully to its audience is its ability to not only entertain but inform as well, not merely through a monotonous series of long-winded speeches but a variety of operations that, no matter how exaggerated they may be, reflect upon experiences in our own lives. The young children who are anticipated to be A Series of Unfortunate Events' core audience this holiday season are at quite a vulnerable age, standing at what some would consider "the water's edge". Slowly but surely they are beginning to mature into free-thinking and conscious adults and admirable members of society, or as close as they can be depending on the behavior of one's own family. Though it is suppose to be the direct responsibility of the parents to instill in their children lessons to assimilate throughout life, it certainly does not hurt to have popular culture such as films like this expand on their teachings. The most sensational thing pertaining to the characters of this film is that they teach us that even the best of individuals have their own little quirks about them but, despite these seeming strange to us, they do not change the natural good inside them that they have already demonstrated. In fact, they may even make them better individuals. Another lesson too many children in this world learn all too late in this life is that the world is not always a happy and fair place and events do not always work out in the way we would want them to. Those that raise their children with the hippie-dippy view of society, that being that all men and women no matter how evil they may seem have a source of good in them, should be jailed for child neglect. What a horrible and ignorant way to propagate their minds like that! But Lemony Snicket's most decisive lesson taught within the course of this film is that no matter where you are or how dire the situation may be, as long as you are surrounded by friends and family, you are never truly far from your home. Quite simply, this is the best family film this holiday season and will sure to go down as one of top ten family features of the year.

Spanglish (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Spanglish

[4/10 · 18 December 2004]

It's the most wonderful time of the year! True, the Christmas season is upon us but more importantly to the Hollywood left, who could giving a flying-hoot about a Christian based holiday, it is the season of giving and rewarding themselves. That is correct, it is award season! Though the nominations for the Golden Globes have already been handed out, there is still plenty of time for those last-minute additions to the 2004 film schedule to make an impact on the most prestigious award ceremony of the year, the 77th Annual Academy Awards. And who better to vie for the coveted spot on the nominations list then James L. Brooks, the man who creates the romantic comedies the Motion Picture Association can not help but eat up, no matter how gooey and clichéd they may be to some. This has yet been another light-weight year when it comes to award-worthy presentations – it is so hard without Lord of the Rings, is it not – and Spanglish, despite some rather negative buzz early on, may still yet be able to stir up some noise come this January.

The story follows the events of an immigrant woman's life as she and her new daughter adjust to their new surrounds after moving to the United States from Mexico. Flor Moreno, a beautiful native Mexican woman left by her husband to raise her maturing daughter alone, makes the difficult decision to immigrate, illegally of course, to the United States for a better life for her small family. After entering the country, she and her young daughter make the long bus trek from Texas to southern California, moving in with her cousin in a heavily Hispanic ghetto. Concerned about her daughter Cristina's budding femininity, Flor decides to scope out a position as a housekeeper and is hired by John and Deborah Clasky who live in an affluent white neighborhood. John is a rising star in the culinary world and racked with the thought of Time magazine coming to his restaurant to review his work. He fears success, believing that if he receives four stars the only way to go is down and with the increasing attendance at his hot new restaurant that will mean less time spent with the family. Deborah, a former working woman, feels trapped as a stay-at-home mother, constantly battling with John for the good/bad guy parent position when it comes to rearing their children, usually receiving the latter. As cultures, traditions, values, and languages clash between Flor and her newly adopted American family, life changing lessons on marriage, parenting, love, friendship and family are learned on both sides. The story for Spanglish instantly becomes lost in translation, certainly no pun intended toward the vastly superior Academy-Award winning screenplay, lacking what matters to a film above all else – consistency, direction, style and heart. All of these troubling revelations become all the more difficult to swallow when one fathoms this rather dull, forlorn, and acutely humorless presentation is from the mind of James L. Brooks, the man behind such romantic comedy classics as As Good As It Gets and Terms of Endearment. No need to fret though. Even the best of directors in Hollywood have their off days and this seems to be the year for it with M. Night Shyamalan's The Village and Steven Spielberg's The Terminal being prime examples of this theory.

It is revolting to see so many talented performers as there here have their respected gifts wasted like this, among them all Adam Sandler should stand out prominently in anybody's mind. Sandler, hardly a stranger to the dramatic comedy after astounding critics in his high-praised performance in Punch-Drunk Love, comes off as being intensely under-utilized in this film. He works out fabulously in the role and there appears to be quite some chemistry in his conversations with Pez Vega, especially when he opens up to her emotionally expressing what he can not say to his own wife whose perfectionist nature leaves no room to appear weak. Sadly, quantities of these sequences are limited and the audience never receives the full picture on John Clasky. In the end, instead of feeling happy for him, the audience leaves feeling sorry for the fact that the only woman he has ever felt a real connection with – not mere sexual attraction but emotional closeness as well – is leaving his life possibly forever and he is stuck with a woman that after a decade or so of marriage is just beginning to come around appreciating how good of a man he is, if only due to the enforcement of her alcoholic mother. Poor Téa Leoni! Her genuine and engaging performance as the perfectionist stay-at-home mother, Deborah Clasky, is so unfortunately wasted in this film. Deborah is so atrociously neurotic and undignified, even going so far as to border on the line of being flat-out insolent, the audience leaves the film wishing John Clasky would just divorce her and save the rest of the family the trouble of having to deal with her a moment longer. It's fantastic to see that Brooks is able to deliver such an absurd and retched character as Deborah, leaving the audience hating her guts with every compulsive move she makes, but the problem lies in the fact that he strips her of so much that there is no redeeming quality left about her to gain the respect of the viewers, let alone her husband, at the end of the film. And, furthermore, what is Brooks attempting to say with Deborah? What is with Hollywood and their inane belief that every woman who free-willing gives up her job in the workforce to be a stay-at-home mother falls into a deep and secluded depression, thus leading her to dabble into a sexual affair with another man? Paz Vega is positively illuminating as Flor Moreno, catching the audience's eye every time she appears on screen but, as painful as this is to say, that is as far as Brooks' direction, maybe even his script, allows her to be. There is hardly a quality or action about her that marks Flor distinguishable above the rest of the cast of characters outside the fact of being the only one that is rather dull and bland, based solely on actions rather then appearances. It may be the whole language barrier that fails the audience in connecting with her on an emotional level but considering John Clasky is able to somewhere in there, it is hard to believe that that is entirely the problem. This may once again be a direct result of James Brooks' poorly crafted and executed screenplay, which fails in its attempts to grab hold of a singular message and run with it to the end. And, yes, Ian Hyland does receive credit for the role of the Clasky son Georgie despite the clear and overt fact that he never once states more then a few words, beyond the realm of show-tunes with his grandmother, throughout the entire film. Hey, John and Deborah – when you're done dealing with your weight conscious daughter and your own marital complications, remember that you have a son somewhere in that household of yours.

Overall, linguistic complexities being the least of their problems, Spanglish's audience is in desperate need of its own translator in order to decipher amongst the garbled mesh of clichéd cuteness and bland one-liners rattled off as deep philosophical thinking the message the film is attempting to express. The film certainly enjoys hedging its bets early and often, only to lose big-time when all was said and done. Does Brooks truly expect us to believe that such a sophomoric essay theme as 'Who do you admire most?' would appear on the application form for such a prestigious education institution as Princeton? And this is captured in the opening sequence of the film! On top of this, Spanglish's script, or what exists of one, sends confusing and complicated messages to the audience, none of which are ever clearly stated, let alone backed up with sufficient evidence to prove its point. Does this mean that every child who attends a private educational institution will lose his/her independence and identity? Every stay-at-home mother finds herself so entrenched in depression that the only way she can escape is by having a sexual affair with another man? And every illegal Hispanic immigrant who drops out of a private education and remains stranded in the public education sector of the state of California who sends in his/her essay to Princeton University will have it examined intensely for the sake of their own merit and not merely for the unethical method of affirmative action? And what is more insulting is that the actions of the film are excruciatingly bland and static. There is not a moment of real humor in the beginning of the film until about twenty or so minutes into the presentation. From there the jokes are few and far between and are usually aimed at the language barriers of the two illegal Mexican immigrants. There are so few actually gracious recommendations that can be made about this film that to list the meager amount that do exist would stray away from the undeniable fact that Spanglish is yet another tremendous disappointment this year from a respected filmmaker. Also, when escaping from the bottom rung of society in a country such as Mexico, screw the heritage bull-crap and assimilate quickly – everyone will be better off for it.

My Rating: ** out of 5 (Grade: D)

Ocean's Twelve (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Ocean's Twelve

[8/10 · 11 December 2004]

After grossing nearly one-hundred and eighty-five million dollars domestically and well over four-hundred and fifty million dollars world-wide, Warner Brother executives were eager to jump on the bandwagon while the property was still hot and pump out a sequel as quickly, and cheaply, as possible. Steven Soderbergh insisted that the production budget be kept around the same as that of the original film – eight-five million dollars respectively – and asked all his actors, specifically George Clooney, Brad Pitt, and Julia Roberts, to take significant pay cuts from their usual twenty-million dollar-per-picture salary. And with the WB studio in a tight market race, currently tied for second place with The Walt Disney Company, they need a hit more then ever, especially if they want to come close to recovering profits lost on the multi-million dollar disaster, Alexander. Perhaps the executives of the studio could learn a thing or two from these con-artists.

The story picks up some time after the original film ended and takes audiences across such glamorous European locations as Amsterdam, Paris and Rome in another crime-capping adventure. It has been three years since Danny Ocean and the rest of the gang of thieves and con artists broke into the 'impenetrable' vault of Terry Benedict's Las Vegas casino and ripped a cool one-hundred and sixty million dollars right under his nose. After splitting the money amongst the eleven members of the Ocean's team, each went their separate ways, with the exception for Danny and Tess of course, and attempted to lie low and live an easy going life with their newly acquired fortune. Unfortunately for them, a fellow con-artist with a grudge against the group breaks Rule Number One by ratting them out to Terry Benedict, thus causing the ruthless casino owner to pay a visit to each and every one of the team members demanding a return of his one-hundred and ninety-eight million dollars – that's the amount of money they stole plus interest over three years – within two weeks. Considering they are too hot to find suitable work in the United States after their last stunt, they travel to Europe to steal an antique item only to run into complications with their criminal rival, 'The Night Fox', who just happened to be the man who broke Rule Number One. On top of that, the gang has to deal with Isabel Lahiri, an intrepid female Europol agent with extensive links with Rusty Ryan, who is vividly determined to catch them in the act. When it comes to the story treatment for Ocean's Twelve, one must learn not to take these sorts of genres, specifically the caper-comedy, seriously. They are for mere entertainment purposes only and not to be destined, or taken as such, for Oscar-caliber quality or serious thought. On another note, the script is not as original as it may seem. In fact, it was originally designed as John Woo action-flick vehicle but when it came to developing the highly-anticipated sequel to Ocean's Eleven, Warner Brothers decided to rewrite the script to specifically fit with each of the characters of the series. Though some may feel cheated by this piece of trivia, this turns out ten times better then anything John Woo could have slapped together, so look on the bright side of things here.

The complication Ocean's Twelve faces, the exact same predicament the original feature ran into three years ago, is that with so many cast members, specifically ones with marquee names, increases the likelihood of each person receiving limited screen time which inevitably causes complaints of certain characters being underused. Quite surprisingly, the whole Brad Pitt/Catherine Zeta-Jones romance angle worked amazingly well and added yet another intriguing twist to the already complicated storyline. Unfortunately, what does not work out quite as well as it should have was the 'family' element to Catherine Zeta-Jones' Isabel Lahiri, if it can be properly described as such. There is hardly any mention of her family other then in limited moments of the film and the scene near the end where she reunites with her father seemed senselessly tacked onto the end without a second thought as to what it should have meant but was not. Perhaps it is due to all these separate story elements – the romance between Brad Pitt and Catherine Zeta-Jones and the wager with 'The Night Fox' – that George Clooney's Danny Ocean seems quite left out of the picture compared to the last go-around where it was completely and entirely his film. Not that this was a significant problem but this is just yet another demonstration of the sometimes unequal shifting of story involvement amongst the numerous characters of the film series. Without giving too much information away, let us simply say that the way Tess is used in order to help the Ocean's gang pilfer a specific item from an Italian art museum was hilarious. Sure, it does wear a little thin as more time is spent on but, in the end, it works invariably. The only one that can truly be said as being underused in this picture is Andy Garcia reprising his role as the menacing Terry Benedict, the victim of Ocean's Eleven's casino heist from the first film. His appearance in the film, in the beginning and near the end, is really nothing more then a mere cameo, possibly to fulfill the contractual obligation he signed to appear in the sequel with the rest of the cast. This, on the other hand, can not be said of Matt Damon's Linus Caldwell who seems to have had a significant increase in the amount of screen time from the last film, playing a more central role in the story, specifically near the end.

Overall, Ocean's Twelve, in spite of its failure to surpass the magnificence of the original which essentially set the precedent for all modern crime capers to follow, does indeed match it based on pure entertainment value and would certainly be a feature Frank Sinatra and the rest of the crooning Rat Pack would be proud of. All in all, the film itself has very few problems to raise complaint about – A drawback that was apparent with Ocean's Eleven as well was that the first thirty minutes of the picture start off quite laboriously and nothing exactly interesting happens or no real action occurs. Granted, this is to set up the situation and the characters but considering this is a sequel and most audience members are aware of the original film, this should not have taken as long as it did. And was it absolutely necessary to bring back every single member of the original Ocean's Eleven cast for this film? Bernie Mac, Don Cheadle, and Carl Reiner barely appear at all – you could count on both hands, possibly only one, the number of lines each one of them has in this feature – and should have been written out entirely based on what they contribute – nothing. Middling complaints aside, Steven Soderbergh's skillful editing, mixing and cinematography style works wonders, except for the occasional still-picture shots, near the beginning and the end of the film, but are not so off-putting as to be entirely noticeable or discomforting. Though not holding quite the level of prestige as some notable sequels that have managed to surpass the expectations set upon by the first film might have, the series still able to maintain its suave composure, intricate white, and stylized flare to make more then worthwhile viewing over the holiday season this year.

My Rating: **** out of 5 (Grade: B+)

Alexander (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Alexander

[4/10 · 25 November 2004]

Hollywood right now seems to be in the middle of a great revitalization of the swords and sandals genre once a prominent staple of the golden age of cinema with such classics as Ben-Hur and Spartacus. After being caught nearly off-guard by the Best Picture win of Gladiator at the Academy Awards in early 2001, major movie studios put the fast track on projects they once thought would never be made, including a large budgeted adaptation of the fall of Troy. Continuing with the subject matter of ancient historical figures and events, controversial filmmaker Oliver Stone, whose recent gushing documentary on communist dictator Fidel Castro received mixed reviews among critics and the public, has put his ten year plan of bringing the life of Alexander the Great to the big screen into action. He has had a lot to compete with in recent years including three others Alexander based projects developed just in the last few years – two of the most notable ones being the Martin Scorsese directed feature starring Leonardo DiCaprio and the ten episode HBO miniseries produced by Mel Gibson called Fire from Heaven. Leave it to Stone to continue making headlines, this time with rumors of the film's unconventional portrayal of the most influential figure in the history of Western Civilization – as a homosexual.

The story follows the eight years of constant warfare led against most of the known world by one man that would alter the course of Western Civilization forever. Born in July 356 B.C. (his exact date of birth has never been precisely determined) as son to Philip II of Macedonia and Olympias, Alexander was destined for greatness. After the assassination of his father, a plot many historians believe was conspired by Olympias, Alexander forced rebel barbarians in northern Macedonia out of the country and brought Greek city states such as Thebes and Athens under his control. Seeking revenge for the invasion of Greece in 490 B.C. by the Persian Empire, Alexander then set his sights east battling King Darius of Persia for control of the vast territory. After chasing King Darius for several years, Alexander arrived in Persepolis and discovered the dead body of the conquered ruler, apparently betrayed by his own men. Alexander enforced a blending of the Greek and Persian cultures instead of stripping each conquered nation of its cultural identity, which had been a staple of military conquest at the time of his invasion. This led to the spreading and vast acceptance of Greek culture throughout most of the known world, the most supreme and lasting influence Alexander's conquests had on the world. By the relatively young age of twenty-seven, Alexander the Great had conquered about ninety percent of the known world. Unsatisfied with simply conquering the Persian Empire, Alexander continued east into India but turned back home after one of the bloodiest battles his military campaign had yet encountered in their eight years of fighting. Despite being described as god-like figure, some say even a god himself, Alexander the Great met an inglorious demise, dying of a fever on June 10th, 323 B.C. The story for Alexander should be a shining example for future generations of intrepid writers on how not to pen an epic historical drama. In all honesty, Pearl Harbor's extravagantly clichéd storyline was far more engaging then this overblown snooze-fest. Granted this is an adaptation of some rather heavy-handed events in history that altered the course of civilization as we know it but the tone of the entire feature, including its less then important subject matters, can only be describe as being too austere to be taken with a straight face. The linguistic tone of the film's dialogue is so overblown as to be inadvertently laughable, a screen writing debacle that was obvious in another epic disaster earlier this year, Troy.

What is with Hollywood when it comes to making films about either the Greeks or the Romans? Does every actor and actress in these grand-scale epics have to have a British or Irish accent to them? Even Val Kilmer, who clearly isn't a native of the British Isles, has a slight accent to his voice! Other then that minor quip, Kilmer gives an engaging performance of a deeply trouble ruler. Philip II of Macedonia, the father of Alexander, is presented in the film as a disfigured drunkard and womanizer. Though he certainly overly relished in wine and women, there is no evidence to suggest that he was disfigured in anyway. If this is suppose to be a metaphorical device for interpreting his tortured soul or what have you then it should have been better explained through the language of the script as it is blatantly unclear to audiences. Olympias, Alexander's barbarian mother, played by Angelina Jolie, had a profound influence on the young ruler's life and should have had more screen time or more important sequences then what is presented in the film but this isn't of tremendous concern in the end. So little is given on the backgrounds of either one of Alexander's parents that the audience is often forced to interpret certain aspects of the film's story a certain way without any real knowledge as to whether it is correct or not. This isn't so big of a problem but it would have served the flow of the film better had Stone cleared those up a bit more then he did. Stone only alludes to a certain aspect of Alexander's strange life, this time his Oedipal attraction to his mother which greatly affected his sexual preferences throughout the rest of his life. Colin Farrell, despite his Irish accent intact throughout the film, really showcases his acting chops in this film, if anyone hadn't noticed already in Tigerland, Phone Booth, or Minority Report. Sporadically throughout the film director Oliver Stone alludes to Alexander the Great's supposedly homosexual preferences especially with his best friend Hephaestion, with whom it is well-documented the ruler had a close relationship with whatever that may be interpreted as. Unfortunately, despite the general acceptance by historians that Alexander had a preference for men, there has been no recorded evidence available to this point to suggest that the Macedonian ruler ever had a sexual encounter with any males of that time period, let alone his best friend Hephaestion. If those were more accepting times as Stone claims then there would be indication of so-called affairs but to date there has been no such discovery in any documents written about him. Whether you agree with the morality of homosexuality or not, one has to admit that Stone's faint allusions to Alexander's sexuality are cowardly at best, offensive at worst. Instead of making simple-minded, and blatantly obvious, allusions to Alexander's sexual antics why don't you just come out and admit to what the man was and not cower to the whim of certain fractions of the general public who may find the idea offensive. This is the simple case of put up or shut up and Stone seems to want to have it both ways, which doesn't bode well with anyone.

Overall, Alexander stays true to form of the romanticized image Hollywood has built up about the stylized epic dramas of Oliver Stone, that being that the film is excessively long, tedious, humorless, boundless in the realms of prodigal violence and loose sexual escapades, and its even looser interpretation of the facts of history. In essence, the basic make up of the modern Oscar nominee. Oliver Stone exemplifies in this film a severe problem that has succumbed a fellow socialist filmmaker, Michael Moore, specifically he likes to pick and choose through the piles of facts and theories those that are consistent with his particular line of thinking in order to force onto audiences his propagandist agenda. Yes, Stone did immortalize Alexander the Great as a child, he has stated this numerous times before, and nobody can really blame him for making a film that looks more favorably on his hero then actual history would suggest, but that does not give him a legitimate excuse to alter historical truths to his liking or give a ring of truth to inane conspiracy theories as he did with JFK. Can it be that hard to believe that Alexander, despite his spectacular accomplishments, was actually human and died of the flu or malaria? There is no evidence throughout known records to suggest that a conspiracy was led against Alexander, despite him being paranoid for a good portion of his life with the thought of such a thing, and poison actually being the cause of his death. Oliver Stone can believe whatever he wants but without any crucial evidence to back up his opinions and thoughts, he shouldn't be subjecting his audiences to hearsay and whatnot when that is far from the truth. Regardless of the fact that the film is about one of the greatest military strategists in history who had conquered most of the known world by the age of twenty-seven through countless bloody battles, only two engagements are ever focused on throughout the three-hour marathon, and even the facts of their interpretation have been arranged to the liking of the director, not historical relevance. Though several events depicted in the film are legitimate with historical records of that time, too often they are moved around to better suit the 'vision' of the filmmaker giving an extreme disadvantage to audiences in their understanding of the most influential figure in Western Civilization. Yes, there are certain moments in history that may not be as interesting as if someone jazzed it up a bit but this is supposed to be better? At least in school you had the school bell to look forward to liberating you from utter boredom, if you were that kind of person. Even if you were one of those individuals who got a kick out of reading up on history, you'll be wishing for that bell halfway through this deathtrap.

The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of The Spongebob Squarepants Movie

[5/10 · 23 November 2004]

You would think practically cornering the children's market in the last few years would make Nickelodeon, owned by Viacom, happy enough but apparently sustained competition from The Disney Channel and Cartoon Network may have forced, at least in recent years, more into conquering the movie industry as well. The venture didn't start off so hot – their first two films, Harriet the Spy and Good Burger failed to gross more then a combined $55 million domestically but The Rugrats Movie and its $100 million plus run at the box office fixed all that. Ever since then its been a rocky-road for the production company, with some good – Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius and Rugrats in Paris – but plenty of bad – Hey Arnold! The Movie and Rugrats Gone Wild – as well. It was given that with the latest Nicktoon craze, Spongebob Squarepants, would come a movie adaptation of the cartoon series but with the tremendous drop-off for the Rugrats franchise, if one even wants to go as far as to call it that, the pressure will really be on the series' creators to produce a box office behemoth to match the anticipated hype.

The story follows the misadventures of an immature young sponge as he goes out on a great quest to prove his manhood. The day in the sun has finally arrived for Spongebob Squarepants, the absorbent and yellow and porous sponge of Bikini Bottom, who works as a fry-cook for the Krusty Krab fast-food restaurant. With the opening of the Krusty Krab 2 right next door to the original fast-food location, Spongebob is easily expected to receive the position of manager having received the Employee of the Month Award three years running. Much to his surprise, Mr. Krabs gives the promotion to Squidward, the dull and tone-deaf cashier of the Krusty Krab. Questioned by a distraught Spongebob, Mr. Krabs replies that he simply couldn't give a position of such responsibility to a kid. Next door, Plankton, rival to Mr. Krabs and owner of the Chum Bucket, the failed competitor of the Krusty Krab, has enacted his devious plan to steal King Neptune's crown, frame Mr. Krabs and pilfer the secret recipe of the Krabby Patty in order to rule the undersea world. Even after losing out on the promotion of his dreams, Spongebob makes a deal with King Neptune to venture out to Shell City and retrieve the crown within six days or else Mr. Krabs will be executed. Spongebob, along with his best friend Patrick Star, must race against time, as well as their childish antics – singing the Goofy Goober song, having a bubble party, etc. – in order to retrieve the crown and save Bikini Bottom from the tiny grasp of the evil Plankton. The story for The Spongebob Squarepants Movie should not be of concern considering its primary audience will be gullible little children who will sit through anything as long as it is either loud or makes a crude farting noise, in certain cases both apply. And when it comes to older adults dragged into watching this disaster in action, don't waste the time of day contemplating the film's plot, because there is none, at least nothing you or anyone with a shred of common sense would give a hoot about. Seriously, the creators of the television series suspended work on regular episodes for this? One could have only hopes that they were simply kidding around when they did that but, alas, what a waste!

And here's a rarity – an animated feature where cameo voice-over by famous Hollywood actors and actresses mean diddly-squat, as the situation should be. Say what you want about her brilliant performances in Lost in Translation and Girl with the Pearl Earring but Scarlett Johansson's voice-over feels way over in this film and doesn't work here at all. In fact, why even bring in a star such as herself in at all? Any normal teenage girl's voice would have served just as well, possibly even better, then Johansson, and probably would have freed up some cash as well. The character itself is a problem as well. Often, Mindy comes off as this whiny 'peace and love' hippie – granted the king is executing people for insane reasons but her explanations are way too dragged out to be taken too seriously. In true life, not everyone is as good or 'compassionate' as she would want everyone to believe, but perhaps that's digging too much into the subject matter. Quiet, or else you'll miss Alec Baldwin's completely unnecessary cameo as Dennis, the aquatic hit-man sent by Plankton to whack Patrick and Spongebob on their way to retrieving Neptune's crown. The character is only seen briefly, and heard even less then that. He honestly doesn't contribute anything to moving the story along and seems forced into certain aspects of the storyline. And let's not even get into the positively confusing, and, at moments, down right disturbing finale sequence on the back of David Hasselhoff – as has been said before, you don't want to know. And Jeffrey Tambor as the voice of King Neptune, ruler of the seas, works practically well except for the fact that the filmmakers rely too heavily on the character's 'one-trick pony' gag, specially his baldness, to get laughs. Yes, he's bald, we get it! The first time may have been cute but as they repetitively use the gag over and over again, it gets real old real fast.

Overall, it is an absolute travesty to think that the savior of traditional animation, a genre that just a few short months ago was on the brink of extinction, is none other then the idiotic slop known as The Spongebob Squarepants Movie – Walt Disney must be banging his head hard on a wall up in heaven right about now. The Spongebob Squarepants Movie should be labeled an abomination and a disgrace by anyone that would consider themselves a true fan of the cartoon series, let alone a sense of decency and respect to animation in general. The material becomes so asinine at times that it literally borders on the psychotic, specifically, someone beyond the stupor age of seven would have to mentally ill to find this 'nautical nonsense' the least bit entertaining. True, the movie does not give off the feeling as if the creators slapped together three thirty-minute episodes, as has been the common trend amongst the cartoon series making the leap to the big screen. If that were the case then the film would have been somewhat humorous – that is nowhere near the situation audiences are faced with this living tragedy. As would be expected, the cries from the hardcore Spongebob fan base – honestly, do these people ever have lives of their own – will be, 'But it's only a family film, so what harm could it do to give it at least a decent passing grade' – and that's what you call a logical excuse? Come back when you've advanced beyond the first day class syllabus for Introduction to Philosophy at any college campus. What if every critic gave a passing grade to every kiddy flick that came along simply for the fact that few, if any, reviews have a long term impact on the feature's primary audience, let alone how studios produce, or in some minds, manufacture, these features? Then how would extraordinary art studios such as Pixar, and to a lesser extent PDI, stand out as the true elitists of the animation genre? With such incognizant comments such as that there's no wonder why so much slop is congesting movie theaters today, especially in the area of family entertainment, if it can technically be called that.

My Rating: ** ½ out of 5 (Grade: D+)

The Incredibles (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of The Incredibles

[9/10 · 6 November 2004]

Superman, Daredevil, The X-Men, and The Amazing Spider-Man – classic comic-book superheroes that have captured the imaginations of not only young children, but those young at heart as well across the world. Though they may have started off small in the two-dimensional world of the nickel comic-books, their popularity began to grow and expanded into spectacular franchises that were developed in the areas of television series, movies, and merchandising. Some have done better then others – as of this writing, Ben Affleck is still not speaking to Tobey Maguire – but no matter what the success, there will always be an audience for these fascinating figures. What is the cause for our fascinating fixation with these individuals and their seamlessly conventional plot-lines that are all basically a regurgitation of the vintage hero myth? In a way, we understand what the hero is going through and connect with the overwhelming obstacles that block his/her path to achieving his/her goal, what ever that may be. These amazing individuals are experiencing the same events we have experiences in our own lives, on an obviously different plane of course, and as they go about achieving their objectives, we look to them for inspiration in do so in our own time and place in the world.

The story centers on a family of superheroes that try and go about their daily, normal lives as civil citizens while at the same time concealing their extraordinary powers in an effort to blend in with the regular populous. Bob Parr, a faithful husband and father of three children, drives every day to work for a sleazy insurance company that cares more about their stockholders then their own clients, only to drag himself back home and repeat the process for the rest of the year. While at work, Bob dreams of the glory days when he was the world's greatest superhero, known exclusively as Mr. Incredible! That all came to an end when he was sued by a man he saved who apparently didn't want to be saved (he leaped off the top of a building in an attempt to commit suicide). This, of course, set off a string of frivolous lawsuits against all superheroes, costing the American government, as well as the taxpayers of this country, millions of dollars. The league of superheroes were eventually forced into retirement and relocated to new locations in order to live out a life of solidarity and blend in with the rest of normal society, never to use their powers for the collective good of humanity again. One night, Bob discovers an envelope in his briefcase that holds a communication device asking him to come to a secret island and take care of a rampaging robot located there that has been terrorizing a scientific organization established on the tropic location. When it turns out to be a trap, the rest of his family, including his wife, daughter and son, must summon up their abilities in order to rescue the patriarch of the Incredible family and save the day before the world is doomed. The story for The Incredibles is, for the most part, unfortunately clichéd and excruciatingly predictable, but, then again, isn't every film about superheroes that way? How so? Within the first five minutes of the film, you've discovered who the villain is and determined in which direction the storyline is heading toward, which, in essence, eliminates any real surprises that would occur within the course of the two hour feature. Don't let this matter bother you too much though. The more appropriate question that should be asked about this film is whether or not The Incredibles still manages to be overly entertaining and the answer would unanimously be yes. See, that's the amazing thing about Pixar – they can take a cookie-cutter storyline, throw in a few dozen lovable characters, mind-blowing visual work, and pure-concentrated emotions, unveiling an absolutely genuine and memorable experience at the movies.

Once again, as was the case with Finding Nemo, Pixar decides to live on the edge and create an animated film featuring few famous voices – actually, the only truly recognizable name would be Samuel L. Jackson – but if it worked before, it is certainly worth a second attempt at least. Craig T. Nelson, best known as for his television series Coach on ABC, fits perfectly into the voice-role of the leading man, Mr. Incredible. Nelson truly puts effort into voicing the emotions of Bob Parr – from being frustrated at work, to uninterested and down in the dumps back at home, to emotionally distraught at the possible loss of his family. This is another prominent area where Pixar excels beyond other studios, namely in choosing figures who are perfect for the leading role, not just because their name would look good on the marquee, but that they effectively move the film forward consistently and thoroughly with their emotional performance. Samuel L. Jackson, who voices the ultra-cool Frozone, is unfortunately underused in the film. Granted, he isn't a central character – he's more of a supporting role, the buddy figure to the Mr. Incredible figure, but still essential none-the-less – but he could have been given more scenes then the ones you can just as easily see located in the film's trailers. An absolute waste of perfectly good talent it would seem. John Ratzenberger, known exclusively as the lucky charm of the Pixar Animation Studios, is highly underused in this feature. This isn't asking for him to be given a leading part or anything of that sort, but let's not wait to use him for the very end, and if you do, not just a mere few words. This was disappointing to say the least but nothing to go ballistic about. And last, but not least, Edna Mode, voiced brilliantly by writer/director Brad Bird – is there anything this man can't do – is the most original and effective creation presented in the film. Viewed as the fashion feminista to the superhero stars, she may not be a central character based on the actions on screen, but audiences won't care as she manages to deliver the most laughs out of anyone else.

Overall, The Incredibles, despite lacking the tenacious punch of such previous Pixar success stories as Finding Nemo and Monsters Inc., still manages to engage viewers and connect with them in such a spectacular and seamless way that it makes them - well, incredible. One of the film's main problems is its serious lack of humor, at least early on, but even when it is able to get revved up by the second half, the laughs aren't as consistent and thorough as they were in either Monsters Inc. or even Finding Nemo. Don't take this the wrong way, there are plenty of amusing sequences to be found throughout the feature – this bears repeating, Edna Mode practically steals every scene she's in – they're just fewer and farther between then has been seen in previous Pixar efforts. In reality though, this helps a lot as it allows the story to be set up properly, as predictable as it may be on the surface, and the emotional attachment to the characters to set in with audience members, so that when things really do begin to pick-up, we are in eager anticipation to witness what comes next. Another problem the feature has to deal with, besides the 'been there, done that' atmosphere it invokes, is the fact that the actions of the film begin to feel like a broken record. It just begins to feel like a continuous loop of sequences – someone's in danger then they get out of it then they're in danger again, etc. As Mr. Incredible said once, 'I feel like the maid – can we try and keep this clean for ten minutes', how about we try something and then move on with a vastly different story idea instead of the same one over and over again. These are relatively minor quips though and shouldn't be taken for too much face value when evaluating this film with your family. The talented artists and animators at Pixar Animation Studios have truly out done themselves this around. And to think, you thought you've seen everything with Finding Nemo! There are moments where you'll believe Syndrome's Island is an actual island – the palm trees, the ocean water, and the daunting aerial view of the location are astonishing. And the waterfalls – truly breathtaking. There are so few words to accurately describe the feeling you get watching the visuals of this film – this after drooling over the latest Star Wars prequel teaser trailer moments before. And finally, in all honesty, The Incredibles has to be Disney and Pixar's most adult-skewed animated feature to date – not only does it showcase an array of dramatic explosions and presumed deaths, the touchy subjects of adultery and suicide are even touched upon in the two hour film. Even though a lot of this material will probably go over the head of youngsters, be well aware that questions may pop into their inquisitive minds and may be asked of you later on, so be prepared to answer them should they come up. Bottom-line, The Incredibles may not be Pixar's most superior film to date – Finding Nemo had more adorable characters and Monsters Inc. had far more laughs – but its an entertaining family film that gives every single member of the family something to talk about for weeks, or even months, to come going into the busy holiday season.

My Rating: **** ½ out of 5 (Grade: A-)

Ray (I) (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Ray

[8/10 · 30 October 2004]

It was tremendously heart-breaking for America to have lost not only one, but two cultural icons that had had profound impacts on the people of our nation – Ronald Reagan and Ray Charles – die within a week of each other. Unfortunately, Ray Charles' sudden passing, which occurred on June 10th, was slightly over-shadowed by the funeral processions of the late-president, but he was hardly forgotten, nor will he ever be thanks to the landmark impact he left, not only on his own, but on the current generation of artists as well. There are certainly substantial arguments over the current direction that many believe the music industry is heading toward at this moment in time but what can be said, together, is that Ray Charles will be forever remembered for leaving an influential mark on the music industry and broke barriers in order for the current generation of supposedly 'musically inclined' teen-poppers to express their own voice in the world today.

The story charts the life and career of the pioneering musical sensation Ray Charles, who passed away this past summer at the age of seventy-four after primary production had been completed on the biography. Born in a poor black neighborhood of Albany, Georgia in 1930, Ray Charles Robinson never imagined the extraordinary life he would lead, but it wouldn't come easy for either him or his family and not without heavy costs in return. After the accidental death of his younger brother, Ray began to go blind starting at the age of seven and his mother, a fiercely independent and strong black woman, helped him develop his other abilities in order to better adapt to his changing environment. Ray's true gift lied with his ability to take ordinary gospel and jazz music and turn it into something spectacular, as was demonstrated by the unprecedented number of his hits he obtained in an astounding number of genres, practically unthinkable for a musician in his day. Despite marrying a beautiful former singer and having two children as well as all the wealth and fame he could have ever imagined, Ray Charles for years battled with his inner demons, including his excessive womanizing while on the road and his growing heroin addiction, as well as the psychotic side effects that haunted him for years and nearly ended the long standing career he had fought so hard for. The story for Ray should be commemorated for doing what so few bio-pictures have actually done, which is to tell the whole story, including the good times, the bad, and the down-right ugly, and unfortunately the latter may be the reason the feature's rating gets knocked down a few notches in the end. It's important that Ray Charles' incessant heroin addiction and womanizing are the primary focus of the film, as they were the demons that consumed a large portion of his life and career, but after about two hours it becomes a little depressing. This is hardly a call-to-arms for the 'hippie-dippy' view of Mr. Charles' life story but it would have been nice had some time been set aside to look at the events of his life ranging from the mid-1970s to the time of his death in the summer of 2004.

As is so often the case with biographical features, don't be expecting a star-studded cast – the primary focus is, and always should be, the story's main component and nothing should distract from that, which remains true for this one as well. Let's end the discussion here and now. The votes have already been tallied up – Forget those damn recounts, honestly if people don't know how to properly fill out an election ballot in this day and age then they deserve what-ever they get – The winner for Best Actor at this year's Academy Awards will be Jamie Foxx. To be true, Foxx was cheated out of a golden-statuette for his role in the critically-acclaimed comedy Booty Call but with this one practically in the bag, all is forgiven to be sure. Seriously, Jamie Foxx gives the performance of a life-time as the legendary Ray Charles and, considering he spent numerous hours with the man himself prior to his death, nothing he does in the film seems off-key or out of place. This is one of those rare occasions in the history of cinema where witnessing a film is called for principally for the sake of one actor's astonishing performance and Foxx's take on the late-Ray Charles is it. One can picture Kerry Washington's Della Bea Robinson, the wife of Ray Charles, in comparison to Jacqueline Kennedy, another spouse of a famous figure of American culture whose 'dabbling' in the areas of drugs and women severely affected life back home. She works well with the limited screen time she's given but one has to remember that the primary focus should be on Ray specifically, so it was expected that less time would be spent on the supporting characters. And Sharon Warren, who is an apparent newcomer to the Hollywood scene according to IMDb, does an incredible job with the role of Ray's fiercely independent mother, Aretha Robinson, and reflects perfectly a woman struggling to go through life in a world she is well aware is far from fair, having her youngest son unexpectedly taken away from her and raising a blind child alone in a poor southern neighborhood. She quickly adapts her experience in life and embeds them in the young Ray in order to prevent others from treating him merely as a cripple. Unfortunately what Ray forgets along the way is that it isn't others he should be concerned about treating him as anything other then a blind-black man, it should be himself as well.

Overall, Ray, in the same captivating way as the inspirational artist on which it is based, breaks away from the conventional norms, too often tied down by an over-burdening sense of political correctness, and drastically alters the way we look at the biography genre. As instrumental as the feature may be, it does have its fair share of problems that hinder it enough to prevent a spectacular rating from being given to it. First off, an annoying aspect of the feature was Hackford's constant use of flashbacks to Ray's early childhood in Albany, Georgia during the middle of several scenes throughout the movie. It would have been better had Hackford played the story of Ray Charles straight-up instead of having to resort to using ridiculous, and repeatedly awkward, flashbacks that frequently distract the audience from the current conflicts as hand. With a running time of slightly over two hours and thirty minutes, director Taylor Hackford seems to be biting off more then he can chew and gives the audience the feeling as though he is cramming too much into one film. The flow of the film may have been better had he given the thought of chopping a few unnecessary sequences in order to shorten it up a bit. And finally, the less then spectacular finale to the musical biography leaves something desperately to be desired. Giving benefit to the doubt due to the fact that Ray Charles died shortly after primary shooting had been completed on the film, the filmmakers may have been confused as to how to properly end the feature now that he had passed away. It doesn't give them a total free-pass for ending it as flatly as they did but it is, at the very least, understandable. There are, ultimately, two distinct factors that should convince you to see this film – its rocking soundtrack and the astonishing performance of comedian Jamie Foxx. The soundtrack, though, should be disqualified since anyone can just as easily purchase it either on a compact disc or download it offline (a free version was available on AOL Music at the time of this publishing) but Foxx's breakthrough performance is unlike anything seen in years and should be seen for yourself to be thoroughly convinced. Despite some minor squabbles with particular methods used by the filmmakers, it is to be sure that Ray Charles is looking down on this film at this moment and giving it, as well as the talented cast and crew who worked diligently to make this as truthful and entertaining as possible, his blessing.

My Rating: **** out of 5 (Grade: B+)

Shark Tale (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Shark Tale

[6/10 · 4 October 2004]

Undoubtedly one of the most famous, and most entertaining (depending on who you ask), rivalries in Hollywood would have to belong to the ongoing conflict between the Walt Disney Company and Dreamworks SKG. After Jeffrey Katzenberg left Disney in 1994 to form his own movie studio with hot-shot director Steven Spielberg, the two studios have butted heads on more then a few occasions and look to continue to do so in the future. This rivalry has gotten so bad that one or the other have accused the other of ripping off their ideas in order to profit from their success. In 1998, two animated films featuring insects opened up in theaters – PDI's Antz in October followed by Pixar's A Bug's Life less then a month later. Conveniently Dreamsworks' eventual Oscar winning animated film Shrek, featuring a monster for a lead, opened just six months prior to the release of Disney's Monsters Inc. which, obviously, focused on the world of monsters.And if this obvious trend of copy-catting isn't apparent by now then perhaps this latest match-up will. Following the smashing success of Disney/Pixar's Finding Nemo which netted $340 million domestically alone, Dreamsworks, attempting to one-up Disney before the release of their latest venture with Pixar The Incredibles, hopes Shark Tale will raise their future IPOs to sky-high levels.

The story centers on a 'small fish in a big pond', also known as the ocean, who lies to become a big shot but finds out that holding up the lie was a lot harder then he originally thought. Oscar has huge aspirations for himself but little effort to back it up with. Most of the time he spends coming up with crazy 'get rich quick' schemes, for example – bottled water, and trying to persuade his boss to give him the money to enact on those plans. Unfortunately, those plans, as would be expected, never pay off and Oscar finds himself five-thousand clams in debt with his boss, who is pressuring him for the money thanks to his partnership with Don Lino, the mafia shark of the ocean. When Oscar can't pay his boss, he's tied up and dumped into the middle of a training ground for sharks, with Frankie, the oldest son of Don Lino, heading straight for him. Just as Oscar seems to be done it, an anchor mysterious falls onto Frankie's head and kills him. Since no one is around when the event occurs, Oscar makes up the story that he beat up Frankie in a fight and dubs himself 'The Sharkslayer'. This outrageous event brings Oscar a wide range of fame and fortune but when the Don discovers who he is, a bounty has been placed on his head. Oscar can't see what the fuss is all about over one teeny-tiny little white lie. The story for Shark Tale is a problem within itself, specifically there's very little of it present and any that does exist is all too generic and predictable to be called the least bit interesting, even by preschool standards. The film's entire premise and purpose is based on its trivial references to popular culture. This means that whenever there is a drought of references then the story suffers severely and slowly begins to drag. Even when references are made (for example, Corral-Cola … big laugh everyone) they aren't gut-busters, let alone thought provoking, which is the direct opposite of Pixar's line of humor.

As with any Dreamworks animated venture, whether it be traditional, which has virtually gone the way of the dinosaur not just with this studio, or computer-generated, the studio devotes more time on stock-piling A-list voice-over talent rather then a more prominent issue, specifically the story, and Shark Tale is no exception to the rule. Will Smith, the former Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, voices the fast-talking fish-out of water … well, umm, fish named Oscar. If you find Smith's slick spiel and – then you'll be loathing the hour and a half of this film. There was so much promise as his fabulous performances in Men In Black and Independence Day but now it seems as though Wild, Wild West woke us up to the reality that, like the film, his choice of film projects stinks on ice. And here's a question for the older audience members, aka the parents purposely dragged to this feature by their all-too cute children, does Will Smith's Oscar not draw eerie similarities to the Incredible Mr. Limpet? Scary, huh? The problem with the film's aquatic cast of characters is not exactly their material, though that's separate problem itself, but rather it is the performers themselves. The real issue is that we've all seen, or heard, these actors and actresses play out these exact same characters in an obviously different environment. For example, Robert DeNiro as a mafia boss – Who didn't see that one coming? Granted it might have been slightly more entertaining had the filmmakers stuck with their original choice, that being James Gandolfini, but not by much. The same goes for Smith as the fast-talking and wise-cracking hero, Jolie as the sexy seductress, and Black as the dim-witted, yet lovable, sidekick.

Overall, whether Shark Tale is a cheap attempt to cash in on the success of the underwater family film Finding Nemo or a lame attempt at pop culture humor, in either case it just simply doesn't work. After marveling audiences this past summer with the vastly superior Shrek 2, both Dreamworks and PDI demonstrate that someone seriously dropped the beach-ball on this one, perhaps while executives at the top were distracted counting the stockpiles of money the highly anticipated sequel brought it. It's a hard job but someone, beside the accountant, has to do it.First off, there doesn't seem to be a story with this film at all except for a striking similarity to the Brave Little Tailor, but other then that, it was basically free reign for the animators to do what they wanted. And secondly, the differences between Pixar and PDI are prominent when it comes to pop culture references. With Pixar, they concentrate primarily on the film's story and, whenever they have the opportunity to, they insert a reference to a movie or a celebrity or something like that – they never force the story into a direction for the sole purpose of a joke or base an entire film on a running-gag concept, as this film does. Shark Tale is not by any stretch of the imagination a horrible film, parts are even quite charming, but, not to give the filmmakers too much credit, does lack the originality and spunk that would deem it an enjoyable film.

My Rating: *** out of 5 (Grade: C-)

Ladder 49 (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Ladder 49

[9/10 · 2 October 2004]

Where were you on September 11th, 2001? A little over three years ago, the world stood still as people from across the world witnessed one of the bloodiest and most horrific attacks on American soil by a foreign power. Images of the airplanes slamming into the World Trade Center towers, survivors trapped inside jumping to the ground below, flames rising from the wreckage of the Pentagon, and brave police and fire department workers searching the piles of debris for the remnants of their fallen comrades are ones that will forever be engraved in the minds of the courageous men and women of this beautiful country. And as the nation enters into the public debate of who is the better man to lead the United States in this tumultuous time in our history, one has to question whether the left side of the political spectrum has chosen to blot out the memories of this defining moment of our lives in order to conjure up a false September 10th mentality for political advantage or, to the more unlikely affect, to demonstrate the extremely short memories maintain. Whatever the case, we, as a nation, can not believe the foolish rantings of 'disingenuous filmmakers' and their propaganda and simply ignore the memories of those that made the ultimate sacrifice – and further more to those that continue to lay their lives on the line for our protection.

The story for Ladder 49 centers on the events in the life of a firefighter who finds himself trapped in a horrific blaze struggling to escape and return to his family. Jack Morrison, just one of several dedicate firefighters of Ladder 49, one of Maryland's most prestigious and courageous firehouses, has spent the last ten years risking his life in order to save others. Though he has much to be grateful for – a loving wife, two beautiful children, and a dedicated group of co-workers and friends – Jack can't put off the feeling that he may be taking too much of a chance with his line of work. When he first started off at the firehouse, training as a rookie, he couldn't wait to get the call and spring into action putting out blazes and feel that adrenaline pumping. Then after meeting his future wife, Linda, and getting married, he begins to slowly rethink his line of work after a series of tragic circumstances. During what seems like another normal fire, Jack has to coup with the loss of his best friend, and the brother of one of another firefighter, eventually taking on his fallen comrades duties as a Truckee, a far more dangerous job then working the fire hoses. After the birth of his two children, another comrade of Jack's has his face horrifically damaged in a split-second accident. He finds himself so emotionally drained by the event that he can barely bring himself to visit his injured comrade, let alone bring his wife along and having her worry further about him. Jack then begins to question himself over whether he still feels the same way about his job as he did nearly ten years ago or not and if he should taken the position of captain's aide that has been offered to him. When he decides to continue working as a firefighter and saving the lives of those that truly need him, he finds himself trapped in a tremendous blaze that could very well bring his life to a sudden halt. The story for Ladder 49 is simply nothing short of astounding. There are just so few words to accurately describe the vivid emotions presented through this film's brilliantly crafted script. The image of Jack Morrison lying on the ground surrounded by flames and debris immediately following his rapid freefall descent down several floors of the burning building conjured up some of the most fervent memories of the aftermath of September 11th – an effect the filmmakers definitively wanted crossing the minds of the audience. In order to fully realize the movie's heart-warming and inspiration message, one must see the film for themselves.

Once again here is a clear demonstration that you don't need a tremendous amount of A-list talent, let alone a still not world renowned leading man, to create a truly emotionally loaded feature film to life. Joaquin Phoenix, who appeared earlier this year in the surprisingly disappointing The Village, without question immortalizes himself as a future leading man with his performance in this film. Though he had appeared in both Gladiator and Signs, two critically praised and publicly well-received blockbusters, Phoenix was known more as a co-star and failed to be seen in the form of a famous leading man up to this point. The entire performance of the film rests on Phoenix's shoulders, as the storyline focuses solely on the events in his characters life, and he never once faults in his emotionally dedicated role. John Travolta, whose career seems to have hit a bit of a slump as of late, returns in fantastic form with his role as Chief Kennedy, the captain of Ladder 49, who trains and watches over Phoenix's character over his ten year career. Though the film's primary focus is on Jack Morrison, the balanced mentor-protégée relationship demonstrated through the film's nearly two hour time span offers. And, in all respects, Travolta is the man who holds the firehouse together – he brings them together when they're fighting, comforts them when are at a loss, and lifts them up when they need it most – it may not be the most original character in the book but, hey, why mess with success? The only disappointing aspect of the film when concentrating on the area of casting was the lack of originality when it came to each individual background character but this can easily be overlooked once you realize that Phoenix's performance is the only one that is suppose to have resounding effects.

Overall, Ladder 49 successfully draws Americans back to the emotionally draining days of three years ago when we saw the most courageous and dedicated individuals amongst us risk their lives in the pursuit of fulfilling their civic duty knowing full well that many of them weren't coming back. Though the issue of September 11th, and more specifically the deaths of the three-hundred and forty-three firefighters that were lost on that horrific day, is not dealt with specifically in this film, Ladder 49 does achieve its goal of bringing public awareness to the rigorous careers of those that put their lives on the line everyday to ensure our safety and by that creates renewed aspiration for its audience. There are those that are going to criticize the film for its lack of originality, which, frankly, is astounding considering a majority of critics praised Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow barely two weeks ago despite nearly the exact same flaw. Besides, any film that consistently and thoroughly has audience members either on the verge of crying or flat-out balling their eyes out, not only at its climatic ending but sporadically throughout the feature, should be given credit for pulling off an achievement that is so rare at the box office these days. At long last, firefighters are given the proper treatment on the silver-screen they have so long deserved, The job may not be the easiest, it may even be quite draining not only for them but for their loved ones as well, but, in the end, it is usually those occupations that turn out to be the most fulfilling because they know that they are doing something good in the world.

My Rating: **** ½ out of 5 (Grade: A)

The Forgotten (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of The Forgotten

[3/10 · 24 September 2004]

Everybody wants to be the next M. Night Shyamalan, don't they? It would appear that way with the super-natural thriller genre getting a serious kick in the pants over the past couple of years based on the number of projects, some have worked (The Ring) but for the most part audiences have come away disappointed by the far from quality Shyamalan's films were known for. Now with the now famous director's latest work, The Village, far from meeting fan expectations, could the door be open for a new one to take over now that essentially Shyamalan wants to move on to different projects? Already The Forgotten has labeled itself this year's The Sixth Sense, whether it be the rumors of this being a knock-off of the 1999 hit or studio enthusiasm, so whatever way it goes shouldn't be shocking, just as its finale is.

The story for The Forgotten follows a grieving mother as she attempts to track down the truth about her eight year old son who was believed to have died in an airplane tragedy but now appears to have been part of an orchestrated cover up. Telly Paretta, like any parent would be in this situation, has never felt the same way since two years ago when her son Sam was killed in a tragic plane accident the killed five other children on their way to summer camp. Every day, for at least an hour, she slips back into her son's room, looks at old scrapbooks and watches videos of him through his short-lived childhood, thus keeping a part of her son alive – his memory. When she discovers that the videos have been erased and the scrapbooks emptied, she becomes furious at her husband who she claims wants their son forgotten from their life so that they can move on. But her psychiatrist reveals to her that Telly and her husband never had a son, or at least a living one, as she miscarried and nearly died after giving birth to their still born son. He states that it is normal for a woman in this situation to create imaginary children and friends to fill the void that has been lost in their life. Telly refuses to belief this and runs off searching for a man whose daughter was friends with her son before the crash. When he comes to realization that he had a daughter, the two run off together in search of the truth while being constantly pursued by National Security attempting to cover up a conspiracy they don't want dug up. The story for The Forgotten is quite simply one of the most pathetic and miserable scripts created for a feature film, not sent direct to video, this year. To be fair, the first one-third of the film in which Telly is told by her psychiatrist that she may be psychotic, specifically making up a child in her mind to deal with the miscarriage, was an intriguing piece of work and may have kept the interest of audience had the screenwriters followed through with that premise. Unfortunately The Forgotten, much in the same way as another horror rip-off, Godsend, earlier this year, decides to veer so severely off course from reality that you are left with more questions by the end then when you started off.

The film has a perfectly assembled cast, , unfortunately all that priceless talent is wasted in this hopeless tripe of a film. Julianne Moore, better known for her brilliant performances in more independent fare like The Shipping News and Far From Heaven, gives tremendous emotion to the character of Telly Paretta, a woman who will do anything just to have her son back in her life. Her specific actions and moods will connect instantly with parents while those not yet blessed with a child in their lives may struggle to accept some of the events occurring but will at least understand them. Dominic West, a rising up and comer in Hollywood, does an exceptional job with the role of man who's practically sent his life down a drunken spiral ever since he lost his daughter in what supposedly a tragic plane accident. Applause must be given to the screenwriters for getting at least one thing right in this script and that was for Moore and West's characters to have an intense relationship together but not have them collapse into yet another pathetic 'romantic' escapade as in other films of this genre. Alfre Woodard and Anthony Edwards are two support characters that could have easily been down-sized based on their roles in the feature or completely eliminated altogether as they do little, if anything seriously, to the progression of the story. And Gary Sinise, now known as the star of the recently launched CSI: New York series on the C-BS television network, does the best he can with the material that is given to him but unfortunately for him the character is seriously flawed. Without giving too much away, though, to be honest, there's too much confusion to clearly give anything away in this film, Sinise's character knows of the 'experiment' going on near the end of the film but states he isn't a government agent, just a guy who knows. Then why wasn't he abducted? Is he one of 'them'? What is his specific role in this cover up? These are just a few of the absurdly large amount of unanswered questions poised at the end of this film that may never be answered.

Overall, The Forgotten is by no means, in any shape or form, this year's The Sixth Sense, though it does share a trait with another Shymalan film, The Village, namely that the audience feels cheated in part to its cheap thrills but mainly for an ending that feels ripped an old episode of either The Twilight Zone or The X-Files. There will be those out there who want others to believe that this film is a wonderful send up to the classic B-movie science-fiction thrillers of the 1950s but, as illogical as those films were, they never contained plot holes as gigantic as the ones that occupy The Forgotten's premise. How is it that the Telly is the sole obsession of this 'alien life form' conducting this experiment and not Ash as well? Though it did take a little coaching, he did remember his daughter nearly as well as Telly remembers Sam. Granted he was eventually abducted but still doesn't he get a little credit in all this? Though mothers do share a much closer relationship with their children then do the fathers, which can not be denied, the film's ending is a bit of an insult to fathers who care deeply for their children and would do just as much as the mothers would to protect them. If these 'things' are able to instantly 'abduct' human beings, like Alfre Woodard's character, simply for knowing about what is going on then wouldn't it be simpler for them to abduct everyone involved with these children in order to have them forgotten? What are these 'things' that are supposedly monitoring the planet and conducting experiments on us? Why are they being conducted? For what specific purpose? Why Earth and not some other life-inhabited planet? Even if one ignores the mind-numbing amount of holes presented in the film's sense of logic, though they are pretty hard to ignore once you get down to the bare bones of it, it must be admitted the film's ending, whether it be clichéd or admirable, is wrapped up too neatly and without any sense of surprise what-so-ever. No matter how you dress it up, The Forgotten is yet another disaster in the area of science-fiction thrillers this year joining the ranks of Godsend and The Village on the trash-heap of the box office.

My Rating: * ½ out of 5 (Grade: D-)

Mr. 3000 (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Mr. 3000

[6/10 · 20 September 2004]

'If you film it, they will come' – this is the phrase movie studio executives wish was the rule of thumb when it came to releasing baseball themed features. This genre has become a rarity in recent years and the select few that have gone on to find success have become even scarcer. Only one has ever crossed the once coveted $100 million barrier, that being A League of Their Own in 1992, and few have come close to even achieving that once famous feat, the closest being The Rookie in 2002. Baseball may be America's favorite pastime (not so much as in past years) but it's clear that sport fans would prefer to keep the realms of reality and Hollywood separate. And yet, even beyond that indelible black-eye on the genre, there lays the classics – Field of Dreams, Angels in the Outfield, The Sandlot, Major League, and Bull Durham. Unfortunately the movie studios are no longer interested making a classic – that is to say they aren't interested in making a classic that fails to recoup their investment, or, at the very least, grab a few Oscar nods. Considering Mr. 3000 is a far-cry from a Best Picture win, Touchstone Pictures hopes, desperately, that it makes its money back – and considering the year they are having, they better pray for a miracle.

The story for Mr. 3000 centers on a former big league baseball player who must return to game he left years ago in order to regain a historic milestone that was taken from him thanks to technical error. Stan Ross was once one of the greatest baseball players of his generation. He had the energy, the ambition, and the passion to play the game with every ounce of strength, not just for him self, but for the love of the game, whether it be win or lose. But somewhere down the line of his illustrious career, on his way to achieving the 3000th hit mark, he lost understanding of what it really meant to play the game and slowly began to focus every bit of media attention on him self rather then the team – swearing at the press, insulting fans, and, to top it all off, quitting midway through the Milwaukee Brewers playoff run season once he achieved the prize he craved so much – his 3000th career hit. Unfortunately, ten years later, as he wanted in zealous anticipation to be voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame, a statistical error is found in the records and the discovery is made that 'Mr. 3000' is actually 'Mr. 2997', thus losing his shot at greatness. Not willing to live this down, and the owner of the Brewers desperate to get sports fans packed into Miller Park, both the team and Mr. Ross come to an agreement where he will be able to come out of retirement to regain his coveted crown if he agrees to not hit his actually '3000th hit' until the team is back home. At first this agreement seems quite simple but as time progresses, 'Mr. Hot Shot Major-Leaguer' is more out of shape then he once thought and, what's more, he discovers the true love of the game was never lost, he just had to know where to look. The story for Mr. 3000 has its fair share of problems, namely in the fact that it can never fully decided whether it wants to be an inspirational no nonsense sports drama or a flat-out irrelevant comedy. Here's an ultimatum for the filmmakers: pick one and stick with it. Stop switching back and forth between the two or, if its that hard of a decision that you can't make up your mind, then at the very least have a somewhat healthy mix rather then the unbalanced mess that's present on screen.

In the same light as the film's tag line, Bernie Mac 'puts the 'I' back in team' as the film's entire focus is on his character alone. Despite appearing in small roles in over fifteen films since 1992, Mr. 3000 marks Bernie Mac's first leading role in a feature film and he makes a valiant effort in the role despite the weak material. Although advertisements have led many to believe this film was going to be an all-out slap-stick baseball comedy, something along the line of Major League, though no where near the greatness, the film is actually more of drama then anything else and Mac does a remarkable job at invoking the emotions on screen of a man trying to cope with his demons, in this case his arrogance and self-centeredness. And poor Paul Sorvino – what has his career come to when he's reduce to appearing in insipid roles such as this? Sorvino, best known for his roles in Goodfellas and Nixon, or, to the intended teenage audience, William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet, looks as though he's dying a dog's death on screen and. And what's worse is that he has few speaking lines at all throughout the feature (the only time he does speak is at the very end and it just ends up being a bunch of garbled anger rants and obscenities). The filmmakers couldn't have made a more pointless character if they tried. At the most they could have shoved this character deeply into the background and just given Sorvino cameo credit instead.

Overall, Mr. 3000, as valiant an effort as it gives trying to invoke an inspirational message of teamwork and devotion to the game, strikes out when its step up to the plate thanks to a one-two-three combo-punch of inconsistency, insufficient material, and a horrible backdrop. First off, the feature's main problem lies in the fact that the filmmakers can't decide what direction to pull this movie toward – the emotional melodrama or the slap-stick comedy. The fact that a good amount of material isn't all that funny is bad enough, but to have the audience confused as to where the film is pulling them is even worse. Secondly, let's give credit where credit is due – Bernie Mac should have no trouble dealing with the transition from venerable side-kick to illustrious leading man, given that he chooses his scripts properly, but no matter how. Had this been an R-rated movie then Mac would have had more room to roam and given his fans what they expect. Granted the language in this film is probably excessive for what is usually allowed, it isn't anywhere near what would normally come from Mac's routines and often the audience finds him holding back, which isn't what they paid for. And lastly, from the viewpoint of a sports fan, no amount of glitz and glamour can make the Milwaukee Brewers look anything close to an inspirational baseball team. Even for those unfamiliar with the area of sports, if you lived in the state of Wisconsin you would be well familiar with state of affairs of the losing sports team. It may be nice to dream but do it with some other team and not the Brewers because once you enter that stadium, dreams are crushed. It's harsh but it's the truth, and those coming from the state of Wisconsin would know it all too well. In the end, Mr. 3000 is a good start off vehicle for Bernie Mac to learn from his mistakes and become a more prosperous leading man. As for the audience, the lesson of the day is not to be misled by advertisements, as the phrase 'what you see is what you get' is not the case with this film.

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow

[9/10 · 18 September 2004]

Looking back in time you would think the Americans of the 1920s and 1930s were nuts when it came to concepts of the world of tomorrow. To many scientists of the modern day, these 'visions of the future' are clumsy, primitive and naïve but to young children, and even some older readers, these were a form of escape from the less-enthralling realism of the post-World War I depression era that consumed the country at the time. Science would soon blend with the comic-book/science fiction world creating such astounding superheroes as Superman, Flash Gordon, and Buck Rodgers. This concept would eventually spill over into the realm of the movies, spawning now classic films such as The Invisible Man, The Island of Lost Souls, King Kong, and many more. Today, we look back upon these films, often laughing at the now amusing concepts and clichéd situations, but at the same time feeling a bit nostalgia for a time when things seemed, at least in our minds now, a bit simpler then they are now.

The story for Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow takes the futuristic visions of the world as dreamed up in the science-fiction comic books of the 1950s and brings them to life in brilliant style and texture. Though the world seems brighter and better then ever after the horrible events of World War I and the Great Depression, danger still loams on the horizon. Scientists, who were part of an underground doomsday project created before the outbreak of the First World War, are mysteriously disappearing from across the world – six have already been abducted, with the seventh highly aware of his dire situation and looking for safe haven. He soon comes into contact with the ambitious Polly Perkins, an adamant reporter for The Chronicle, and tells her the identity of the mastermind behind a serious of raids on the city conducted by gigantic mechanical robots – Dr. Totenkopf, the same devilishly brilliant scientist behind the organization of the doomsday project. After receiving this startling information, she then pays a visit to an old friend, Sky Captain and his mercenary fighter pilots known as the Flying Legion, who may be the world's only hope from absolute destruction. The story for Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is more then simply a vision of 'the future that never was', at least outside the realm of comic-books, but offers an enthralling storyline combined with a rousing musical score, entertaining performances, and stunning action sequences, all balanced together in a well-formulated film-noir style of film-making. Is it jammed packed with clichés and unrealistic situations? Of course it is and that's what makes this film one of the most pleasant surprises of the year, namely for the fact that those clichés are actually used to help it achieve a level of entertainment that is so rarely seen in modern cinema.

Another keen move by first-time director Kerry Conran was to enlist as few high profile performers as possible in order to keep the actions of the film centralized on the two leads, namely Jude Law and Gwyneth Paltrow. Though some may have dispute with some of their past performances, kudos must be given to these two for carrying this entire experimental project on their shoulders and for doing it as ideally as they did. Jude Law fits flawlessly into the role of flying ace Sky Captain and pulls off a performance reminiscent of Harrison Ford's in the Indiana Jones series, though with far less prestige and anticipation then Ford's signature role. Even the character himself gives off the suggestion that he might be a direct takeoff on the famous archeologist but perhaps that's what makes the movie all the more attractive and ultimately more enjoyable. Gwyneth Paltrow also gives a commendable performance, though slightly less savoring then Law's but, then again, that was expected considering he is the hero of the film. And Michael Gambon, who recently took over the role of Professor Dumbledore in the immensely popular Harry Potter series, makes a slight appearance in the film as the editor of the Chronicle. His character isn't exceptionally important to the overall storyline but it was just good to see him on screen once again, at least for those who enjoyed the Singing Detective television episodes. There are two minor complaints when it comes to the area of performances in this film: the first being the most blatantly obvious one, that the actors frequently gave some stilted, wood-like performances in particular sequences, but this was to be as expected after the some-what bumbling work that appeared in Star Wars – Episode II: Attack of the Clones. The other issue being the role of Angelina Jolie, more specifically the character of Franky Cook. Whether this is the fault of the advertising department or the filmmakers, Jolie's role was built up as this prominent co-starring role when in actuality it's nothing more then a mere cameo. One can say that they may be holding up on the character in order to broaden her role in any sequels, or quite possible prequels, should this film prove to be a success. These two are what would be called 'deal breakers' for this film; rather they are just minor annoyances that merely need to be addressed.

Overall, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow rattles the box office from its usual post-Labor Day slumber and brings about an experience that can best be described as this generation's Raiders of the Lost Ark. The feature's obvious draw will be its astonishing special effects (seriously, the entire film is done in computer animation, with the exception of the actors of course) but thankfully the film relies on a cleverly-crafted script to back it up, rather then depending on a one-trick pony to simply get butts in the seats. Some individuals may go into this film with the impression that it will end up being nothing more then a clichéd special effects extravaganza and, in one respect, they would be right but what separates this film from the rest of the trash that has been cluttering the movie theaters for the past few weeks is that Sky Captain has created its own separate identity and hasn't simply cut-and-pasted ideas from the competition. The script, though not absolutely believable, does what it's suppose to do and that's namely to entertain audiences without going so over the top so that it becomes ridiculous and not worth your time. And what could one ask for more then a villain who comes off as an extremist social-liberal wacko who believes mankind is doomed to destroy itself and should be punished for ruining the planet and filling the world with hatred? Sure this guy may be a god to the left-wing fringe of the Hollywood elite, namely everyone but Mel Gibson and Bruce Willis, but we all know better. Should this film prove to be a success at the box office, it would not be surprising in the least to see this bud into an affluent franchise in the not too distant future, something of high demand from the movie-going public with The Lord of the Rings now done and over with and Harry Potter possibly on the ropes. Bottom-line, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow may not be everyone's cup of magnesia milk but for those tired of sequels and the same old tired retreads, this is the film for you.

Collateral (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Collateral

[8/10 · 6 August 2004]

`O' Oscar, Where Art Thou?' is a phrase that Hollywood super-star Tom Cruise has become all too familiar with, especially as of late. Ever since his break out in Risky Business, a film, as good as it may be, is hardly Oscar material, Cruise has made numerous attempts to take home the golden statuette by taking on roles in such high-profile dramas as Born on the Fourth of July, A Few Good Men, Jerry Maguire, Vanilla Sky, and Magnolia, only to come up nearly empty handed (he received Best Actor nominations for his roles in Born on the Fourth of July, Jerry Maguire, and Magnolia). But his last two films (Minority Report and The Last Samurai), quite possibly the best chances at an Oscar nod in years based on critical as well as public acceptance, failed to produce even a nomination. Does this affect his career, let alone his own self-esteem for his craft? Hardly! Cruise continues to take risks as an actor, which includes performing in a role that doesn't suite his personality: the villain.

The story centers on an ordinary man living in the big city just trying to make a decent living as a cab driver until one day he picks up the wrong guy at the wrong time and becomes embroiled in a situation he never could have imagined. For twelve years Max has been a cab driver in the city of Los Angles, a position that he envisioned would only be temporary until he saved up enough money to start his own limo service, one that would be like a `club experience', but some things in life don't always work out the way we envision them. Take for instance, one night Max picks up a man named Vincent, a person who one would describe as well put together, who `hires' him to drive him around to five locations that night for double the amount of money he would normally make in a single night. Max, believing him to be a decent hardworking guy, agrees to the deal only to shockingly discover that his occupant is actually a contract killer sent by a narco-trafficking cartel to eliminate five individuals, both witnesses and prosecutors, involved in a federal grand jury trial set to take place the next day. Though Max tries everything in his capacity, which, at times, can be quite limited, to escape, Vincent forces him at gun-point to drive him around to each location. As the increasingly distressing night drags on, Vincent and Max become more dependent on each other and begin to reveal within themselves aspects of life they never once considered before – aspects that will change the course of their own lives forever. The story for Collateral is not all that complex and, in a sense, remains fairly predictable from beginning to end but the way Michael Mann successfully blends an intoxicating atmosphere with sympathetic characters and brilliantly choreographed action sequences, that feel neither drawn-out nor short-lived, that make it the most fascinating storylines this season.

One of the most striking aspects about the film is the way the filmmakers allow a small group of performers to carry the entire feature without missing a beat. Though several background characters are brought in and out throughout the film's two hour time length, they are, in essence, meaningless to the audience as many of the main actions occurring on screen primarily affect the relationship between Vincent and Max, played brilliantly by Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxx. Tom Cruise, who is better known on the big screen for playing the hero rather then the villain, could have been disastrous had he ended up like most actors who break their usual mold, but he demonstrates that he's just as good, or even better, being bad. The grey-haired, clean-cut Vincent may seem intelligent and even debonairish in certain respects, which makes the character all the more enticing, much in the same way Anthony Hopkins portrayed Hannibal Lecter … a person so interesting and majestic that you can't help but root for him at times, though in your heart you know should be hating his guts. The other reason the character works so well is the way his acts and reacts with the character of Max the cab driver, played by Jamie Foxx. The film starts off with Max as the weak-willed, cautious pawn in the grand master-plan that he can't control, but as time goes on and their conversations become more and more profound, his personality changes in such dramatic fashion that it snaps the audience's moral compass back in line by having them root for the man they should be interested in from the beginning.

Overall, Collateral started like any other film and could have ended up the disaster it should have been (based on the clear-cut final sequence it finished with) but its impressive cast, tense atmosphere, brutal violence, and, more importantly, its austere message make this film the sleeper hit of the summer. The ending is not disappointing in the sense that is flat or uninteresting but rather that if one figures out early on that Jada Pinkett-Smith's appearance in the film is more then just a mere cameo (if you caught the appearances on the late-night talk shows, this should be a given to you), the way the film wraps-up isn't all that surprising. But this hardly deters the audience from having an enjoyable experience none the less. The aspect, one that literary wizards will adore, that sets Collateral apart from other thrillers is the Richard III-ish affect it has on the reactions of the audience. Early on, we should be hating Vincent, a man who viciously kills people without any second thought, but the character is ten times more interesting then Max, who comes off as a cautious neat-freak rather then a hero, that we are easily attracted to him and, dare it be said, root for him even though we know deep inside that we should be loathing his actions. Only when the real hero emerges in Max and he finally begins to escape the precarious shell he has kept himself in do we begin to shift our attention to the person that deserves it the most. Collateral's message, one that is hammered further and further into the minds of movie-goers as the story unfolds, that life should be lived to its fullest and one should take advantage of every minute of every day. This may sound simple and even clichéd but once you've seen this film, it's easier to understand and therefore take to heart once you've exit the theater.

The Village (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of The Village

[7/10 · 31 July 2004]

For those wanting to know not of the film's secrets, This review must not be seen …

Never enter the review, That is where the spoilers wait …

These are the rules of watcher of the woods …

Heed this warning now, For they are coming …

In the last couple of years, the supernatural thriller genre has belonged mainly to one man: writer/director M. Night Shyamalan. Though several have tried to copy his style of film-making and the signature twist endings, few have developed the same kind of success that he currently enjoys, whether it be the numbers at the box office or the fan base his films have built up. Ever since 1999's surprise hit, The Sixth Sense, M. Night Shyamalan has been scaring movie-goers across the world with his takes on ghosts, superheroes and aliens but after several years it seems he may be giving the old gig a break. The latest rumblings from Hollywood saying that The Village may be the last thriller in awhile as his next project is set to be the film adaptation of the hit novel, The Life of Pi. Preferably he would like to go out on top with the genre he made his own playground but that is all up to how the American public receive it, either as another success or a failure.

The story centers on an isolated group of villagers who find themselves confined to their town by the mysterious creatures that roam the woods that encircle them. In the year 1897, the village of Covington, Pennsylvania can be seen as the prime example of a utopian society – there is no violence, no greed, and all work together in upholding the vision of hope that has driven the villagers to bountiful blessings, something the elders of the town believe will continue through the leadership of their children. Covington, to the untrained eye, may seem perfect but the element of fear still dwells within the occupants of the town. What would inhabitants of a utopian society such as this have to fear? 'Those we do not speak of' … red hooded creatures that reside in the woods and make raids on the town when they feel they have been threatened. None have the courage to venture beyond the forbidden border, except Lucius Hunt, the head strong yet reserved son of Alice Hunt, one of the town elders. Lucius feels compelled to defy the boundaries of the village but at the same time he dares not leave out of the fear, the only one he has, that harm will come to Ivy Walker, the blind daughter of the leading town elder with whom he has fallen deeply in love with. But when an accident occurs in the village and Lucius is found deeply hurt, Ivy demands that she be given permission to enter the woods and obtain medicine from the nearby towns.

The story for The Village suffers from an acute identity crisis in that it plays out more like an extended episode of The Twilight Zone then usual Shyamalan thriller audiences have come associate his films with. That is not to say that it doesn't try, in fact the first half is quite engaging, it's just that it fails to ends the same way. Another Shyamalan thriller, The Sixth Sense, shares a similar trait with this film, the less then surprising twist at the end. If The Village was able to have as genuine and masterfully orchestrated a plot as The Sixth Sense had then it wouldn't be a problem. Unfortunately, Shyamalan demonstrates that either he is losing his once golden touch or he is running low on decent material to scare audiences with.

With as talented a group of performers as is seen in The Village, the most high-profile cast ever assembled by director M. Night Shyamalan, you would think it would no problem for a film with the least orchestrated storyline to be raised to the level of a tolerable feature but that isn't true here. Bryce Dallas Howard, the daughter of director Ron Howard, makes a surprisingly brilliant debut in the role of Ivy Walker, the blind daughter of leading town elder. All Shyamalan films contain a lead role that tests even the most skilled of actors and Howard is able to tackle the role easily without showing once any inability to rise to the challenge, which indicates she could be a rising star in Hollywood if she continues to give prime performances such as this. Joaquin Phoenix, in the role of Lucius Hunt, demonstrates that he can lead a film with an engaging and emotionally driven performance that goes way beyond the role given to him in Signs. And Adrien Brody gives an emotionally charged roller coaster performance as the mentally challenged Noah. There are times where he can make you laugh, make cry, have you feel sorry for him only to turn around and do something that provokes the opposite effect with the audience. The character of Noah is the combination of both the talent of Brody and dexterous construction from Shymalan's script. The problem with the cast is that there are too many of them for the audience to keep track of each individual character plot. The brilliance about Shyamalan's past films was that he kept the group of characters relatively small in order to allow the audience to singularly focus on the actions of the main characters and not have them confused by separate character developments. The filmmaker diverts from his usually agenda and that in effect hurts the film's script deeply.

Overall, writer/director M. Night Shyamalan trades in his philanthropic messages on humanity and supernatural fantasies brought to life for cheap scares and a story that may turn out to be an accidental rip off of a classic sci-fi television series. Though Shyamalan makes no direct assertions within the nearly two hour feature and quite possibly leaves this up to interpretation, there is the slight assumption that The Village may be a political commentary on the current climate of the United States after September 11th.

What evidence within the framework of the film would support this theory? For starters, the color coded system the villagers develop, yellow to indicate safety and red to imply fear and danger, overtly resembles the terrorism warning levels developed by Homeland Security after the attacks on September 11th. The creatures that wander the woods and raid the town when threatened are nothing more then false reports developed by the elders to keep the townspeople in fear and prevent them from leaving the village, which may be a reference to the accusations made by the liberals about the Bush administration whenever they release a terror alert. And the most convenient piece of evidence lies in the name of the lead elder who orchestrates the entire façade: Walker, which may or may not be an allusion to the current commander in chief's middle name. Granted the deception was in an effort to preserve innocence but in the minds of some individuals, deception is deception no matter the reason.

Even if that theory is proven correct, only a hand full of individuals will probably pick up on that message and doesn't affect a person's perception of the film much if one disagrees with the assertion that may or may not be made. In other aspects of the film, James Newton Howard is once again able to calibrate a successful and chilling musical score that works directly in sync with the actions on screen, as he has been able to do in all of Shyamalan's films in the past. And even though Shyamalan's engaging sense of direction allows the psychological intensity of the film to remain intact through nearly the entire presentation, the less then surprising outcomes makes it out to be all for naught. There are three twist endings to the film: the first seems misplaced as it totally eliminates the element of fear that is associated with the creatures, the second isn't so much a problem as it is obvious especially if you're one who pays close attention to certain characters, and the final twist gives you the feeling as though you were watching an episode of The Twilight Zone, leaving the audience neither shocked nor amazed, just swindled. But the film's most disappointing aspect is the fact that the audience is left at the end with nothing; no fear, no hope. The Village is the first Shyamalan thriller that eliminates the sense of fear movie-goers would take home with them when it reveals the creatures weren't real. This was the key that made Shymalan thrillers classics to so many people. Whether it is political allegory or just pure coincidence, anyway you slice it The Village is a drawn out disappointment.

I, Robot (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of I, Robot

[4/10 · 16 July 2004]

What happened to the Big Willie America first fell in love with many summers ago? The former rapper and Fresh Prince of Bel-Air became the king of the sci-fi action genre with two back-to-back box office hits, Independence Day and Men In Black, after first making an image for himself on the big screen in Bad Boys, produced by Jerry Bruckheimer. So what happened? Wild, Wild West, an unmitigated embarrassment for all those involved, went on to be one of the biggest box office flops of 1999 and forced Smith to concentrate on more low key roles in films like Ali and The Legend of Bagger Vance until the fallout from the disaster flick had passed over. Will Smith re-emerged on the summer scene with Men In Black II in 2002 and Bad Boys II in 2003, and though they weren't as critically, or even publicly, hailed as much as his earlier works, he proved once again that he was a box office draw when it came to a film's opening weekend, which is all that seems to matter now adays with fewer leggy films popping up at the box office.

The story centers on one paranoid cop sent to investigate the first recorded murder committed by a robot. In the year 2035, the future of humanity is as bright and efficient as ever imagined. During this time, robots, once thought improbable several years ago, are now an every day commodity. In fact, the largest robotics distribution company in the world, USR, is set to launch its most highly advanced robot to date, the NS-5, to nearly every home in America. The shipment is so large that experts claim that there will be one robot for every five humans. To optimists this seems like a marvelous dream come true but to others, namely Detective Del Spooner, this is nothing short of a nightmare. After a freak accident several years earlier that left him haunted with images of the terrible event every night when he goes to bed, Detective Spooner has grown paranoid with the idea of humanity becoming too dependent on robots. One day, he is sent to investigate the 'apparent' suicide of Dr. Miles Hogenmiller, the man who created the Three Laws of Robotics and worked extensively with the NS-5 robots at the USR headquarters. Spooner dismisses the idea that Hogenmiller would kill himself and implicates a robot named Sonny who was found hiding in Hogenmiller's office and fled when the detective tried to question him. Everyone believes Detective Spooner has lost his mind for a robot can not bring harm to a human being since that would be a direct violation of the first Law of Robotics. If this were a violation of that law then there would be nothing to prevent the robots from turning against humanity and taking control of the world. Unfortunately, after a series of complicated events involving the NS-5 robots, Detective Spooner becomes more and more convinced that his once thought overwhelming paranoia may be the truth. The story for I, Robot, which was based on the 'I, Robot' anthology written by Isaac Asimov, is nothing more then the regurgitation of every other science fiction film with the concept of robots taking control of the world and destroying humanity. The difference with I, Robot is that the filmmakers lace the script with so much pretentious humor that most of it comes off flat and ultimately distracting from the film's supposed serious concept.

One of the biggest compliments attributed to I, Robot is its concept of a relatively small cast, allowing the focus of the audience to center on the its main characters rather then distracting them with numerous side-characters that do nothing but clog up an already complex storyline. But that's where the kudos stop with several of those characters coming off as flawed or seriously misguided by the script. Will Smith, once again in his summer block-buster mode, gives an engaging performance as Detective Del Spooner, despite the character's noticeable flaws. Whether it's due to the way the script was written or the way Smith portrays the character, Spooner's wise-cracks are too over-the-top, with most of them, namely the one's early on in the film, failing to be the least bit humorous. Once you are able to look past that, Smith manages to the make the character quite interesting and mysterious with his emotions playing a prominent factor in his unpredictability. Alan Tudyk, who provided the voice work for the robot Sonny, does an adequate job with the limited material given to him but can't raise the character above anything more then a cheap CGI distraction. The problem with the character of Sonny is that the filmmakers attempt what director Steven Spielberg failed to do with Haley Joel Osment's character in A.I.: Artificial Intelligence, which was to present a robot that had dreams, felt emotions, and, in some weird way, possessed a soul. The reason this failed, and this stands true with I, Robot's attempt as well, is that when all is said and done, a robot is nothing more then highly advanced can-opener. You can build it up as much as you want, throw in some high-tech gizmos, and anything else you can think of but you won't be able to replicate anything remotely close to a human being with a soul. A soul is what makes humans unique above any other creature and nothing, not even by the hands of man, can duplicate that and place it inside something else, let alone a hunk of metal. And what was the point of Shia Le Beouf's character in this film other then being a pathetic attempt at comic-relief, something this film possesses too much of.

Overall, as hard as I, Robot attempts to come off as brilliant vision of a futuristic utopia where all humanity has to do is look into the inner depths of our souls to live in peace and harmony, it comes off more along the lines of scientific mumbo-jumbo and computer-animated special effects run amok thrown into a blender at top speed resulting in nothing more then a garbled mess. Whether or not the film accurately projects the writings of Isaac Asimov, Robot's radical theories and story elements will go over most heads and those that do understand them will be disappointed by the lack of depth into how these conclusions were made. The special effects, though marveling at times, seem to be more the focus of the filmmakers then the script as nearly every scene seems to put more detail and concentration on the computer animation then how the story shapes out in the end. How can a film that seems as bad as this get any worse? By finishing it off with a final sequence that feels like the screen writers themselves didn't even know how to end this disaster. The filmmakers would have been better off just ending the film with Detective Spooner and Dr. Susan Calvin on top of the USR building looking out upon a rising sunset. Sound clichéd, doesn't it? Sure it does, but a clichéd ending, or any ending really, would have been a whole lot better then the perplexing sequence the … You can't even call it a ending since the scene resolves nothing and just leaves the audience with more questions with no idea on how to answer them. Are we to assume there will be a sequel to answer them? What if the film bombs? What if there is no sequel? Then what? I, Robot may have seemed like a neat summer distraction, quite possibly even thought provoking, from the juiced up trailers and television spots but advertisements can be deceiving and they are no different with this film. If you aren't a fan of Will Smith or special effects outweighing the plot, save your money and rent either The Matrix or Terminator 2: Judgment Day … It's practically the same thing only ten times better from everything this film presents.

My Rating: ** ½ out of 5 (Grade: D+)

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy

[8/10 · 9 July 2004]

Will Ferrell is boldly going where no Saturday Night Live! performer has gone in years … translated success from the small screen to the big screen! Not since Mike Myers made the move to feature films with Wayne's World has Hollywood seen such a comedic performer such as Will Ferrell. It isn't recent that Ferrell has been making appearances in feature films; in fact he made his feature film debut in the Mike Myers comedy, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery in 1997. Since then he has made feature roles and cameos in numerous comedies, none of which have made anything beyond a few million dollars of their production budgets. It wasn't until 2003 when Ferrell appeared in two surprise smash-hits, Old School and Elf, and decided to leave Saturday Night Live! Since then he has become of the most sought after comedic stars in Hollywood, receiving offers both left and right and there appears to be no sign of him slowing down anytime soon.

As with most sketch comedy films, the story doesn't matter as much to the audience as the laughs are all that seem to matter but Anchorman at least attempts, unlike so many others, to the plot it starts off with. Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy takes movie-goers back to the 1970s when Ron Burgundy was San Diego's top-rated news anchor and only men were allowed to read the news. But the times are changing and when an ambitious female reporter, Veronica Corningstone, comes to the Channel 4 newsroom, Ron's world begins to change and not to his liking. At first, Veronica is given 'female' oriented interest stories, like cat fashion shows, and is kept out the lime-light for the most part. But one day, Ron fails to show up to report the news on time and Veronica takes his place, only to receive her big break and become co-anchor. Things just continue to get worse the more Ron fights the fact that he is no longer San Diego's top anchorman. The story for Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy may not be the most accurate representation of the era at the time but it does manage to touch on some issues, as in the rise of feminism, that were of importance in the 1970s, although the film does not take them as seriously as they were in real life. But bottom-line is that film plays for laughs and nothing presented in this film should be taken seriously, except perhaps the representation of news anchors that are often seen on the local news today.

The cast of Anchorman consists of mainly of actors and actresses from Saturday Night Live!, whether they be current or former members, as well as several others that are well accustomed to sketch comedy of this nature. Will Ferrell, who proved to Hollywood that he was comedic driving force to be reckoned with thanks to his holiday smash-hit, Elf, owns the show as the title character, Ron Burgundy. This film proves to many that Ferrell is one of the best comedic minds in the business today as he is able to turn even the dumbest material into something funny … it may not be gut-busting but it doesn't come off as stupid as it should, which is all that matters to move the film along. Christina Applegate performs reasonably in the role of Veronica Corningstone, the female newswoman who threatens Ron Burgundy's news world. It wasn't that she doesn't work well in the film; there are severely scenes between her and Will Ferrell that are particularly funny. The problem is that most of the material given to her isn't as funny as it should be. Often she is too dependent on someone like Will Ferrell to help make the scene humorous and when it comes to a scene by herself, it doesn't have the same impact as the rest of the film. David Koechner's Champ Kind, the sports reporting cowboy, is one of the bigger disappointments and becomes a character that should have been entirely cut from the film as his material more trite and annoying then anything else. Steve Carell's Brick Tamland, the mentally retarded weatherman, is one of the biggest highlights of the film and, yes, there is a jab at the Bush administration with his character (what kind of Hollywood production would it be without one of those?) but other then that, he draws some of the biggest laughs of the film. And what would a comedy such as this be without celebrity cameos? Though many of the jokes of Anchorman don't live up to other comedies, this is one area where it probably rises above anything else in the past few years, including the opening segment of Austin Powers in Goldmember. Without giving away anything, pay attention to the street-fight sequence or you may miss someone.

Overall, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy is dumb, immature, and lacks the consistency and technique of vastly superior comedies of the past such of Austin Powers but in a summer severely lacking in anything remotely humorous, it does the job its meant to do, making us laugh, even if years from now it will be long forgotten. One of the film's main problems is that there isn't anything excessively amusing. There are certain parts of the film that are certainly humorous, most notably the street-fight sequence between the numerous news teams, but they are few and far between. For the most part Anchorman relies on monotonous toilet humor that becomes old and tired the more they use it. It doesn't get to the point where it makes the film intolerable but it gets graze the line a bit. Another problem wasn't what was seen but rather it was the material that wasn't shown in the comedy. Remember the film's trailer? Some of the trailer's more entertaining moments don't make into the film ('Well, I'm getting a divorce and I may never see my kids again' … 'Fantastic!') but according to the film's director, he ended up with about four hours worth of material which may all end up on a special edition DVD when its released later this year. The point is, despite those minor complaints, Anchorman is a pure, dumb comedy that doesn't expect to be anything more then entertaining, even if it fails to be all that memorable. In a year that has certainly lacked its share of quality comedies, let alone decent ones, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy is one class act and worth the price of admission this summer.

My Rating: **** out of 5 (Grade: B)

King Arthur (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of King Arthur

[7/10 · 7 July 2004]

What would the summer season be without another action-packed adventure flick from Jerry Bruckheimer? Since Top Gun officially deemed him one of the leading producers in the summer of 1986 (though, to his credit, it was Beverly Hills Cop that really kicked his career into high gear), he has revved up the careers of such current super-stars as Tom Cruise (Top Gun and Days of Thunder), Will Smith (Bad Boys and Enemy of the State), Nicholas Cage (The Rock, Con-Air, and Gone in 60 Seconds), and Josh Hartnett (Pearl Harbor) as well as director Michael Bay, with whom he has worked with on five feature films over the years. And don't think that time has had effect on his ability to keep turning out hits, not only in the theaters but television as well, or his ability to make stars of his films into leading actors and actresses. He hopes to add Clive Owen onto his already extensive list of accomplishments in Hollywood with the historical take on the Arthurian legend.

The story for this telling of the adventures of King Arthur takes away the mythological aspect and place emphasis more on the historical roots that led to the creation of the legend centuries later. Arthur is the leader of a group of loyal knights in the service of the Roman Empire and one who only wishes to finally fulfill his obligation to the Empire and return to the city of Rome to live out the rest of his life in peace. But times have changed; the once great empire that was Rome has become dangerously corrupt and now faces the threat from Barbarian tribes like the Saxons who kill anything and anyone in their way. Those Saxon tribes now have their eyes set on Britannia and Arthur, along with his knights, are sent on one last mission for Rome, which is to bring the favorite godson of the Pope of the Catholic Church to safety. But while accomplishing his final task for the Romans, the realization that the once great center of civilization is gone sets in and Arthur comes to decision that he must take up arms with his former enemies in order to unite the people of Britannia and repel the Saxon force that has invaded their homeland. The story for King Arthur seems rather lifeless and bland when one compares it to the legend on which it is based but taking it for what it is, a historically tweaked version of the story, it is at least a noble effort, if not one that comes off more mediocre then the filmmakers would want. The problem is that Hollywood is devoting too much time and effort into grand historical epics, referring to the lack-luster Troy earlier this year, when they should be putting more thought into bringing the legends to life, not through historical context but through the full-realization of the myths themselves and what they stood for those who heard them.

The feature's lack of star power is not its primary draw-backs, in fact it's one of the its better assets, but rather the blame can be transfixed on the script's undeveloped and, at times, meaningless characters. Clive Owen takes his first leap onto the main stage as the historical equivalent to the legendary King Arthur, known as Arturius, and produces one of the film's best performances. Despite an exhilarating performance given by Owen, the audience is often left confused as to the just end Arthur is seeking. At one point, he fights for the Romans, but with the empire crumbling and the realization that his utopia doesn't exist, he shifts course … if only the filmmakers informed us what that is. Obviously at the end, everything comes together and the goal Arthur was seeking becomes, but unfortunately it comes too late for us to put too much emotional investment in the film's climatic battle sequence to care all that much. Keira Knightley's role as Guinevere is another in which there is confusion placed on the movie-goers as to certain actions that are placed around her. For example, what is her exact relationship with the tribal leader Merlin? In one scene she leads Arthur into a clearing in which the tribal leaders comes out to speak to him about the invading Saxons … Is she his daughter or just a loyal tribal follower? And what was the sole purpose of Ioan Gruffudd's Lancelot? He's suppose to be Arthur's most devoted follower but often he comes off as whiny and too much of annoyance. And is the whole Lancelot glancing at Guinvere every now and again the best the filmmakers could do into incorporating the Guinvere and Lancelot adultery aspect of the myth into this story? It's not romantic but rather creepy and flat.

Overall, for those who had grown up reading about the legendary King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table, the Jerry Bruckheimer spectacular may come as disappointment, not so much as to the point of echoing Warner Brothers' Troy, but rather for its less attractive approach to the legend. For the less informed individuals of this society not willing to venture to Spider-Man 2 for the twentieth time in a week, King Arthur at least offers itself as a reasonable, if not an inferior, alternative. When Jerry Bruckheimer originally envisioned the film, he had planned on a no-holds barred blood, sweat and tears aspect of the Arthurian legend but unfortunately producers must bend to the whims of their studio masters, in this case Disney (can someone just dump Eisner already?), and so the wonderfully choreographed battle sequences are toned down to the level of PG-13 audiences in order to reap in more box office coin. As one can probably guess, the film, namely its action sequences, suffer severely because of this … perhaps if they had left out a `love scene' between Guinvere and Arthur, which, considering their ages (Knightly – 19, Owen – 39), comes off as more disturbing then anything else, and the language had been toned down a bit, certain sequences could have been saved. Don't get the idea that the film's an utter mess; it's actually quite decent if one understands the historical context in which the film is placed and isn't expecting something on the level of Gladiator but more along the lines of the usual Bruckheimer diversion. It's definitely a disappointment considering the amount of marketing blitz Arthur has been given and Bruckheimer's 2003 summer hit, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, but if one goes in looking for a simple diversion for the summer, then you won't come out demanding your money back at least.

My Rating: *** ½ out of 5 (Grade: C+)

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Spider-Man 2

[9/10 · 30 June 2004]

You would think a sequel to one of the highest grossing films of all time, sixth on the list once Shrek 2 swings past it sometime this summer, would have an easier road to completion but what kind of challenge would that be for the Amazing Spider-Man? As the original film was racking in nearly $115 million in cash at the box office and smashing every box office record in the book, the ink was drying on the deal to develop two sequels for the comic-book superhero, with more to come gathering that the profit margin was still worth the high production price for Columbia Pictures. Unfortunately production for the highly anticipated sequel didn't start off on the right foot with Tobey Maguire, fresh off his new horse-racing drama, Seabiscuit, holding up the film's start date due to complaints about back problems. It didn't take long for the rumors to start churning out possible replacements, among which was the boyfriend of Kirsten Dunst, Jake Gyllenhaal. But, like the web-slinger he plays on the big screen, Tobey bounced back and in a small way, though inadvertently, he demonstrated one of the film's prominent themes.

The story picks up near where the last film left off, only several months in difference, with Peter Parker balancing his personal life and the life of New York's favorite web crawler, Spider-Man. No one said the life of a superhero was going to be easy, though no one said it was going to be quite this hard either. Peter Parker tries as hard as he can to live a normal life but every time he's handed the opportunity to keep his promises, whether it be showing up to Mary Jane's performances, performing his job correctly or paying the rent, the role of Spider-Man gets in the way, thus allowing the one's that depend on him to suffer. As Peter does all he can to balance his two lives, those in the real world are moving on with theirs … Mary Jane, tired of waiting for Peter to admit his true feelings for her, plans to marry the son of J.J. Jameson, a handsome and successful astronaut. Aunt May, struggling after the death of her husband, falls behind on her house payments and faces eviction from the bank if the late payments are met. Even his best friend, Harry Osborne, has moved on and taken over operations at Oscorp … but the anger left by the death of his father at the hands of Spider-Man still remains and threatens to push him over the edge. The family business is all that keeps him on the level of sanity and Harry has big plans for Dr. Otto Octavius' new device to create and control fusion power, which, in essence, puts the power of the stars in the hands of mankind. But in a freak accident which results in the death of Octavius' wife and the fusion of the mechanical arms to his spine, Octavius goes on a rampage to finish his work, possibly taking half the city with him if he fails again. Just as he is beginning to enjoy the retirement he has taken from the superhero life, Peter Parker must again put on the suit and fulfill the promise he made to protect the innocent and bring justice to those who deserve it.

The story for Spider-Man 2, though flawed, is without a doubt one of the best comic-book adaptations ever put on screen and excels beyond the expectations set not only by the original but every comic-book franchise that has come before it, including that of the winged one himself, Batman. As was said previously, the storyline is far from perfect and there are some noticeable flaws. Among them, the whole discussion of fusion power between Doctor Otto Octavius and Peter Parker in which they use strange and complex scientific vocabulary and theories is lost on the majority the movie-going public, unless you happen to be on the same level as these individuals but to be sure such people would be few and far between. Granted these individuals are meant to be in sync with the subject of science but since the discussion is so obscure, the audience is just meant to trust what they say, which takes away some of the attachment they are meant to have with the story. And there are moments within the film that seem to last a little longer then some would like them to, and, in part, seem to drag the film a bit, but they are easily forgivable.

Most, if not all, of the cast from the original film are back for another go-around and there is substantial improvement in their performances from the last time we saw them, though that can not be said of everyone. One performance that fails to disappoint is once again given by Tobey Maguire in the lead role of Peter Parker, or better known as Spider-Man. The non-superhero side of the character appears to get more screen time then in the original which isn't a bad thing. Maguire is given a lot more room to demonstrate emotionally what the character of Peter Parker is going through; at one end attempting to fulfill the promise he made to his Uncle Ben in the role of Spider-Man while at the same time trying to lead the life of a normal human being. Kirsten Dunst, returning to the role of Mary Jane Watson, gives another wonderful performance by maintaining the 'girl next door' charm she had in the original film but at the same time demonstrating a character that is desperately yearning for something more. Crafted in such the perfect manner, Mary Jane is not another dimwitted damsel in distress as the connection between Spider-Man and Peter Parker slowly begins to develop in her mind. It's hard to say who's the better villain, the Green Goblin (who could forget that terrible costume) or Doc Ock, but even if Doctor Octavius' performance wasn't quite what everyone may have wanted it to be, Alfred Molina fits properly into the role. The only truly bad mark out of the entire cast belongs to James Franco, who drops the ball with his over the top and, at times, flat-out ridiculous performances as Harry Osborne. Rather the see the slow transformation of his impeding insanity, the audience notices the unbalanced behavior of Harry right off the bat and don't really sympathize with his situation, though the understanding of who his father really was may be also to blame. And just when you thought he was gone for good … don't miss the quick, though wonderfully developed, cameo of William Dafoe as Norman Osborn, which, in turn, hints at the possible villain for the third film.

Overall, Spider-Man 2 delivers most of what the hype and promotion promise, not only in the areas of spectacular special effects and an emotionally driven storyline, but in the film's enduring message of heroism and self-sacrifice. Before rounding off what made this sequel the fulfilling feature it was, let's focus on items that failed to live up to the rest of the film. First, the random shots of normal civilians, though some well placed, were mainly an annoyance. There is one specific shot, when Spider-Man (costume and all) makes his first appearance, where a woman shouts, 'You go, Spidey!' … this was humorous for the wrong reason and should have been left out, along with the several long focus shots of people screaming and running in terror. Not that they weren't needed but it was the amount of time Raimi used to focus on them that was the problem. Secondly, as was said earlier, it hard to determine whether the Green Goblin or Doctor Octavius is the better villain as Doc Ock isn't nearly as menacing as Goblin was, though he does offer up more action packed fight sequences in return. Depending on how you felt with the first film, this feature's villain could go either way. Third, some of the sequel's more subtle jokes, namely the homage to Butch Casidy and the Sundance Kid, are lost on the majority of the film's target audience, though they are quite humorous to those that know what they are referring to. And finally, the film's final sequence, in which the audience sees Spider-Man swinging between two helicopters over the rooftops of Manhattan on his way to another crime scene, is quite possibly one of the worse computer animated sequences presented this year and is a severe disappointment considering the sensational sequence the last film ended with. The problem is that the computer graphics are way too obvious and ends the film on quite a sour note considering most of the effects presented in the film were spectacular.

Though the problems of Spider-Man 2 seem to significantly out weigh the good, the film's emotionally driven messages of self-sacrifice and heroism are what truly set this one apart from all the rest. Where the first film hammers the idea that even the most unlikely of individuals in this world can be heroes, the sequel drills home the belief that there is a hero is every one of us … we just have to make the choice listen to the voice that lets it shine through if it means we have to give up on the things we want the most in life. It's easy to relate the idea of self-sacrifice with the fire and police departments of this country after the tragic events of September 11th but there is another aspect that many of us as Americans fail to respect or even recognize. Right now thousands of American troops are deployed overseas, either in Afghanistan or Iraq, bringing about freedom and opportunity in parts of the world that have not experienced such fundamental principles for over three decades … they are risking their lives not only for the protection of the American people but to further the causes our founding fathers endowed upon us nearly three centuries ago. It is obvious that there are polarizing views in this country on the conflicts we find ourselves in but there once was a time in America's history where the people of this land looked upon the self-sacrificing men and women of the armed forces with respect and admiration, and, in a slightly smaller way, they still do today. But there are also the people who view these true 'heroes' with anger and hatred, not understanding nor having the will to accept the good they are doing in the world, despite what many may say. Symbolism of this can be found in Spider-Man 2 and, like in the comic book adaptation, we believe that a time will come when frustration and hatred can be washed away to fully understand the reasoning behind their sacrifice, as well as the sacrifice of every 'superhero' in this world … to bring justice to those that deserve it.

My Rating: **** ½ out of 5 (Grade: A)

The Terminal (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of The Terminal

[6/10 · 19 June 2004]

Remember a time when back in the mid-1970s when Steven Spielberg was a young inexperienced director out in the middle of the ocean with a broken down mechanical shark shooting a movie many had predicted wouldn't make a dime at the box office? Thirty years later Spielberg is laughing all the way to the bank while all his naysayers and critics grumble away in disgust and dismay. In that nearly three decade career as a director, producer and studio owner, Steven Spielberg has laid claim to some of the most celebrated feature films of all time including Close Encounter of the Third Kind, the Indiana Jones series, Schindler's List, Jurassic Park, and Saving Private Ryan. And if box office numbers have any say in anything it's that Spielberg hasn't slowed down just yet as both Minority Report and Catch Me If You Can, both of which were made within the same year, grossed a combined $300 million domestically. With no signs of slowing down any time soon, Spielberg is sticking less with features that once made the most business sense and more with projects that peck his interest the most, this time around with the concept of airplanes in The Terminal.

The story for The Terminal is actually based on the true story of Merhan Karimi Nasseri who was banished from his home country of Iran in 1977 and traveled from one European city to the next seeking refugee status only to lose his briefcase in France forcing him to remain trapped in Charles de Gaulle airport where he remains there to this day. Upon arriving one morning into JFK International Airport in New York City, Viktor Navorski discovers that his homeland of Kakosia in Eastern European has become embroiled in a military coup led by rebel forces. Since the country of Kakosia no longer exists and a military embattlement has engulfed his homeland, Viktor is refused access to the United States since the government no longer recognizes his Kakosia passport or anything related to that country and will refuse to do anything with him until the war in his country is over. Until that time, Viktor Navorski can not pass the front doors onto American soil and must live within the terminal both day and night waiting for the war to end. In the meantime, Viktor befriends numerous airport personnel who request service from him to perform separate tasks in exchange for food, money, supplies, and anything else he might want while he waits for the doors to America to open. Within a nine month timespan, Viktor Navorski discovers friendship, romance, and the true realization of the American Dream without having to leave the confinement of the airport terminal building. The story for The Terminal plays much like another Tom Hanks film, Cast Away, only this time there's a lot more dialogue … too bad there isn't much substance behind those cleverly divulged words. Unfortunately the film suffers from its own unbelievable story line in that many of the scenarios that occur within the course of its two hour time length are so over the top that it is hard to take anything from them seriously. And despite having a relatively happy ending, most of the subplots that occur within the feature wrap up too neatly which, once again, derives a bit from the film's sense of believability and realism.

As was said earlier, The Terminal plays like Cast Away in that Tom Hanks is the main focus of the film and that is all that truly matters when it comes to the bare bones approach for movie-goers but if you rely on more supplemental supporting characters to add to the entertainment value, you aren't going to find that here. Tom Hanks never fails to do wonders with the material that is given to him, even the rather bland and weak components presented with the character of Viktor Navorski. There are moments where you are suppose to feel sorry for this man but unfortunately he is played out so much like a running joke at times that it is hard to keep a straight face in some of the film's more serious moments. And what's worse is that that running joke becomes less humorous and more annoying as the feature goes on thus eliminating potential connection one might have with the character and the actions that occur with him on screen. One character that does not seem to work well at all is Amelia, played by Catherine-Zeta Jones, the female flight attendant Viktor falls in love with. There is a point within the film where the audience is meant to feel sorry for the character after she admits she is tired of waiting for the right man to come along in her life … then we remember she knowingly had a sexual relationship with a married man. How do you feel sorry for a person who blatantly trots around the world having promiscuous relationships openly with married men and cares only of herself and no one else? And her relationship with Viktor Navorski, in the end, becomes pointless as just when she seems 'destined' to be with him, she ends up going back to 'dating' the married man she had earlier in the film. That combined with the lost connection the audience has with the character of Viktor Navorski results in an ample void in the film's emotionally driven message.

Overall, the arrival of The Terminal signals not a new surge in the creativity of director Steven Spielberg but rather it announces blatantly that the world famous director may have finally been brought back down to the level of mediocre filmmakers after spending so much time at the top. The film suffers severely from a rather predictable and emotionally confused script that wraps up nearly all its loose ends but leaves its audience scratching their heads wondering how the conclusion they received came about. The hard part is deciding what The Terminal actually is, a comedy or drama … there is enough evidence to support either side, and that is its problem. It's great that Spielberg introduces some well induced humor into the rather lifeless storyline but sadly he bunches too many gags into one time period leaving the audience confused when the direction of the film takes on a more serious tone. This is not to say that jokes that used in the film don't work well, they do, it's just that there are too many of them that they end up outbalancing the film's dramatic moments thus resulting in an uneven presentation. With both Spielberg's Catch Me If You Can and The Terminal coming off as less then impressive, especially compared to the superb work he's most known for, this should be a wake up call to the director to get his head out of the clouds (namely off the concept of airplanes) and back to the sci-fi and fantasy genres he works best with.

My Rating: *** out of 5 (Grade: C)

Around the World in 80 Days (2004)

The Moose Hole - Review of Around the World in 80 Days

[6/10 · 16 June 2004]

Two imaginative authors, H.G. Wells and Jules Verne, have become the toast of Hollywood with the latest adaptations of their works, War of the Worlds and Around the World, having just been announced in the last few years, but as the delightful, if albeit overlooked, Walt Disney World attraction Timekeeper noted, they wrote of two notably different things … Wells wrote of the improbable, Verne wrote of the more probable scientific scenarios. But now the debate rages over whether Jules Vernes really predicted such scientific events as space travel to the moon, voyages under the sea, and exploration of the earth decades before they actually happened. Whether or not Jules Verne truly predicted such events prior to them occurring in history or simply modeling his stories around early scientific events, his novels still manage to capture the imagination of those who have ever dreamed of exploring the mysteries of the ocean floor or traveling the world in fantastic flying machines.

The story centers on the adventures had by an inventor and his manservant, who make a wager with England's scientific community to travel the world in no more then eighty days and numerous parlous, but often exciting, obstacles they encounter on the way to accomplishing their ultimate goal. Phileas Fogg is vigorous inventor whose scientific breakthroughs such as rolling shoes (roller-skates), automatic electric lighting (via whistling), and even the possibility of human flight have been less then welcomed at the Royal Academy of Science of England, ministered by the short-tempered Lord Kelvin. Fed up with Fogg's outlandish claims of human progress, Lord Kelvin wagers that he can not circumvent the world in less then eighty days. If Fogg succeeds, Lord Kelvin will hand over his position as minister of the Royal Academy of Science. Should Fogg fail, he must tear down his laboratory and promise never to invent again. To everyone's surprise, including that of Lord Kelvin, Fogg accepts the wager and sets out on a global trotting adventure with his manservant, Passpartwo, who hides a secret that may threaten not only Fogg's scientific goal but their very lives as well. Along the way the two encounter a variety of unique individuals including an ambitious French artist, Monique de Grave, who joins them in their travels and eventually falls in love with the bumbling scientist. In the end, the race around the world becomes more then wager but a beautiful insight into what man is willing to do to accomplish a dream, even the most eccentric of fantasies. The story for Around the World in 80 Days demonstrates once again that Hollywood has no reverence for classic literature, as was evident with the monstrosity that was Troy, but at least makes some attempt to adhere to the message Jules Verne's novel tried to express. The film is also not all that unique in its approach as it seems to model itself on another Jackie Chan film, Shanghai Noon, which, coincidentally starred Owen Wilson, who makes a cameo in this film, making the film feel more like another tired joke then a fresh twist on a classic story.

With less then a recognizable cast, with the exception of Jackie Chan, Around the World in 80 Days relies heavily on the quick, if albeit cheap, cameos from some B-list, and a slight few A-list, talents. Steve Coogan makes the role of Phileas Fogg all his own and does exception work with the material that is given to him. Despite the character being converted from a snobbish upperclassman to a snobbish inventor, the transformation surprisingly works well for this adaptation and doesn't do as much damage to the classic novel as the rest of the film ends up performing. Let it be known now … despite his increasing age, Jackie Chan is still able to successful pull-off some absolutely amazing action sequences almost as well as he did in his younger days, though it is to say he has a lot more help this time around thanks to computer animation. But reflecting on his character in the actual Verne novel, one wonders was Chan was even considered for this since Passpartout was French and had nothing to with a ring of Chinese acrobatic fighters. In fact, in the film adaptation he isn't even named Passpartout, it's Passpartwo … this is a huge difference from the creative liberties taken in changing Phileas Fogg's character as this modifies the story drastically and tweaks too much of the novels purpose. And Cecille de France's character, Monique de Grave, is rather a new addition to the classic story, though in part she may be based on Aouda, who, in the novel, was Parsee Indian princess who fell was rescued by Phileas Fogg and Passportout on their travels through India. Unfortunately her addition is rather a weak addition and does nothing more then hinder the story and its characters down longer then they should be. Though it is to say that it was a delightful touch for the filmmakers to keep the romantic aspect of the story in tact, the novel's version is a lot more exciting and romantic then the rather bland one presented in this adaptation.

Overall, Around the World's exuberant boast of presenting a brilliant and imaginative take on the classic Jules Verne novel seems have been filled with nothing but hot air with numerous plot holes failing to deliver audience members to their promised destination. The problem is that the filmmakers never fix the film in a proper place in time, the novel itself was set in 1872, which allows them to place as many historical figures and events in a two hour film as they want without having to worry contradicting historical time periods. This is what hurts the film the most as this idea was tried not once but twice before with Shanghai Noon and Shanghai Knights, both of which starred Jackie Chan, which may give reason to why he was attracted to this film. The lack of originality in the film's direction makes it feel more like a cute joke that is used too often and becomes more tired and dull as it is told more and more often. But as much as there is to complain about the film's lack of originality and its less then respected reverence to the classic Jules Verne novel, the latest adaptation of Around the World in 80 Days is not a complete train wreck and does contain several humorous moments sure to entertain the younger crowd it is aimed at and enough Jackie Chan fight sequences to keep adults from feeling they have totally wasted their time. In the end, the film is just another summer distraction for those who have felt they have seen Shrek 2 or Harry Potter & the Prisoner of Azkaban way too many times in the past few weeks.

My Rating: *** out of 5 (Grade: C-)