W

Having not read the reviews, I approached W with an open mind. After all, I have enjoyed many of Oliver Stone's films in the past, and I think Josh Brolin is on the type of acting roll that creates Oscar winners. However, I also have a bit of apprehension about any politically motivated skewering of one of the most controversial presidents in the history of our country, not to mention the current leader of the free world.

I was surprised and pleased that the film focused less on the mistakes that George Bush has made (although those were certainly incorporated) and more on the growth and path that led him to the white house. Perhaps the most interesting and entertaining aspect of the film was the supporting cast of players, who all did an exceptional job with the exception of Thandie Newton, who I can't tell if she intentionally made Condoleeza Rice look like an ignorant puppet, or if that's just how it turned out. Anyway, from Dick Cheney, to George Bush, Karl Rove and Donald Rumsfeld, the actors hit the characters with stellar accuracy.

Especially remarkable were the performances of Jeffrey Wright playing Colin Powell, and Josh Brolin playing W himself. I fully expect Oscar nominations for Brolin as well as either Cromwell or Dreyfuss based on the pivotal scenes and likenesses of character. The story is compelling if not a bit uncomfortable, but the personal perspectives of the director are subtle and restrained. I fully enjoyed the ride, although it did start to slow down a little bit toward the end.

Where the film missed the mark is in the absence of critical information to the development of the story. For example, Bush's campaign for governor of Texas breezed through the process without a hint of how he found himself in the position. Likewise, with flashes back and forward from his prolongued adolescence to the aftermath of 9/11, there is no time spent dealing with the event that polarized our country forever. Additionally, for a man who has difficulty holding down a job, how exactly does he find himself as the owner of a major league baseball team? The business sense he gained from Harvard's business school should have been more than mentioned in passing, as that accomplishment alone warrants some attention.

We, as viewers do achieve a sense of the motivation and political influence of the prestigious Bush name, and to Stone's credit, it is quite well done. The acclaim belongs to the players though.

A very interesting story; it makes you think about the changes in the political world over the past 20 years, and that although many things have changed for the better or worse, the old school wealthy grey-haired Ivy league politicians still rule undisputably. Worth seeing whether you are a supporter or not. 7/10.

Body of Lies

I read David Ignatious' book in 2007 and thought it was a riveting CIA story about an operative who finds himself torn between the real-time intelligence that he receives in the volatile Middle East, and the bureaucratic red tape in Washington that dictates his rules of engagement.

Ridley Scott's adaptation is an exciting thrill-a-minute action movie, but too much of the mystique of covert operations is wasted behind an absurd power struggle between the man on the ground (DiCaprio) and his supervisor in the safety of an air conditioned office (Crowe). The interaction between these two is cool, but Crowe's character is despicable and callous not to mention ignorant of Middle Eastern customs and language. Qualities that certainly do not qualify someone to head a division even in the black ops realm of the CIA.

The film belongs to DiCaprio. He displays his inner action star, but does so with a bit of nobility. Films like Blood Diamond and the Departed showed a glimmer of his potential in this arena, and he brings quality acting to the table as well as a believable character. Crowe simply brings a second big name to the mix. He could have played this part in his sleep, and it's obvious.

Ridley Scott accentuates the technological capabilities as well as the ethical grey areas as it concerns the global war on terror. There are no boundaries or rules when dealing with extremist groups who want nothing more than to punish the infidels. Scott makes sure that the viewer realizes this, and it helps the film.

What does not help the film however, is that it is far too long. At 2 hours and 8 minutes, it seems more like 3 hours, and the multitude of plot twists that made Ignatious' book so entertaining have found themselves on the cutting room floor save one mildly unexpected twist.

The film comes and goes, and there is no real satisfaction or resolution. The climax comes far too quickly during the pivotal scenes near the end, and although the intent is to be a smart, realistic, spy thriller, Ridley Scott should have milked the action angle a little more for entertainment value since he scrapped major plot points.

Some of the action is commendable - particularly with regard to the military and intelligence scenes, but the action is dulled by interludes of nonsensical romantic tension that is seemingly only placed in the film because there was nothing else to put in it.

I loved the book, but only moderately enjoyed the film. Perhaps my standards are skewed and a comparison is unfair. If you have no basis for comparison, this would be one of the better films in recent years to tackle the subject of terrorism, but in many ways it is still just a waste of talented actors, writers and director. By the way - William Monahan (the Departed) wrote the screenplay for this one, and fails in my book. I'm looking forward to more of DiCaprio's films in the near future. 7/10.

Eagle Eye

This cautionary tale derives much of its influence from 2001 and 1984, both exceptional stories, yet very much unrealistic. The film begins with a special operations group targeting a terrorist Muslim group somewhere in the Middle East using the latest and greatest computer assimilating technology, dubbed Eagle Eye. From there the story flashes to Chicago where we find out unlikely protagonist, Jerry Shaw (Shia LaBeouf) leading a remarkably unremarkable life as a copy clerk. He is chosen by a mysterious voice and is paired up with Rachel Holloman (Michelle Monaghan) to complete a series of tasks that put them both in constant jeopardy. Will they escape? Who is behind this mysterious omnipotent voice? Who cares?

What begins as an intriguing story begins its inevitable demise far too early in the film to be taken seriously. There are good sequences of action (those which don't have so much shaky camera work that the screen is a blur of twisted metal and explosions) and some of the technological aspects of the story are interesting, but the characters never fully convince the viewer that they are worthy of these tasks, or that they deserve to survive.

After many red herrings and unwarranted tension-filled scenes, the elaborate puzzle pieces come together in a cacophony of absurdity. Is there anyone within the Department of Defense who knows what they are doing? Will Jerry and Rachel complete their tasks? What are their tasks? Again - who cares? The film does a terrible job compelling the viewer to invest emotion in these characters.

Billy Bob Thornton is in his element as the FBI Special Agent in Charge of Anti-Terrorism, and adds some dry humor as well as some star talent to the picture. Michael Chiklis on the other hand, is entirely out of place as the Secretary of Defense. Perhaps it's difficult to see him playing anything except for a morally corrupt cop who is out for street justice, but just about anyone would have been a better choice for this particular role.

DJ Caruso seems to have a template for his films, attempting to manipulate the viewer by giving the protagonist a tragedy that somehow affects the outcome of the story. This paradigm gets old, and the story would have been better off had this not happened (of course, the story gets so ridiculous that I'm not sure if it would have actually been better off).

Shia is a very affable actor, good screen presence and witty. He plays a good action/comedy lead, but Monaghan doesn't do anything for me. Bottom line - this film has some good action, but is ridiculous and lets the viewer down at the end. 6/10.

Seven Pounds

I had the distinguished privilege of being at a test screening of Seven Pounds over three months before its scheduled release date in late December. It has already begun generating Oscar buzz, but I will give you the straight scoop.

Seven Pounds follows an IRS agent named Ben (Will Smith) who is trying to atone for a tragic accident that he feels personally responsible for, by committing random acts of kindness to strangers who happen to be on his caseload. The story is a little more complicated than that, but without spoiling anything crucial, that is the premise.

Will Smith will be nominated for an Oscar for his performance, without a doubt. The filmmaker (Gabriele Muccino - the Pursuit of Happyness) and film are another story altogether. Granted, I viewed a rough cut, and with the audience response, I am sure that some major cuts will be made including some of the more pivotal scenes in spoiling the twist. Smith is harrowing in his performance, no humor at all - just the shell of a broken man trying to find his personal salvation through others. The dark undertones of the story take a little bit away from the performance, but despite what you think of the film itself, Smith is still a beacon of brilliance.

Rosario Dawson is the love interest, and although she holds her own, there is something that doesn't seem quite right about her playing this role. A conversation about her heart condition came up afterward and there were some lingering questions. Woody Harrelson is a bright spot among an otherwise unremarkable supporting cast (Barry Pepper was awful and should be cut altogether). He receives a minimal amount of screen time, but it is powerful, particularly the seemingly out of place phone conversation with Smith near the beginning of the film.

There are a few minor flaws, which may still be addressed before the film is rolled out for general audience. The first is that there are a couple of plot twists that the viewer suspects way too early on and are simply anti-climactic when they come to fruition. The second is the ending. Once the pivotal climax occurs, there is too much reflection and the final sequence drags out unnecessarily. On a brighter note, the choice of pet that Will Smith owns is probably the most original and interesting seen in film in recent memory. There is one image that stays in my mind even after the plot of the film and the dialogue fade.

It is not a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination, in fact, with some surgical editing, it could be a very good one. I just think that the themes and story are too dark and depressing to end up winning statues in March. Smith is exceptional (again) and I look forward to seeing the final cut on DVD next year. 8/10 (with optimism for some final editing).

Burn After Reading

The much anticipated follow up to the best film of 2007 by two of the most creatively innovative filmmakers of our time takes the form of a silly spy comedy, but it works. Star power and Coen movie regulars carry witty dialogue and character development despite the lack of a compelling story. There are clearly trademark Coen comedy staples, such as the long loud wingtip-clacking walk down a government agency hallway. There is something about the camera behind the shoes angle that never gets old to me. There is also the slightly morbid twist of gratuitous violence that shakes up the comedic vibe, something that has turned off many other critics, but which works just fine with this film.

George Clooney headlines as a sex-addicted Treasury Department agent (although the Marshals fall under the Justice Department, but that's a technicality). He finds himself involved in a tangled web of players ranging from CIA spooks to a trio of "Hardbodies" gym employees, to Russian emissaries when a classified file is discovered and used as an instrument of blackmail. The character is a bit of a schmuck, but played well by Clooney who has a wonderful comedic presence and was probably in his element filming this role.

Brad Pitt (who I honestly believe is a great actor) is the likable but not-so-bright gym employee who orchestrates the debacle with the secret disk. His performance is a far cry from the cool Tyler Durden or Detective Mills of the 90's, he exudes self-effacing confidence and is hilarious in the process.

John Malkovich (excellent performance), Frances McDormand and Tilda Swinton round out the A-list cast, but it is JK Simmons, David Rasche and Richard Jenkins that give the film its Coen brothers feel. The dialogue between Simmons and Rasche is worth the price of admission alone, and their final conversation left me laughing out loud.

Cleverly written, well acted all around, and worth checking out to any fan of the Coens, Pitt, Clooney, or Malkovich. It does not have the serious feel of Fargo or No Country, but the premise of the film is intriguing enough, and the closure is exceptional. I felt that the pace was slowing near the middle, and there were probably some unnecessary scenes, but as it comes to a close, every loose end is tied up and it is done quickly and with hilarity. JK Simmons has to be one of the funniest straight-faced actors around, and he was given some great lines.

Overall, a thoroughly entertaining movie, but perhaps a slight disappointment considering the talent involved. 7/10.

The Rocker

The Rocker follows a washed up forty-something drummer named Fish (Rainn Wilson) who does a Pete Best impression and gets kicked out of his band just prior to them making it big back in 1986. Vesuvius becomes the metal sensation ruling the 80's and 90's like Metallica, Motley Crue, Guns n' Roses and Poison all rolled into one monstrous supergroup. With Spinal Tap flair, the band is comprised of barely recognizable comic veterans Will Arnett, Bradley Cooper and Fred Armisen.

Flash to the present. Fish is desperately trying to leave the pain behind, but the reminders of Vesuvius' mega success pervades his every thought, and he just can't escape the personal hell of what might have been. From this point forward, what we get is a more mature and good-natured version of School of Rock, but Wilson is not nearly as annoying as Jack Black despite his character's many deficiencies, and the kids are a little older. What sets the film apart is that you root for Fish to succeed. There is something intangible about the positive way that this film was created. There is something counter intuitive about the character. You keep expecting some horrible quality to come out, but there is simply an excess of sloth and a love for banging the skins. Wilson is almost endearing even as he shamelessly doffs his clothes in a Will Ferrell-esque jam session. Separating Fish from the Dwight Schrute that we all know and love is nearly impossible, but that is alright.

The kids pull their weight as well, especially Fish's nephew (Josh Gad) who is the socially retarded keyboardist who conjures a less brash Jonah Hill. Their journey takes them to unprecedented heights of success, and there is even some satisfaction in the end. What is missing however is the raunchy humor and Apatow wit that we've seen in recent years, but it works as a kid-friendly film.

One knock in my opinion (although small) is the choice of original music. There is a bit of misrepresentation as the kids band is more Emo and less Rock, and although it plays into the plot a little smoother (and makes it more believable), I was really craving some bad 80's metal a la Spinal Tap, or... Vesuvius.

Alas, I left the theatre both impressed and feeling good. Rainn Wilson can carry a film, and apparently some great comedians stand behind him as well (most of the SNL cast). I would recommend this for a good time. Definitely not going to win any awards, but some good laughs nonetheless. 7/10.