Black Dynamite (Review)

      Somehow, I missed "Black Dynamite" when it was in theaters.  Now, finally, thanks to Netflix, I get to see it.  (Can you dig it?)

     "Black Dynamite" is pure spoof.  It parodies the classic Blaxploitation films of the early 1970s, making fun of films like "Shaft," "Dolemite," and many others in the short lived, but prolific, genre, mocking their low budget production values, kung fu prostitutes, and the unending battle against The Man.  Black Dynamite, played by Michael Jai White, is a  former CIA operative and bad ass pimp, who is training his prostitutes in kung fu so they can fight The Man in the coming revolution.  When The Man kills his brother, Black Dynamite comes out of retirement to avenge his brother's death and uncover an evil plot by The Man to destroy the black community. 

     ...And that's about as much sense as the plot will ever make.  Most Blaxploitation films have continuity errors and plot holes so big you could drive a mac truck through them, and so does "Black Dynamite," but it's meant to.  Being a genre spoof, there isn't much to say about "Black Dynamite," except that it's an intelligently done spoof of Blaxploitation films that just gets better and funnier the more you know about the genre but is likely to confuse those with no knowledge of Blaxploitation.  Michael Jai White is dead on, and drop dead funny, as stone cold (I am smiling,) yet righteous, cultural warrior, Black Dynamite, fighting in the revolution against The Man.  Numerous other supporting roles, like Arsenio Hall as Tasty Freeze and Tommy Davidson as Cream Corn, are just as funny and accurate to the genre. 

     "Black Dynamite" is a must see for anyone who's ever seen a Blaxploitation film.  Can you dig it?

P.S.  If you're looking into the genre for the first time, start with "Shaft" and work your way down.   "Dolemite" is kinda rough, as in, you might not ever try the genre again.  

Crazy Heart (Review)

     Growing up in small (extremely small) town Texas, I have a healthy dislike for Country music.  So does "Crazy Heart."  It might seem like a meaningless distinction, but "Crazy Heart" is more about the very old school Country/Western/West Texas kind of not quite Country, not quite Rock, not quite Folk music that has a real authenticity to it without being pretentious or superior about exactly how authentic it is the way modern Country music tends to be.  The kind musical background that gives us artists ranging from Willie Nelson to Janis Joplin.  This may make this review a bit biased, but the characters and situations in this film are real (to me, anyway.)  I've known them and people like them all my life.  "Crazy Heart" is a real, down to earth drama that doesn't claim that down to earth is somehow superior like so much commercialized, so called, Country music does today.

     "Crazy Heart" is about aging Country and Western star Bad Blake, played Jeff Bridges. Bad Blake is fifty-seven, broke, alcoholic, and is now consigned to playing gigs in small bars in the middle of nowhere and bowling alleys.  On one of these gigs he meets small town reporter and hopeful writer Jean Craddock, played by Maggie Gyllenhaal.  She has a bit of an infatuation for this aging music icon and the has been Country and Western star is drawn to the occasional glimpses of family life he gets from Jean and her 4 year old son.  Add to this Tommy Sweet, played by Colin Farrell, a former member of Bad Blake's band in Blake's glory days and a current Country/Pop star who has reverence for his former mentor for teaching him everything he knows about music and resentment about his fallen idol's alcohol soaked condition.  Eventually, Bad Blake finds redemption in these two and the strength to crawl out of the bottle and write new music, even if he's not the star who's playing it anymore.

     "Crazy Heart" is an almost shockingly realistic drama and story of redemption that really lets you get to know the best and worst of its characters without getting preachy or saccharine.  Bridges' Bad Blake has a realistic, hard edge to him that isn't endearing but is very human and allows you to connect with his character and his character's situation in a very real and meaningful way.  As I said before, I may be biased because of this, but I have known people like Bad Blake all my life, and Bridges Blake was hauntingly familiar to me as were some of the other supporting characters.  Gyllenhaal is similarly authentic as the single mother who, rightfully, fears Bad Blake's alcoholic exterior but loves his warm and caring inner self.  She makes it easy to both empathize with her need to feel some kind of love and painful to watch her making the same mistakes over and over again.  The story may not be overly surprising, but it is realistic and it seems, even the characters themselves can see most of what's coming, but, just like real life, they allow themselves to be pulled into all to familiar and destructive paths until something or someone comes along to pull them out or remind them about the things in life that are worth living for.

     Despite my extreme aversion to Country music, I thoroughly enjoyed "Crazy Heart," and I hope its Western flavor doesn't stop others from enjoying this well acted, well written, drama about some very flawed, but very real characters.

P.S.
     Seeing it at the Alamo Drafthouse and having their "Crazy Heart" themed Biscuit-Battered Bourbon Steak Fingers, made with Bad Blake's three favorite foods, buttermilk biscuits, steak, and bourbon, didn't hurt the experience either.  If you are ever in Austin, go to the Drafthouse.  You won't regret it.

Edge of Darkness (Review)

     Going into the theater, I was optimistic about "Edge of Darkness."  It seemed to have a lot going for it; Mel Gibson in an angry, emotional role, Ray Winstone in a shadowy, mysterious role, a dark story, and director Martin Campbell, who also directed the BBC mini series that the movie is based on.  Happily, it all comes together well.  Well, it comes together well if you like dark and violent.  (I do!)

     "Edge of Darkness" is a dramatic tale of mystery and vengeance starring Mel Gibson as Thomas Craven, a Boston police detective who's daughter is shot and killed just as she is trying to reveal to him the real reason for her sudden visit.  Craven begins to investigate his daughter's murder and becomes increasingly motivated by revenge as he descends into a complex web of corporate conspiracy and government cover-ups.  He is aided (or is he?) by a shadowy NSA agent named Jedburgh, played Ray Winstone.  Both characters are searching for a kind of redemption and, in the end, both receive some measure of it.

     "Edge of Darkness" has a gripping, dramatic, story that keeps you engaged and resolves all the mysterious elements, but only in due course.  The drama and mystery are punctuated by scenes of sudden and intense violence, all of which are done very realistically and are not over stylized or completely unbelievable or unintelligible like a lot of action movies seem to be today.  The violence is also not inappropriately bloody or gory, but, again, is realistic and believable, though some scenes are appropriately bloody and intense.  Gibson is quite convincing, almost frighteningly so, as a bereaved father who will stop at nothing to avenge his daughter's death because he has nothing else left to lose, and Winstone, in some ways, outshines Gibson in his stone cold portrayal of a NSA fixer who may, or may not, be tired of cleaning up other people's messes.  The thick, Boston accents didn't distract form the film and seem, to me anyway, to be authentic, but, then again, I can't really tell (y'all.)

     I always enjoy realistic action dramas or thrillers.  "Michael Clayton" comes to mind.  "Edge of Darkness" is a bit more intense than "Michael Clayton," and a lot more violent, but all the same basic elements are there, good actors, good characters, good writing, good drama, and a realistic execution.  All of it makes for a well done drama that one can enjoy without having to suspend disbelief.

Invictus (Review)

     I was anxiously awaiting this one.  It had all the right elements to be great: a truly incredible, true story, Clint Eastwood directing, and Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon starring.  It's also a sports story about rugby, but, nothing's perfect.

     "Invictus" is the true story about how a newly elected Nelson Mandela tried to bring some unity to a fractured South Africa by promoting the national rugby team, who were hated by native Africans and loved by the white Afrikaners, and pushing them to win the World Cup.  Morgan Freeman delivers a stellar and convincing performance as Mandela.  Matt Damon co stars as the captain of the South African Springboks, (Spring Buck) François Pienaar, a man who realizes that his team can overcome its image of a hated symbol of apartheid and can help to unite and build a new South Africa. 

     I think Eastwood milked the ending tension a bit with the slow motion grunting and multiple cutaways, but other than that, "Invictus" is a truly great film.  It manages to tell a story happening amidst great social turmoil and in a land of incredible racial hatred and injustice without bludgeoning you to death that fact.  Instead, "Invictus" is about finding the inner strength to accomplish what must be done, no matter how difficult the task, its about being the 'captain of' your 'unconquerable soul,' it's about what motivates people to achieve greatness and where leaders find the inspiration to lead.  Mandela manages to find strength in a poem, and he instills that strength in François who leads him team to greatness and inspires them to achieve for a greater cause than just rugby. 

     Even if you don't like sports movies, and I generally don't, "Invictus" is an inspirational true story that is well worth seeing.

Rustlers' Rhapsody (Review)

     "Rustlers' Rhapsody" is one of those forgotten gems from the 80's.  A western spoof that doesn't take its self too seriously and is completely conscious of its self, but, at the same time, still works as a movie and manages to be very funny.

     The concept here is simple, and is spelled out in narration at the beginning of the film.  What if all those serial westerns of the 40's and 50's were done today.  (And by 'today,' I mean the mid 80's.)  After a quick shift from black and white to color, we get a spoof of those old westerns, and the later spaghetti westerns, with some classic elements, like the good guy always wins, he never draws first, and he never kills anyone, he just disarms them, and a modern look at a lot of those old western cliches, like the way the good guy dressed, and how every single western was, pretty much, identical, (which is why they're called cliches) plus some added modern elements, like a bit of sex and drug (root) use.  The characters are all western cliches as well.  Tom Berenger plays Rex O'Herlihan, The Singing Cowboy, (the what?) G.W. Bailey is the town drunk and Rex's sidekick, Marilu Henner is the prostitute with a heart of gold, (who doesn't actually sleep with her clients) Andy Griffith is the cattle baron (bad guy), and Fernando Rey is a spaghetti western-esque railroad tycoon.  (Another bad guy!)  There's even a second good guy, played by Patrick Wayne, leaving everyone to wonder, what happens when two good guys fight each other. 

     Berenger and Bailey compliment each other well and Bailey's character provides some great comic relief to the stiff and proper Rex O'Herlihan, stereotypical western good guy, but the real star of this movie is the screenplay.  Every western movie cliche is picked out and dissected.  Nothing is left unexamined and every one is turned on it's ear in ways that should have been obvious while we were all watching those old westerns.  Maybe they were a bit obvious, but we were able to forgive them because the good guy always won and we always knew where we stood with them.  

     "Rustlers' Rhapsody" may not be as well known or have the star power "Blazing Saddles," but it is a unique and very funny western comedy/spoof.  I can safely recommend it to anyone, but especially to anyone who fondly remembers a time when movies cost a nickle, Hopalong Cassidy always got his man, and you could sit through both showings of a double feature, twice. 

時をかける少女 or Toki wo Kakeru Shoujo or The Girl Who Leapt Through Time (Review)

     When I saw "Toki wo Kakeru Shoujo" on Netflix, I thought it sounded like a a fairly original idea and was curious to see a Japanese perspective on time travel.  I discovered later (five minutes ago) that this is actually, only the newest incarnation of an old story in Japan.  The original dates back to 1965, according to The Boston Globe.1  (Actually, I learned that from Wikipedia, but I refuse to quote them as a credible source.)

     "Toki wo Kakeru Shoujo" is an almost tragic love story/coming of age tale, about an ordinary, maybe 15 year old, girl, Makoto Konno, voiced by Riisa Naka, who accidentally acquires the ability to, quite literally, jump through time.  (I'm surprised she didn't get a concussion from all the rough landings.)  Predictability, she uses the new found power to improve her own life, redoing each small embarrassment over and over until it come out well, and discovers, again, predictability, that her actions may have unintended consequences.

     While the setup may be cliche, where they go with it is not.  I absolutely hate domestic romance flicks.  They are all identical in the third act, leading up to what is really only the beginning of the story, and they all end in a huge romantic gesture and passionate kiss that, if you actually stop to think about it, is likely to be the start of a terrible relationship.  Thankfully, "Toki wo Kakeru Shoujo" doesn't go there.  It's more like one of my favorite films, "Roman Holiday."  Sure, they have a good time for a day, but in the end, it can never happen.  Well, maybe it can happen for these kids, but that's for the future, quite literally, and maybe a sequel.

     "Toki wo Kakeru Shoujo" has a great story, great development of characters, a surprise near the end that I would have never seen coming, is voiced very well, and, like most Japanese animated movies, is beautiful to look at.  It also seems to put a new twist on this old, Japanese tale.  From what I can tell, which isn't much, I don't think that the girl in these stories was ever as strong a character as Makoto is in this version. I could be wrong though. 

     Anime fans (the ones who like to read their anime, anyway) will enjoy this modern update of "Toki wo Kakeru Shoujo" and so will anyone who enjoys a well done, if a bit fanciful, coming of age tale. 


1. http://www.boston.com/movies/display?display=movie&id=12469

Død snø Or Dead Snow (Review)

      I will apologize now if my objectivity on this review is not as objective as it should be, however, I LOVE zombie movies, and I saw "Dead Snow" on Halloween, at the Alamo Drafthouse; the experience could have not been better.

     "Dead Snow" is a Norwegian, Nazi zombie movie (that should be all the review you need!) and an instant classic for the dark comedy/horror genre.  The premise is simple and familiar; (even the people in the movie recognize it) a group of young, med students are on a ski trip to a remote mountain cabin where there is no cell phone signal or any other means of communication, they had to hike forty-five minutes to get there, and, the only other person they see is a random, old man of the mountain, who shows up for no purpose other than to educate the vacationers, and the audience, of an evil presence on the mountain, in the form of Nazis, who fled to the mountain with their stolen gold and were never seen again.  Some fun in the snow, drinking, and sex follows, and then our vacationing med students are besieged by hordes of Nazi zombies and the gore fest begins! 

     "Dead Snow" is extremely self aware, making fun of its self when it begins to become too serious or cliche.  It mixes dark humor, gruesome death by zombie, and horror movie stereotype in a way that is very reminiscent or "Evil Dead II."  While the crowd I was watching with, a sold out showing for the final movie in the Alamo Drafthouse's, Dismember the Alamo film festival, was obviously, like myself, biased and inclined to enjoy this movie, I still feel it is worth mentioning that multiple times during the movie, we broke out in applause at the creative gore, unique zombies kills, and the absolutely righteous mass slaughtering of Nazi zombies.

     I hate to give away too much of a good movie, but I would like to mention (entice you with) some vague details, like the fact that a Nazi zombie's intestine can support the weight of a person, and a higher ranked Nazi zombie, while they are both dangling off a cliff, the fact that I have never seen more intestine in any movie, ever, the fact that, at one point, someone's brains landed on the floor, and the fact that this movie contains, hands down, the funniest, self amputation scene that I have ever had the pleasure of witnessing.

     I find it very difficult to actually review "Dead Snow."  I think about this movie and I just smile and wish I could see it again, and again, and again.  (Sometimes I start to giggle a bit too.)  It is pure gory fun.  One of those rare gory, scary, and yet funny movies that just seems to get everything right.

True, "Dead Snow" is not for everyone.  It does take a special (that boy ain't right) individual to like this kind of movie, but if you liked the Evil Dead movies, you will absolutely love "Dead Snow."

     P.S.  Ok, so I didn't answer the main question for any zombie movie.  Slow moving, Romero-esque, living dead, zombies or fast moving, virus infected, not really dead, zombies?  Neither.  These zombies are obviously dead, they move as quickly as a living Nazi, but there is no explanation for how they became zombies other than, they were the really evil Nazis, and they want all their stolen Nazi gold back. It all sounds so ridiculous when you say it out loud, but, when you are in the theater, watching it unfold, it's pure Nazi zombie magic.

雲のむこう、約束の場所 or Kumo no Mukou, Yakusoku no Basho or The Place Promised in Our Early Days (Review)

     Back in the day, watching anime meant a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a video tape and a photocopied script that were mailed around together, so it was really something when computers reached the point of being able to process video in a reasonable amount of time and dedicated fans could translate and subtitle anime themselves.  Of course, you still could end up with a copy of a copy of a copy.  The accessibility of the internet and the fears connected to file sharing seem to have destroyed most of the tight knit communities of fan subtitleers, and the advent of DVDs just makes the whole process seem archaic and not really worth the effort anymore.  Ah, memories.  I've seen a lot of anime and, as a student of Sociology, studied the Japanese culture, a bit, so, a lot of the stuff in anime doesn't shock or confuse me anymore.  I had to say that so you could understand the full gravity of the statement I am about to make.  "Kumo no Mukou, Yakusoku no Basho" is the most confusing, yet beautiful, anime, that I have ever seen.  In the end, though, I think that the beauty of it was the point, and the not understanding of how and why is intentional.

     The less you know about "Kumo no Mukou, Yakusoku no Basho," the better.  It takes place in a slightly altered present day Japan, however, the movie's revelation of those alterations, as well as the revelation of other plot and story elements, is integral to the story as a whole, so, to review this movie properly, I will need to completely destroy the experience you will have in watching the movie.  Before I do that, I will say that "Kumo no Mukou, Yakusoku no Basho" has elements of a coming of age story, a tragic love story, and is a very complex tale where the experience of the story is more important than the scientific analysis of the 'universe' that the story takes place in.  To enjoy this film, you need to experience it and not try to analyze the sci-fi-ish aspects of it, you need to allow the film to reveal its secrets to you and not try to guess them ahead of time, (your guesses will almost always be wrong) and you need to be ready for a story that is far deeper and more complex that most.  Characters first, augmented by story and animation, and setting becomes almost irrelevant.  (...if you're wondering how he eats and breathes and other science facts, just repeat to yourself, "It's just a show.  I should really just relax...")

     Also, as an essential side note, never watch anime in English.  You lose all the emotion and feeling of the characters.  If you are not willing to read subtitles, then maybe this movie, and anime, in general, just isn't for you.  (Don't be one of those people who puts down reading.  It only makes you look ignorant.) 

     Now on to the complete destruction of the experience I was just talking about.  Really, if you think you might watch "Kumo no Mukou, Yakusoku no Basho," don't read any further.  Just watch it.

Battle For Terra (Review)

      I had seen "Battle for Terra" in theaters when it came out, but only the 2-D version, however, thanks to the Fantastic Fest and the Alamo Drafthouse, I got to see it in 3-D (and have a really good pizza.)      Sadly, the 3-D does very little for this movie.  Luckily, there are no moments of things flying out of the screen, just some floating credits, but there is also not a lot of really good use of 3-D in the screen.  Most of the time, you don't even notice the 3-D or it seems to be almost non existent, as if the movie was not originally made for 3-D and it was added after the fact.  Some of the space scenes are nice in 3-D and the huge, flying, alien whale thing is a nice effect, but all in all, you can safely skip the 3-D version and not really be missing anything.

     Than having been said, this was a pretty good movie.  It is not a lesson on environmentalism.  It is an anti war story.  The movie begins on Terra, an alien world inhabited by large eyed, legless aliens who seem to swim through the air.  Despite the lack of 3-D luster, the animation is actually quite breathtaking.  Not to far in, humans arrive.  It seems that we did not destroy the environment, rather, over centuries, we used up the the Earth's resources.  (No, it is not about recycling either.)  After that, we terraformed Mars and Venus, colonized them, and began to use their resources.  About 200 years after that, the colonies want independence.  War destroys all three worlds, and the remaining humans strike out in a huge ship, taking generations to arrive at the nearest world that can support life, Terra.  So, it's us or them.  The story is a bit archetypal at this point.  There's a general, hell bent on destruction of the native Terrians as the only solution, a young, intelligent Terrian trying to rescue her father, a human pilot who is rescued by a Terrian, and even a cute, little robot sidekick, however, despite a less than original general story, the execution of the story is gripping  and done more than well enough to keep you engaged.  You get drawn into these characters and actually care about what happens to them.  They manage to not make the robot an annoying gimmick and make him more than a bit player.  There is even a surprise as the Terrians end up being not your typical group of backwater natives.

     I enjoyed this movie.  It's not long enough to get preachy or boring or hung up on details or the science of anything and it moves along at a really nice pace.  The voice actors all do a good job, including Evan Rachel Wood and Luke Wilson in starring roles as the Terrian Mala and Human fighter pilot, Jim Stanton.  Other voices include James Garner, David Cross, Beverly D'Angelo, Danny Glover, Laraine Newman, Ron Perlman, Dennis Quaid, and Mark Hamill.  That's quite a lot of star power.  Unfortunately, only James Garner and David Cross play roles of any consequence.  Cross plays the, thankfully, not annoying, (and thankfully not very David Cross) robot Giddy and Garner plays one of the elder Terrians (and guardian of the terrible secret) 

     Ok, so I liked "Battle for Terra," who else will enjoy it?  It's animated, so you think kids, but it's not really a kids movie.  There is war, violence, death, alien autopsy, racial hatred, and an attempted genocide.  Even if you'd like your youngster to see the positive message about living in harmony and peace, it's likely to be a bit much for them.  Adults are likely to be thrown by the short running time, 85 minutes, the sci-fi setting, and the kinda cutesy aliens, and teens will likely think it's a kids movie.  However, if you can get over watching a cartoon (CGI, that is, and beautifully done) and you are old enough for the PG-13 content, I'd recommend seeing "Battle for Terra", at least once.