Showing posts with label Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

50/50

50 50 Poster.jpg
Released:  September 30th, 2011
Rated:  R
Studio:  Summit Entertainment
Starring:  Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Seth Rogen, Anna Kendrick, Bryce Dallas Howard, Anjelica Huston
Directed by:  Jonathan Levine
Written by:  Will Reiser
Personal Bias Alert:  dislikes manchild jokes, likes Joseph Gordon-Levitt

4.5 of 10





            What’s funny about cancer?  “First of all, it starts with that hard C sound, that K.  That is a comedy principle,” said Sarah Silverman in her Stand Up to Cancer video.  She goes on to tell a few more jokes while weaving in a serious message, mirroring in three minutes what it takes 50/50 100 minutes to do.  Now, I know that Silverman’s video and 50/50 are entirely different mediums of work, which partially explains the time difference, but it also highlights how much more a film is expected to do.  50/50 tries to do more, but too much of it feels false to get across any larger meaning.

            Much ado was made during the film’s release about the story being based on writer Will Reiser’s own cancer incident (he recovered before writing the script).  The story loosely follows Reiser and friend/co-star Seth Rogen’s experience, focusing on how the unexpected cancer diagnosis of 20-something Adam (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) effects his friends, family, and himself.  Perhaps this gave me some false expectations.  I was hoping for a funny, insightful film that felt close to reality, and what I got was a formulaic, manchild comedy with an affecting ending.  Needless to say, I was disappointed.

            My biggest problem with the film, which would have bothered me even without my incorrect expectations, was just how unrealistic the whole thing was.  And I don’t mean the cancer scare.  I know that 20-somethings get cancer.  It’s the insufferable tropes surrounding Adam’s predicament that annoyed the hell out of me.  Between the inattentive girlfriend, the doctor with horrible bedside manners, the overbearing mother, the manchild best friend, and the terrible therapist, I couldn’t find any genuine characters for Adam to interact with.  Every scene felt unnatural, and, well, written.  There are few things that annoy me more in a movie than being able to see the strings, and this film leaves them pretty bare.

            Moreover, this film just felt nasty to me.  It judges all its characters, hard, for the vast majority of its runtime.  The fact that they’re all so one-note, and that their notes are so negative, left me little room to care about them at all.  I mean, why should I care about a mother who overreacts to everything whenever she comes onscreen?  She’s not my mother, and Adam is perfectly fine with ignoring her, so I am too.  At least the best friend played by Rogan makes some effort, but he fails so miserably that I just wanted him to leave Adam alone.  Honestly, I didn’t even buy that those two would be friends, cancer or not.

            Then you have the technical aspects of the film, which too often stick out and add to the unreality of the whole thing.  I made two separate notes about how much I hated the music in this film, once after the cancer reveal and once in the scene where Adam’s high.  Although, the music wasn’t the only thing wrong with the overdone ‘Adam’s high’ scene.  Between the hackneyed cinematography, the ridiculous slow-motion chuckles, and that music, I thought I had stepped into a happy version of Reefer Madness.

            The only spark in the first 75 minutes of this film are the scenes between Adam and Katherine, the young therapist played by Anna Kendrick.  Gordon-Levitt and Kendrick are the only ones with enough screen time and talent to overcome their thin characters, and there’s moments when their interactions feel genuine.  Add in that these two are the only characters allowed to show a shred of decency before the ending, and it’s no wonder I didn’t care about the rest of the movie.

            And let’s talk about that ending.  There’s such a sharp tone change in the last 25 minutes that it felt like a different movie.  The raunchy comedy is abandoned in favor of the big, emotional ending, which is a bit easy and familiar given the setup, but Gordon-Levitt sells it so well that it’s hard not to be moved.  I actually enjoyed this part of the film, probably because the characters around Adam were suddenly allowed to act like actual human beings.  They were still flawed, but their efforts inexplicably start to amount to something.  It’s not at all consistent with the rest of the film, but I was so happy that it was finally working that I threw up my hands and went with it.  I just wish the rest of the film had actually set this ending up.

Other Notes:
Ø  What world does this film exist in?  No doctor would be that oblivious while revealing a cancer diagnosis, and no one would do what Rogan’s character does with that picture.
Ø  The crude humor felt out of place.
Ø  I liked Kendrick and Gordon-Levitt’s relationship, but I’m not sure about the ethics of it.  I mean, he was her patient.
Ø  Sarah Silverman’s Stand Up to Cancer video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGtaV85AzWE

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Sin-City-A-Dame-to-Kill-For-teaser-poster.jpg
Released:  August 22nd, 2014
Rated:  R
Studio:  The Weinstein Company
Starring:  Mickey Rourke, Jessica Alba, Josh Brolin, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Rosario Dawson, Bruce Willis, Eva Green, Powers Boothe
Directed by:  Frank Miller, Robert Rodriguez
Written by:  Frank Miller
Personal Bias Alert:  didn’t like Sin City, gets distracted when the background exists in a different universe than the actors

5 of 10



            Like the original, Sin City:  A Dame to Kill For is less a feature than a series of shorts.  It’s only tied together in the sense that it takes place in the same town at roughly the same time, allowing the characters to move in and out of storylines.  Also like its predecessor, it’s packed with stars, guns, leather, unique coloring, terrible dialogue, and poor plots.

            This is a guess, but I think Mickey Rourke had the most screen time, making him the de facto star.  His character, Marv, fits in so well with the city that he’s almost bound to pop up in every story.  He’s big, tough, and always looking for a fight, which isn’t a difficult search in Basin City (Sin City?  What is this town’s name?).  He starts one in the opening story Just Another Saturday Night and gets recruited in A Dame to Kill For and Nancy’s Last Dance.  In between, he sucks booze and cigarettes, lusts after Nancy (Jessica Alba), and laments in clunky noir-style narration his meaningless life.  I think he just needs to put down the booze and take his pills on time, but this isn’t that kind of world.  As a summation of the city, and by extension the movie, he’s a natural fit.  He even has a good leather coat.

            Perhaps the only thing Marv’s missing is some good curves, because to go without mentioning the hyper sexual nature of this film would be a disservice.  It’s incredibly preoccupied with the female body, whether entirely naked or bound in leather.  Eva Green’s Ava, the titular dame to kill for, stars in the largest section of the film, often naked, using her extreme powers of seduction to get what she wants.  The catch is, she is neither the main character nor the good guy in the story (both go to Josh Brolin’s Dwight).  Her powers are portrayed as evil, driving men to do the things they are otherwise able to resist.  It’s a sexist slant that runs through the entire film, as much of the action seems to spawn from the strip club Nancy works at.  Tsk-tsk.  We women and our sexuality are always causing problems.

I know you’re shaking your head at me for pointing out Sin City’s sexism, because hey, it’s a selling point.  It’s on par with criticizing it for its cinematography, which is arguably the most distinctive look in modern cinema.  When you see a still from this series, it’s instantly recognizable.  You will never mistake it for something else.  While I’m not a massive fan of the style, it is interesting if only for its novelty, so when the story started to drag I remained moderately entertained by its looks.  The hyper sexuality is a natural extension of this desire to visually entertain, and it’s ultimately successful.  Green does look good, as do all the ladies in the film, so even though it’s appealing to a base desire, I have to give the film credit for delivering what it promises.

As I mentioned, the stories do drag at times, with certain ones working better than others.  A Dame to Kill For is by far the most complete story, even if everything in it is very one-note.  Nancy’s Last Dance manages to give fans of the first movie a gratifying ending, and Just Another Saturday Night is over so quickly that it’s hard to have a strong opinion.  By far the worst is The Long Bad Night, featuring Gordon-Levitt as a talented gambler taking on Senator Roark.  The plot outcome is so preordained that the story seems pointless, and it adds absolutely nothing to the tone or overarching themes of the story.  Why it exists is a mystery to me.

If I thought this film was trying to be anything other than pulpy noir, then I would give it a much lower rating.  For what it is, it works adequately well, and there’s no way you can accuse it of false advertising.

Other Notes:
Ø  No joke, an anti-smoking ad played in front of my screening.
Ø  Throughout most of Eva Green’s scenes, I imagined her turning to the camera, pointing to her face, and saying “eyes up here.”
Ø  I feel like a lot of these character’s problems would be solved if they just shot people in the head faster.