Paperman: “Spotlight” Features a Top-Notch Acting Ensemble and Engrossing True Life Story

It's not surprising that films directed by actors usually feature truly great performances. “Spotlight” is no exception. Tom McCarthy, who previously directed indie films like “Win Win” and “The Visitor,” hits it big with “Spotlight.” It tells the true story about a team of writers at the Boston Globe who uncovered the massive child molestation scandal that rocked the Catholic church. McCarthy has appears on screen in films ranging from Hollywood fluff like “2012” and comedies like “Meet the Parents.” He's arguably stronger behind the camera as he directs his actors who give fantastic performances.

“Spotlight” is one of those “true story” films that sort of works like a documentary (though isn't at all shot like one) in that it sort of drops you in front of characters and slowly unravel a story that becomes more and more fascinating as time progresses. We're introduced to various newspaper reporters at the Boston Globe who make up the investigative Spotlight team. There's Michael Keaton's Robby, Rachel McAdams' Sacha, Mark Ruffalo's Mike, and Brian d'Arcy James' Matt. The new boss at the paper is Marty (Liev Schreiber) who wants the Spotlight team to investigate some reports of local priests who have been accused to molesting local children in the past. Some reports had been published years earlier but nothing really came of it. But the team is about to uncover the disturbing truth and blow the lid off one of the biggest cover ups of our time.

McCarthy lets the story and his actors do most of the hard work. He isn't interested in fancy camerawork or fancy editing. Not to say there aren't some great shots here. As the Spotlight team is out and about interviewing witnesses and victims there are many shots of large churches looming in the background. These beautiful buildings are actually hiding the ugly truth. The victims' testimonials are discussed in many disturbing details; many of them now fully grown up, as it turns out these crimes have been committed for decades and decades. It's not news to us as viewers (the film takes places back in 2001) but we're fascinated to discover the details as much as the characters are determined to uncover the fully truth even if they don't really know how deep this whole thing goes. 

“Spotlight” is certainly destined for awards success. There is always room for the true life social justice drama. Films like Erin Brockovich, All the President's Men, Silkwood, and The Insider etc are all films that told similar stories. “Spotlight” is a really-well made docudrama that features great performances and an extremely strong screenplay (written by McCarthy and Josh Singer). The acting ensemble is great and the story becomes more and more engrossing as it progresses. Watching the ins and outs of newspaper journalism (which is going the way of the dinosaur) is really interesting to see. The film also tells an important story without ever being preachy, exploitative, or treacly; it deserves all the accolades that are sure to come its way.  GRADE: B+  

Trailer for Spotlight on TrailerAddict.

Spy Games: Steven Spielberg’s “Bridge of Spies” is an Excellent Historical Thriller

If any filmmaker could make me like a movie about the Cold War, Steven Spielberg is the one who could do it. And he did. “Bridge of Spies” is a perfectly fine Cold War thriller. It's a film that is competently made and rather entertaining and thankfully leaves out the stuffiness that was so present in “Lincoln” and “War Horse.” Even if Spielberg hasn't made a film that's taken place in modern day since 2005's “War of the Worlds” I'm at least thankful that he's still a master of Hollywood filmmaking. All of his modern Spielbergian touches are there from beams of light in smokey rooms, family dynamics, to impeccably timed moments of cinematic suspense. The only thing here that stands out as something radically different is Thomas Newman's terrific score. At least we know we'll be comforted knowing another composer could easily fill John Williams shoes. “Bridge of Spies” feels like what the dramatic period pieces “War Horse” and “Lincoln” should have been but weren't: flat-out entertaining.

I don't know a lot about the Cold War, and not that I want to point the finger of blame, but I never remember getting much beyond World War II in any of my school history classes. The fifties and sixties were a somewhat fascinating and terrifying time in the United States. There was political upheaval eventually but mostly there was a level of fear in the country at the time. Fear of an unseen enemy: communism. People feared Russia and their political ideology. Unfortunately, not much has really changed today. There's still a high level of fear that permeates our society, though the enemy has changed significantly. Spielberg has crafted a glorious recreation of the time period right down to kids being shown how to prepare for a nuclear attack.

In “Bridge of Spies” Mark Rylance plays Rudolf Abel who is arrested in Brookyn, New York on suspicions that he's a Russian spy. Tom Hanks is James Donovan, a lawyer who's asked to represent Abel in a trial. Donovan and Abel have a fascination relationship in that both men respect each other even if they are both “enemies.” Later, after a US spy plane pilot (played by Austin Stowell) is shot down over enemy territory, Donovan is tasked with making a deal to make a prisoner exchange. “Bridge of Spies” is like two stories in one. The first half largely focuses on Donovan and dealing with representing someone seen as a traitor and enemy of his country. The second half of the film focuses on Donovan as he's forced to go into enemy territory to help facilitate the prisoner exchange, which brims with suspense.

Spielberg has easily crafted one of his finest films since 2005's “Munich.” The film has that prestige factor with big stars and its finely crafted period setting, but there's an entertaining air about it and a sense of humor and humanity that surprisingly pervades the film. Credit writers Joel and Ethan Coen for their top notch screenplay contributions to Matt Charman's script, which, like many films made today, is based on a true story. It's also one of those “serious” Spielberg films that isn't pervasively violent for shock value. This is a film you could show in a high school history class without parental objections; and best of all, it's actually entertaining.

“Bridge of Spies” was a film I wasn't quite looking forward to. I long for the “fun” Spielberg adventures that seem to be a rarity nowadays. It's no surprise that as Steven Spielberg ages and matures his films reflect that. Luckily, his latest effort is a showcase of everything that makes him such a great storyteller and filmmaker. The film has great performances, rich characters, striking cinematography, top notch production design, and a beautiful score. It's not your average stuffy period piece, it's way more than that; and it's almost disturbingly relevant even in the year 2015.  GRADE: A-  

Trailer for Bridge of Spies on TrailerAddict.

Legally Bond: “Spectre” is a Worthy Follow Up to 'Skyfall'

If you had asked me nine years ago what I thought of the James Bond series I would have first rolled my eyes in disgust and then immediately confessed to never actually seeing any of them. Then “Casino Royale” came out, and while I didn't absolutely love it, I definitely didn't hate it. It felt like a Bond movie anyone could like and it was a perfect introduction for those like me who felt indifferent to the entire franchise. When “Quantum of Solace” came out I could finally say I hated a Bond movie that I had actually witnessed in its entirety. And then in 2012, everything changed and “Skyfall” officially made me a fan. It changed the game arguably even more so than “Casino Royale” and instantly became one of the most beloved—critically and commercially—films in the series. “Spectre” continues that success in a way that is almost polarizing. It feels like the version of “Skyfall” that was made for fans of the series, which immediately isolates many people who loved watching the Daniel Craig films evolve the way they have. To put it simply, “Spectre” is a great, if flawed, modern Bond film; not as good as “Skyfall” but certainly one of the better made films in the series.

Does anyone really care about the plot of a James Bond movie? I can't even attempt to describe the plot here and not because it's confusing in a “Quantum of Solace” type of a way, but because it's almost pointless in describing whether a James Bond film is good or not. This latest entry, also directed by master filmmaker Sam Mendes is sort of the more “fun” version of "Skyfall." It has way more of the cliched Bond moments and has certain elements to specifically cater to the fans. But that's fine in my book because since I've spent that last few years catching up on the Bond films they're all fresh in my mind and it's always fun getting the references. It turns out the main baddie here played by Christophe Waltz was the true mastermind behind the other baddies in the previous three films. No reason to spoil who this character really is, though fans will not be too surprised. The Bond girl, is well played by Lea Seydoux and finally gadget man Q played by Ben Whishaw has a more important role. Guardian of the Galaxy's Dave Bautista is also great as a Jaws-like silent baddie called Mr. Hinx.

What makes Spectre, and for the record Skyfall, such great successful James Bond films, is how well polished they really are. Gone is the campy silliness that flowed through the Bond films of the 70s and 80s. When you watch a Roger Moore James Bond film you expect, and want, that silliness. Daniel Craig is all business. It's an almost entirely different portrayal – you either like it or you don't. It definitely works as a modern interpretation. And this more suave, and realistic, version pairs well with the fantastic production value and cinematic elements, like more realistic action, characters, and photography. Cinematographer Roger Deakins who has a goldeneye behind the camera was a godsend in the last film; here we get Interstellar's Hoyte Van Hoytema's camerawork with almost equally fantastic results. There's no more corny music; composer Thomas Newman grounds the film in a modern score that most likely won't sound dated twenty years from now. Cinematically speaking everything is just as good as “Skyfall;” including a standout opening sequence (featuring a great long take and thrilling helicopter fight).

“Spectre's” own worst enemy is that it's the first Bond film after “Skyfall” which immediately makes it subpar in most people's minds. Sure some of the script issues are apparent and some may decry that the film's third act isn't very strong. Go watch a Roger Moore entry and tell me that “Spectre” is a worse film. Even Moore's best movie “The Spy Who Loved Me” has boring parts and is unbelievably silly. Seriously go ahead, I dare you. I'll wait.  GRADE: A-  

Trailer for Spectre on TrailerAddict.

The Big Apple: Danny Boyle's “Steve Jobs” is a Fascinating Character Piece

If “Steve Jobs” seems suspiciously like the Oscar-winning hit “The Social Network” you're not far off. Both films are about eccentric (read: jerky) computer entrepreneurs with scripts by Aaron Sorkin. Even if the films tread familiar ground, they couldn't be more different which is why directors' visions really set movies apart from each other. “Steve Jobs” is essentially shot as a three act play that take place during three product launches during Apple co-founder Steve Jobs' career. It's not new news that Mr. Jobs hasn't always been perceived as a saint, not every businessman is, though accepting a Hollywood depiction of a real life person should always be taken with a grain of salt. He was a man who revolutionized an industry, and is rightfully considered to be one of the most important and influential people of the 20^th century.

Danny Boyle isn't exactly the name you'd expect to direct a talky and intimate film about a ruthless businessman. In all honestly, it doesn't always feel like a Boyle film, but his trademarks are definitely there. The film opens up in 1984 during the moments before Jobs (played ferociously by Michael Fassbender) takes the stage to unveil the new Macintosh computer. There with his cheerful and allegiant assistant Joanna (Kate Winslet, always hitting a homerun) Jobs gets confronted by several people from his past, including his ex-girlfriend Chrisann (Katherine Waterston), his daughter Lisa (whom he refuses to believe is his), and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak (Seth Rogen) years before he ever danced with the stars. They all want something from Jobs that he refuses to give them. The first act shows what a, for lack of a better work, jerk Steve Jobs is. Or at least how the script portrays him.

In the next act, it's 1988, and Jobs has left Apple to found a new company and launch the NeXT computer system. Even though it's been four years, all his old ghosts come back to haunt him: Steve and Chrisann are there and even current Apple CEO John Sculley (Jeff Daniels) who is confronted by Jobs who is still bitter about being ousted from the company. The final act, ten years later during the introduction of the iMac, is a chance for redemption and triumph after his two previous product launches don't quite achieve the sales Jobs had originally intended.

Unlike most of Boyle's other films, “Steve Jobs” doesn't exactly feel like a cinematic tour de force- it's more intimate. Besides the fact that each segment is shot on three different evolving film stocks, the film feels rather boxed in (like a computer?) though it's always masterfully composed. It's really a play-like character driven piece and that's not surprising. The film is more focused on the dialogue, which to the audience feels almost like a McGuffin: we know it's important to the characters but we're mostly just there to watch talented actors do their stuff. A the music feels more technical than the film itself with composer Daniel Pemberton offering a fun, modern sounding riff you might expect from a David Fincher film.

One doesn't go to see the movie “Steve Jobs” to see a portrait of a “great man.” You go to see the outstanding performances and unique structure of the screenplay. No one is denying what Jobs did for society and how it affects our lives to this day, but he's certainly not the most likable character ever put on film. And that's the way it should be. We're not watching “Forrest Gump” after all. He's aggressive, assertive, prickish, and a mastermind. Ultimately, Boyle and Sorkin want you to know that Steve Jobs did a lot of great things, but his personal life had a few technical glitches.  GRADE: B+  

Trailer for Steve Jobs on TrailerAddict.

Writer's Shock: The Ghoulishly Clever “Goosebumps” is Nostalgic Fun

You wouldn't necessarily look at the filmmakers' credentials for “Goosebumps” an expect anything truly amazing. If you look up the writer and the director you'll see titles like “Jack the Giant Slayer” and “Gulliver's Travels.” It's almost groan inducing until you realize the guys who wrote the film's story are the same duo who brought us “Ed Wood.” It's too bad “Goosebumps” couldn't also be a full-fledged Tim Burton film but it's close enough. It also wisely heeds closely to the formula established by 90s kids movies “Jumanji” and “Hocus Pocus.” It's a perfect mix of comedy and kid-friendly frights. Heck, it's almost as flat-out enjoyable as “Gremlins.” This is a movie Chris Columbus would have had his hands on if they decided to make a “Goosebumps” film during the books' heyday. And while we're in a comparison mode, as strange as it sounds, “Goosebumps” might even be the “Wes Craven's New Nightmare” of children's books-turned-family horror comedies.

How does one adapt a popular series of children's horror novellas to the big screen twenty years after hitting bookstores? In this day and age you take the meta route and have one of the main characters be author himself R.L. Stine. Comedy guy Jack Black takes on the role (though Stine does make a brief cameo). He plays Stine as a reclusive weirdo who's very protective of his teen daughter Hannah (Odeya Rush). A new family moves in next door. There's single mom Gale (Amy Ryan) and her teenage son Zach (Dylan Minnette). As if moving to a new town is bad enough for Zach, his mom is his new school's vice-principle. He catches the interest of Hannah next door and her weirdo father who insists Zach stays away from her and his house. Eventually it's revealed that this guy is actually author R.L. Stine who has all his Goosebumps manuscripts locked away because the monsters inside them are in fact real. And then they get unleashed and wreck havoc on the entire town mostly because of evil dummy Slappy (also voiced by Black) who orchestrates the mayhem.

It's sort of a big risk for a studio film to write its author into the script but Darren Lemke's screenplay is surprisingly sharp, kooky, and twisted. Director Rob Letterman deftly balances humor and frights astonishingly well. There's nothing here that will frighten anyone over 13 but I'm sure little kids will get the willies. There's enough humor in the form of Zach's bucktoothed sidekick pal Champ (Ryan Lee) and Aunt Lorraine (Jillian Bell) to make kids laugh as much as turn away from the screen. There's nothing here particularly grotesque or mean-spirited. The visual effects are sufficient and the animators have obviously had fun bringing all of the creatures to digital life. Most importantly the movie is just plain fun, with a great Danny Elfman score.

“Goosebumps” is a fun and wild ride. I assume the more you're familiar with the books series the more you'll get out of it, but anyone with a hankering of some 80s or 90s family fun nostalgia don't have to look much further. It's a delightfully creepy romp that's much better than it had any right to be; in other words, it's thankfully just as fun for adults as it is for the kids. It won't necessarily cause goosebumps, but it certainly won't produce yawns.  GRADE: B+

Trailer for Goosebumps on TrailerAddict.

How to Survive a Slasher Film

Back in 1996 the horror hit Scream set precedence for what it takes to survive a horror film. You remember it – things like not having sex, not doing drugs, or not asking “Who’s there?” But times they are changing. Some modern slashers don’t care if you’re the horny frat guy or the virginal heroine. Just following the rules don’t necessarily apply. Sometimes you need actual things to survive the typical slasher movie situation. Not everyone is going to have access to the huge fire axe from off the wall but here are some things that would be necessary when trying to outwit and survive while being stalked by a masked maniac. The fine folks over at Man Crates (a site where you can buy and gift goodie-filled crates that have to be opened with a crowbar) asked me what I'd want if I were to survive a horror film. Here's what I would want in my crate if I was in a slasher movie situation:

A Working Smartphone. The main reason why slasher movies hardly work in this day and age is mostly because of better technology. How could any killer get to his or her victim if they’re just a phone call away from calling the cops? Of course since most slasher movies take place in remote locations it would be terrible to be stuck in a dead zone. Though, most cell phones will still send a 911 call when they’re in a location with poor cell service. And besides sometimes you’d be surprised where you might find free Wi-Fi… And for crying out loud take a portable battery charger!

Bunch o’ Booby Traps. If there’s anything late horror master Wes Craven taught us, is that some well-placed “improvised anti-personnel devices” could give the biggest maniacs a trip up. I’m talking about miscellaneous things like ropes, wire, and various sharp objects. An actual guide on how to set up the traps would helpful, though if you have a working cellphone (see above) then you’ve got it covered.

Energy Bars & Water. You need to eat and hydrate. How else will you have enough energy to run at top speed while the killer walks at a leisurely pace and yet still stays about 20 feet behind you? Since most killers seem to be active during nocturnal hours it’s best to caffeinate as well. Eat and caffeinate. You can do both, I hear caffeinated peanut butter is a thing now.

A Flamethrower. Sometimes you just need a badass weapon to get the job done. Of course this won’t work on dream demons, ghosts, or most other supernatural creatures, but we’re talking about masked maniacs of the human variety. Sometimes you just need to light them up. Knives and machetes require you to be close to the killer and bullets fired from a gun rarely work. Just ask Dr. Loomis (“I shot him six times!”)

What would you want to survive till the end credits of a slasher film? 

The Wire: Robert Zemeckis’ “The Walk” is an Astonishing Cinematic Achievement

Robert Zemeckis is the type of director who has made all types of films. He’s not comfortable in just one genre. He likes to push the envelope with what can be done visually on camera. His love of special effects is comparable to other directors like James Cameron or Steven Spielberg. But Zemeckis has worked in so many difference genres it’s almost surprising he has never made a film “based on a true story.” That is until now. Initially it seemed weird to conceive how a Robert Zemeckis biographical film would be like. He came close to the genre with his Oscar-winning hit “Forrest Gump.” With “The Walk” he presents the story of French high-wire artist Philippe Petit who famously walked (illegally) along a wire hung between the Twin Towers in the 1970s. It’s interesting to see Zemeckis work within the constraints of a real-life story, especially one that has already been told in the Oscar-winning documentary “Man on Wire.” What this big budget Hollywood razzle dazzle version has that the documentary didn’t have is the amazing special effects that literally put the viewer on the wire with Petit. To some it will be nauseating and unsettling. And rightfully so: it’s impeccably staged and features top-notch visual effects. The story's not half bad too.

“Man on Wire” was a documentary that played like a thriller. “The Walk” does the same. It has elements of a heist film, not unlike an “Ocean’s Eleven” and it really works for this story. The viewer amazingly sympathizes and identifies this strange and fascinating character. Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who at first sounds weird speaking with a French accent and looks odd in a bad hairdo, but he really sells it. He captures the weirdness and eccentricities of this man. Even though his idea to walk between the Twin Towers is completely illegal (and he refers to as “the coup”) you want to cheer him on. After all, he has no intention of hurting anyone, except for the possibility of himself. He has a vast array of “accomplices” including love interest Annie (Charlotte Le Bon), friend Jean-Louis (Clement Sibony), and random others; and then there’s his mentor in France played by Ben Kingsley.

One thing that stands out in “The Walk” besides it’s obviously big scale thrills, lies in Zemeckis and Christopher Browne’s script. They make Petit such a fascinating character (who narrates it from the Statue of Liberty of all places) and you really get a sense of who he is and why he has such a close relationship with his wire. It’s like a love story between a man and piece of steel. He has this obsessive spirit where he constantly wants to hang it up and walk across various voids, whether it’s the World Trade Center or Notre Dame. You get a sense of why Petit becomes almost obsessed with this absolutely crazy plan. Yes it’s crazy. and the fact that it really happened is almost a requirement in this story; if it were made up would the audience even believe it in a second? Probably not.

The film unravels in the perfect way until it leads to its triumphant final act where we’re rewarded with a firsthand view atop the towers as we’re placed onto the wire with Petit. The 3D imagery is vertigo-inducing and yet I couldn’t take my eyes off the gigantic IMAX screen. Not only has Zemeckis created a delightful true life thriller, but a loving tribute to the Twin Towers themselves. There’s something about telling this story in a post-9/11 world that just makes sense. The World Trade Center as portrayed here with terrific special effects is as much a character in the film as the main character himself. Petit is such a bizarre and intriguing personality it makes sense that when he first arrives in New York he first touches his chin to one tower and looks up. You get the sense of connection his has with the structures and knowing what eventually happens to them gives the film an emotional weight that makes the whole thing a rewarding and altogether moving experience. There's just something cinematic about Petit's story and it works amazingly well-onscreen.  GRADE: A-
Trailer for The Walk on TrailerAddict.

Sol Man: Matt Damon Triumphantly Breaks the Mars Curse with “The Martian”

What do the movies Red Planet, Mission to Mars, John Carter, and Mars Needs Moms have in common? Yes they have to do with Mars, but more importantly they were miserable box office failures. Sure some of them probably have their fans but with some rare exceptions (i.e. the original Total Recall) audiences just aren’t too interested in our red planetary cousin. The idea of going to Mars used to be cool when no one knew much about it, but once scientist probed the planet and discovered not much interesting there no one really seemed to car anymore. Even with something as significant as water being discovered there, I don’t think most people care that much. But finally, the movie gods have finally given us a fantastic cinematic version of Mars and only someone like Ridley Scott could make it happen.

The Martian has been described as Apollo 13 meets Cast Away and I’d be hard pressed to come up with a more accurate description (though I’d throw Gravity into the mix as it shares similar themes). Returning to the sci-fi genre Ridley Scott gives us his first truly realistic science-fiction film. There are no aliens, creatures, or androids to be found here. What we do have is a rather impressive and likable performance from Matt Damon as astronaut and botanist Mark Watney. He’s part of the third manned mission to Mars but during a bad sand storm he’s mistakenly left behind when his crew believe him to be dead. Now he’s stranded alone millions of miles from Earth. Luckily, he’s practically a genius and we get to see him figure out how to survive on Mars’ desolate surface. Screenwriter Drew Goddard uses a smart script device by having Mark keep a video diary that informs us what he’s doing. While Gravity treaded similar territory about survival in outer space, The Martian actually cuts back to Earth to the scientists and engineers trying to bring him home (though they initially fear him dead).

For a film that relies a lot on the charisma and standout performance of its lead actor, the film also features a tremendously eclectic supporting cast. Jessica Chastain, also in the space-themed Interstellar, is great here as the commander of the Aries III who ultimately makes the decision to leave Mars without Mark. Her crew is filled with familiar faces including Michael Pena, Sebastian Stan, and Kate Mara. Meanwhile, back on Earth the head of NASA is played by Jeff Daniels who has to make interesting decisions by announcing the death of Mark Watney and then following it up by telling the American public that he’s actually alive and living all alone on Mars. Others attempting to help bring Mark home include Sean Bean, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and a mostly underused Kristen Wiig. What feels most refreshing here, however, is the absence of cliched scenes of Mark’s concerned family; we don’t have any unnecessary or mawkish scenes of Mark's concerned wife looking helplessly through windows. There’s thankfully none of that unnecessary crap.

Ridley Scott is the perfect guy to tell this story. Working on a sci-fi film that doesn’t consist of scares or creatures is a first for the director but he really sells the authenticity of it. This movie feels realistic. And that includes the mind-blowing shots sweeping above the Mars surface. This is a visually striking film that almost demands to be seen in three dimensions. And even though Mark is an extremely capable and resourceful guy, not everything goes exactly how he wants which eventually leads to some rather tense situations and a nail-biting final act. And to top it all off the film has a surprisingly fun sense of humor and a delightfully fun soundtrack.

The Martian is a breath of fresh air when it comes to the science fiction genre. It’s a thrilling drama with spectacular visual effects in the vein of Gravity or Apollo 13. It’s also a survival story. It’s the rare speculative fiction story from Scott that doesn’t involve a dystopian future or other a pessimistic outlooks at science and technology. It embraces technology as tools humans can use to overcome great obstacles. It’s thrilling, exciting, and ultimately moving; and it takes place on Mars of all places. GRADE: A-

Theatrical Trailer for The Martian on TrailerAddict.

Rainforest Café: Eli Roth’s “The Green Inferno” is an Infernal Mess

I guess we should all be thankful that Eli Roth has only managed to direct four (not including this month’s Knock Knock) feature films in his not-quite-illustrious career. Believe me, it’s all for the better. He’s fine when he’s helping out his friends by making short films (well, hello “Thanksgiving” trailer from Grindhouse) or making an ass out of himself in stuff like Piranha, but man this horror movie obsessed director makes truly horrendous films. He really just makes the same film over and over again: films in which young people of privilege enter dangerous foreign lands and end up being slaughtered, whether it’s a cabin in the woods, Eastern Europe, or in his latest effort, the Amazonian jungle. Unfortunately, everything you’ll read about how Roth made “The Green Inferno” will be ten times more fascinating than what he put on screen.

Let’s breakdown some of things Roth has mentioned about “The Green Inferno” and how it turned out. If there was any indication that Roth is one of the vainest directors in the world (and there are not surprisingly many) he has said his Green Inferno looks like a Terrence Malick film. First of all, Malick’s films are actually shot on film not whatever hazy digital garbage director of photography Antonio Quercia shot on. The film is as ugly as the movie itself, which was probably the point. The film also stars a woman with no real acting talent whatsoever. She’s Roth’s wife. No surprise there, though they seemed to have tied the knot after the film was shot. Lead Lorenza Izzo plays college freshman Justine and she just wants to make a difference. She hates genital mutilation, for instance. Who doesn’t? Izzo comes across as a D-list version of Eliza Dushku, who was already C-list anyways. She joins up with a group of campus activists who want to head into a South American jungle to protest an evil lumber corporation. Fine do that. Seems pretty dangerous to me. Roth says the film is a commentary on what he refers to in today’s society as “slacktivism.” In which the younger generation uses social media to complain about issues and support causes without ever actually doing something about it. Um, Mr. Roth, doesn’t flying to another country and chaining yourself to a tree in the middle of the jungle count as more than a tweet? But I digress.

The first half of the film is the story of college protesters, but on their way home their small plane crashes and lands them in the middle of the jungle. The irony is that the native people they were trying to protect turn out to be cannibals and decide to serve the students for dinner. Roth even cast a real tribe (they’re not really cannibals though, if you really wondered) as the natives – people who had never heard of let alone seen a film. With “The Green Inferno” Roth, ever the horror nut, is attempting to pay tribute to the cult films he loves – here the subgenre of Italian cannibal films, such as “Cannibal Holocaust.” Though, ever the narcissist, he mostly ends up copying himself, as the film follows the same formula as his torture porn hit Hostel. That film’s first half played like a frat boys go to Europe sex comedy before nosediving into the dangers of Americans traveling to foreign countries. This time it’s just college activists heading into the foreign jungle. Same dog, old tricks. And this time Roth can’t even make the activists more appealing than horny frat guys. They’re all clichéd dummies (you’ve got your potheads, your vegans, etc) who we can’t wait to see get ripped apart. At least the graphic makeup effects are decent. Once the film’s cannibal plot kicks in it’s pretty relentless; I’m not sure what they had to slip to the MPAA ratings board to secure an R rating actually. And I’ll give you a guess whether genital mutilation figures in somehow.

When disgusting, graphic violence is the only appealing aspect of your film (besides its nicely designed opening titles), I’d say you failed. Even in a horror film. The gore works but nothing else does. Roth has created a movie filled with so many uninteresting characters, played by actors who can’t act, an uninvolving story, and to top it all off it all just looks ugly. Not to mention all the unintentional laughs – pray Roth never makes a straight out comedy. You’d be doing yourself a favor by just watching the superior “Cannibal Holocaust” instead; it is way more barf-worthy (in the good way, of course).  GRADE: D+

Trailer for The Green Inferno on TrailerAddict.

Cold Mountain: “Everest” is a Visceral Experience if Slightly Emotionally Void

If you really want to know why anyone would want to climb a mountain like Mt. Everest, you won’t find the answer in the film “Everest.” The answer is probably found in many of the other mountain climbing-related texts whether it’d be the documentary “Touching the Void,” the IMAX doc “Everest,” or Jon Krakauer’s best-seller “Into Thin Air” which tells the same story as 2015’s “Everest” (though the film isn’t technically based on the book). But as with most narrative films if you strive to actually learn about a real life incident, you’re better off reading the book or at least the Wikipedia page. That’s not to say that “Everest” isn’t a well-made film; it features terrific performances and some truly suspenseful sequences. It works as a docuthriller, but there’s just something missing. I missed the emotional connection with the characters who are almost as thin as the air to which they ascend.

The film stars Jason Clarke as Rob Hall a New Zealander who leads a tourist group called Adventure Consultants. This group trains and guides those willing to spend the money to summit Mt. Everest. All 29, 029 feet of it. The film is set in 1996 and some familiar faces round out the cast of real life climbers who wish to scale the mountain. There’s Josh Brolin as Beck and John Hawkes as Doug. Michael Kelly plays writer John Krakauer who is also part of the expedition.  There is one female climber played by Naoko Mori, but otherwise most of the female roles are rather passive. We’re talking about Keira Knightly as Rob’s pregnant wife at home, and Robin Wright as Beck’s wife at home. Jake Gyllenhaal shows up as well as a guide in another group who are planning to scale the mountain at the same time. This sort of causes complications. As anyone who would have the nerve to climb the world’s tallest mountain, there’s a lot of testosterone fueled rivalry going on which will eventually lead to tragedy. Oh, and the fact that mother nature can be extremely brutal when she wants to be.

The film’s first have, as directed by Bathasar Kormakur, is fairly straightforward in terms of narrative. There’s nothing truly flashy about the camerawork or editing. The film feels more like a documentary which makes sense, while the film’s second half skews into disaster movie mode after a freak snow storm causes trouble for those still up on the mountain. For all of the setup leading to the inevitable disaster that eventually occurs William Nicholson and Simon Beaufoy’s script doesn’t manage to flesh out the characters all that much which is sad because Beaufoy is responsible to some truly great scripts including the outstanding “127 Hours” (My guess is that he was brought in just for rewrites). That’s not to take anything away from the spectacle that is “Everest.” It’s certainly a sight to behold and it very intense and suspenseful. The film might rely just slightly too much on CGI shots of the mountain which take away from the nauseating height – which might actually be a good thing.

“Everest” is a truly cinematic experience. It tells and important true story about humans’ extreme adventures. It doesn’t quite delve as deeply into the experience as much as one would think but it’s still worthwhile. It presents Mt. Everest as beautiful as it is dangerous. It’s successful at showing us cinematically the people who feel like need to climb to its top to be in place where no human should ever be able to go. It just fails to answer the question on every audience member’s mind: why? GRADE: B

Trailer for Everest on TrailerAddict.

To Grandmother’s House We Go: “The Visit” is a Creepy, Weird, and Generally Satisfying Thriller

No one is more sick and tired of found footage films than me. The more time that passes after having seen “The Visit,” the new thriller from the once-great M. Night Shyamalan, the more it grows on you. There are certainly elements to the film that can only be described as weird. And it’s rather funny – on purpose. The more you think about it the more you realize that was sort of what Shyamalan was going for; something strange and silly with decent scares. It feels like a crowd pleaser, it feels like the type of film he used to make – the one you want to tell everyone about. It’s not nearly in the same vein as say “The Sixth Sense” but that’s no surprise. He hasn’t made a genuinely satisfying film in many years but this seems like the first step back in the right direction.

If you’re sick of the overuse of “found footage” style of horror films that have saturated the multiplexes lately there’s not much I can say to convince you that “The visit” is very different. However, this is easily one of the best looking and well-shot of all these types of films. And of course it is, because look at the who’s behind the camera. Shyamalan isn’t going to compose ugly shots with low quality film even though the majority of the film’s footage is supposedly being shot by a young girl no older than fourteen. The story consists of a single mother (played by Katherine Hahn) who sends her two kids to stay with her estranged parents, whom her kids have never met. There’s older daughter Becca (Olivia DeJonge) who’s an aspiring filmmaker and her younger brother Tyler (Ex Oxenbould). Becca has decided to document her stay with her grandparents by shooting a documentary about her family. Tyler is the typical annoying younger brother; who likes to rap. He raps a lot. It’s weird. Some people liked this characterization; I found it uncomforable and unnecessary and didn’t add anything to the film except make it more bizarre. But I digress.

Becca and Tyler’s grandparents, known only as Nana and Pop Pop are played by Deanna Dugan and Peter McRobbie. They might be the strangest horror film couple since “The People Under the Stairs.” These two elderly actors give fine, weird, full throttle performances. They are peculiar people and they do weird things – and Becca and Tyler notice it. They seem nice enough, but the film wants us to agree that these folks seem just a tad… odd. It feels like a set-up for a Goosebumps book to be honest, but the film has playful fun setting up some of the oddities of this couple and Becca and Tyler’s concerns as they realize something isn’t quite right. Nana stares into a well and even chases the kids underneath the house. There’s also way more old lady nudity here than anyone could have been expecting. And that’s where Shyamalan seems to be having fun: by showing us stuff we’re not quite expecting, including a late story plot development that makes sense and isn’t all that predicable. And let's not forget the best use for human feces since "The Help."

The film does have some solid moments of fear but I never would call it all that frightening. You jump here and there and there’s a modest sense of foreboding, but it mostly consists of Nana and Pop Pop showing up within frame when you’re not quite expecting them. The film is more creepy than outright scary and there’s a strong playful quality with well-timed humor that ups the enjoyment factor immensely. Even if I wasn’t the biggest fan of the Tyler character, he did have some pretty decent lines and moments. The film also feels almost too oddly sentimental by trying to delve deeply into a broken family but the drama isn’t as well earned as it is in “The Sixth Sense.” Ultimately the sappy stuff fails to bring much emotional weight to the proceedings but there’s far more going on here thematically than in any of his recent films.

“The Visit” is practically a joy to sit through after so many painful missteps. It’s easily Shyamalan’s best work in years, though that doesn’t seem so much as a compliment than as a statement of fact. “The Visit” has enough thrills and laughs and originality to make up for its shortcomings. Some people will likely find the film ultimately silly and lame which would also make sense. However, it’s certainly one of the better shot found footage films in a while. Shyamalan just may be starting to get his grove back, and I like it.  GRADE: B

Trailer for The Visit on TrailerAddict.

The Hills Have Teary Eyes: Remembering Wes Craven, the Master of Horror

The sad news that “master of horror” Wes Craven has passed away has shocked, upset, and left a ripple of grief throughout not only the horror fan community but in movie fandom in general. Odds are you’ve seen at least one of Craven’s many iconic films. Craven was a true pioneer in the genre having spent nearly 5 decades tackling the ever evolving genre of horror. How many directors who started in the 70s still have viable careers to this day who aren’t Steven Spielberg or Martin Scorsese? He was constantly changing and evolving as a creative force going from his early days in the “torture porn” genre to the slasher films of the 80s, and even stopping for a rest in the Meryl Streep Oscar Bait Genre. Many would assume a man known for creating such horrifying visions must be some kind of creep but the actors and filmmakers who worked with him all remember him as a kind and gentle guy. And a smart one too: he left his career as a college professor to direct movies, which he was never really allowed to watch in his childhood. He didn’t even mean to become the Master of Horror, he sort of stumbled upon it and thank goodness he did: he’s created some of the most iconic characters, moments, and films in the genre. Here’s a list of ten essential Wes Craven films (my personal Craven Top Ten to be exact), so fire up the Blu-ray player and remember the guy who made us all a little scared of the dark.  

1) A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (1984) Wes Craven’s certified horror classic “A Nightmare on Elm Street” not only spawned an entire franchise but helped build New Line Cinema into a full-fledged Oscar-winning movie studio. A bunch of suburban teenagers keep having similar dreams about a dirty burned man with a razor clawed glove. It seems he wants to kill them and when the teens start dying off one by one, it’s soon revealed that the teens’ parents just might be responsible somehow.  Craven introduced the world to Freddy Krueger (the name of schoolyard bully from Craven’s childhood) who quickly became one of the most beloved horror icons ever created. Oh, and he was a child molester and murderer. It’s funny that this film was released as the slasher craze was just sort of hitting a rut and then  it became a phenomenon. Sometimes it’s all about timing. Tina getting dragged across the ceiling is one of the franchise’s most disturbing and frightening images. Wes Craven proved he was a horror master with this film.

2) SCREAM (1996) If “Halloween” is the grandfather of the slasher genre, “Scream” is the grandson. “Scream” is a wonderful ode to the horror genre that every fan should love and appreciate. Its witty script from Kevin Williamson is about teenagers who are stalked by a masked killer who torments his victims by asking them movie trivia. It’s wildly bizarre but amazingly creepy. The opening sequence starring a frightened Drew Barrymore is one of the best horror film openings ever. Craven made it work as if it were a short film but then the movie’s plot begins and explores an interesting story about a girl named Sidney who the killer may just have a personal vendetta against. This was a surprise hit that not only reinvigorated the slasher genre but Wes Craven’s career.

3) WES CRAVEN’S NEW NIGHTMARE (1994) Confession time: technically, I like this movie more than "A Nightmare on Elm Street" but it's not exactly the horror classic the original is. These top three are basically in a league of their own and are practically interchangeable, but I digress. Taking place ten years after the release of “A Nightmare on Elm Street” this seventh entry in the Nightmare series was conceived by its original creator Wes Craven as a thriller that takes place in the “real world” in which actors and crew members from this horror series play themselves and are tormented by a darker version of Freddy Krueger. It was a wild idea that originally didn’t please fans of the series as they probably wanted something more traditional. But this wildly imaginative and original take on this series is a fascinating drama about how horror films can affect children – “Nightmare” heroine Heather Langenkamp plays herself, starts having nightmares about her pizza-faced co-star, and her young son Dylan begins having psychotic episodes. Is she crazy or is Freddy trying to get her and her son? This was a great prelude to the themes Wes Craven would later explore in the “Scream” series with greater financial success.

4) RED EYE (2005) How does a horror director stay relevant and reinvent himself? By not directing a horror film obviously. Wes Craven had already done that back in the 90s with the violin drama “Music of the Heart.” The only thing horrifying about that film was Meryl Streep not winning another Oscar. Craven attempted a change of genre again in 2005 that featured his expertise in suspense but with an action flair. The result was the outstanding little thriller “Red Eye.” The film is essentially a hostage thriller that takes place aboard an airplane. Cillian Murphy is equally charming and creepy as Jack Rippner a mysterious man who “kidnaps” Rachel McAdams’ resourceful hotel manager aboard a red eye flight who unravels a political assassination plot. More in the vein of Alfred Hitchcock, the PG-13 rated film features very little blood, a rare departure for Craven, and ups the action as these two fascinating characters play a delightful game of cat and mouse, from their seats. The film’s final act features more typical slasher/stalker stuff with plenty of moments to make you jump. It’s a real treat for Craven fans looking for something a little different.

5) SCREAM 4 (2011) Fifteen years after the original film rejuvenated the horror genre came this sequel that was set to relaunch the popular slasher franchise that restarted it all. Unfortunately, the film’s box office performance was rather disappointing as audiences seem to be weary of horror movies with numbers like 4 in the title. Fortunately, this remains arguably the best “Scream” sequel as it has everything a “Scream” film should: wonderful death scenes and solid dark humor. Ghostface returns after a decade to finish the job on Sidney Prescott where she returns to her hometown and a new generation of witty teenagers meet their maker. The meta factor is dialed up to an eleven here and all your favorite [living] “Scream” characters return. Who will survive and what will be left of them? Unfortunately, it’s the last film Wes Craven would ever direct.

6) SCREAM 2 (1998) This fast-tracked sequel is the follow up to the surprise hit “Scream.” This sequel, while not as good or scary as the first film, (the new characters are less interesting and nothing is quite as scary or clever as the first film’s opening) takes a rather original look at horror sequels and continues to skewer the conventions found within them. Heroine Sidney Prescott is now in college, with a new boyfriend and guy friend Randy in tow, where a series of copycat murders spring up. The film features another witty script from Kevin Williamson with a wonderful art imitating life plot detail about the events of the first film being turned into a successful horror film called ‘Stab.’ Definitely one of the better slasher sequels out there, but shame on them for killing Randy.

7) THE PEOPLE UNDER THE STAIRS (1991) Fans of the genre, know that horror was in a strange place in the early 90s. There wasn’t much great stuff and the horror films that did existed were truly odd. Case in point this little seen gem from Wes Craven about a pair of rich loons who own a gigantic labyrinthine, booby-trapped house with hordes of pale, zombie-like teenage boys locked in the basement. The film’s hero is a young black boy from the ghetto and the film is actually a decent social commentary about the current state of socioeconomic race relations. I’m not sure it’s really all that scary, but it’s certainly an example of something somewhat different in the genre and truly a product of its time that only someone like Wes Craven could cook up.

8) SCREAM 3 (2000) The “Scream” movies are obviously one of my all-time favorite film series. While part 3 is arguably the weakest of the three, it ended the series (until the fourth one of course) in probably the best way possible and features the great addition of the hilarious Parker Posey. Here the setting is now Hollywood where art imitates life while imitating art. Though it remains the least frightening of the series, and at this point Craven almost appears to be dialing it in (the latter part of his career was mostly dominated by this series), there is enough here to satisfy fans of this immensely popular set of films which now includes an in-name-only MTV television series spinoff.

9) SHOCKER (1989) I have to admire Wes Craven’s failed attempt to create another original slasher villain (Let’s just forget that he attempted that yet again in the truly forgettable “My Soul to Take”). Here he presents us with Horace Pinker, who murders families at night while they sleep, not unlike the Thomas Harris villain from “Red Dragon.” After being convicted and sentenced to death by electric chair, he somehow survives his capital punishment, and begins infecting various electrical outlets and jumping from various bodies (an idea later explored in the Denzel Washington film “Fallen). It’s up to psychic high school jock Peter Berg to save the day. The film’s TV adventure finale is totally bizarre, hilarious, and fun. A lesser known, and ultimately underappreciated, but truly inventive Wes Craven effort.

10) THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT (1972) – Also known as, The Last Movie on This List. No one really enjoys watching Wes Craven’s first foray into horror filmmaking because it’s so disturbingly violent and shocking. But it’s still miles ahead of other similar exploitation films like “I Spit on Your Grave” in terms of production value. A very, very early example of the type of horror genre dubbed “torture porn” this low budget shocker concerns a group of disturbed individuals who rape, torture, and murder a pair of young teen girls, only to be tortured and murdered themselves by the girls’ parents. Wes Craven’s cinematic fascination with booby-traps begins here. This is ultimately sick stuff, similar to but different from the originally X-rated “The Hills Have Eyes,” and a must-watch for anyone who is fan of Craven’s filmography.

CREDITED CO-WRITER BONUS: 
A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 3: DREAM WARRIORS (1987) Wes Craven rarely wrote films that he didn’t also direct. There were some exceptions. He co-wrote part three of the "Nightmare" series (after having nothing to do with part two), which remains one of the most popular fan favorites. This was a transition point in the series, where Freddy started becoming somewhat of a jokester. Hence lines like: “Welcome to primetime, bitch!” A young Patricia Arquette leads a young cast of suicidal teenagers committed to a mental hospital, though the suicides are the handiwork of Freddy Krueger. Original "Nightmare" heroine Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) returns as an intern who helps the teens fight off Freddy for good (or until the franchise became financially unviable). There are some inventive effects and dream sequences here, most notably the puppetry dream in which a teenage boy’s veins are ripped out and used as marionette strings.

Sophie’s Voice: Meryl Streep Rocks Out in “Ricki and the Flash”

We got to see a bit of rocker Meryl Streep in “Mamma Mia.” Now she gets to go full rocker in “Ricki and the Flash.” However, as fun as it is to see Meryl let loose, “Ricki” remains way more of a drama than a flat out comedy. It’s sort of similar to director Johnathan Demme’s other family drama “RachelGetting Married” which showcased a wildly unhinged Oscar nominated turn from Anne Hathaway. It was one of those family dramas where dark intimate secrets come bubbling up to the surface. “Ricki and the Flash” is very similar except this time “Juno” scribe Diablo Cody takes a shot at the genre. Generally speaking, it feels like a success. The film’s target audience, judging from those I was surrounded by, middle aged women, seemed to be having a blast seeing their girl Meryl in dreds, tight stretch pants, and platform shoes. However, the film sort of wraps things up almost a little too neatly, leaving the awkward family drama behind in lieu of a storyline that basically turns to rock music as the be all end all cure for familial strife.

Streep plays Ricki Rendazzo, she’s a rock star. Well sort of. She’s released one album, and she and her band the Flash perform in a tiny bar to a mixed audience of baby boomers and millennials. Ricki, who’s real name is Linda, also works as a grocery store clerk and has filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy. She seems more like a washed up rock star wannabe. And that’s probably the point. Because she left her family years ago and now her kids are all grown up and they all hate her for running out on them. Her ex-husband Pete (Kevin Kline, where have you been?) calls out of the blue one day because of a crisis situation involving their daughter Julie (Streep’s real life daughter Mamie Gummer). And hence Cody gives us a sort of standard three act story: Ricki heads back to Indianapolis to her family who hates her including her sons Josh (Sebastian Stan) who is engaged, and Adam (Nick Westrate) who is gay. Then she flies back home to hang out with her bandmate/boyfriend Greg (Rick Springfield, yes that Rick Springfield) where she thinks about how much her family hates her, and then the final act where she seeks redemption by attending Josh’s wedding much to her extended family’s dismay.

“Ricki and the Flash” has several things going for it. It sort of has a “Mamma Mia” meets “Rachel Getting Married” vibe which is probably because of the trifecta of Cody, Streep, and Demme. In that way it feels untraditional yet will most likely appeal to the masses, or at least those over forty and hardcore Streep fans. Demme gives it that indie feel; he knows how to direct actors and dialogue driven scenes. Though given his track record for nailing realistic tones, I’m not sure much that happens in the film could be considered realistic at all. Cody’s script has trademarked witty repartee though it seems more geared an older crowded and has much darker elements. The thoughtful commentary on women’s roles in the family and parenting are interesting if not entirely fully developed. And of course the performances are all very solid. Streep has fun with the role even if she’s not necessarily breaking the mold. I’d say it’s at least Golden Globe worthy though she’d have to count on weak competition if she wants a chance at Oscar number four.

Overall, I enjoyed “Ricki and the Flash” though it’s ending feels almost too neat and tidy. The third act feels rushed and disjointed compared to the rest of the film. Without giving too much away, Ricki , ultimately as a generally poor person, has nothing really to give except the gift of music, which works fine in Disney form, but seeing as though she’s caused so much distress, sadness, and bitterness among her entire estranged family you’d think it would take more than a Dobie Gray song for redemption.  GRADE: B-

Note: The fact that the opening number is Tom Petty’s “American Girl,” a song briefly but memorably featured in Johnathan Demme’s “Silence of the Lambs,” can’t possibly be just a coincidence right? Either Cody and/or Demme have a delightfully wicked sense of humor. 

Trailer for Ricki and the Flash on TrailerAddict.

Clear and Present Danger: No Need to Return “The Gift;” It’s a Top Notch Thriller

If you told me a month ago that “The Gift” the writing and directorial debut of Joel Edgerton would be one of the best thrillers of the year, I would have said you’re joking. And here we are and “The Gift” is a cinematic present indeed. It features terrifically nuanced performances from its cast and a twisty, tension-filled script that’s beautifully directed. I absolutely love films directed by actors. Sometimes they just get it. Actor-turned-directors get acting therefore know how to direct actors. Mr. Edgerton, known for appearances in Warrior, Exodus Gods and Kings, and The Great Gatsby pulls triple duty by also writing and acting. “The Gift” is a stylish thriller filled with sometimes unbearable tension and is note-worthy for featuring practically no onscreen violence. It’s pretty amazing and simply Hitchcockian in execution.

The film stars Jason Bateman and Rebecca Hall as Simon and Robyn. They’re that typical thriller movie couple who move into a new house at the beginning of the film. It has lots of big open windows. Not an ideal place you want to live if a creepy man from your past insists on constantly stopping by and creepily leaving you welcome gifts. That creepy weirdo is Gordo and he’s played by Edgerton. Gordo runs into Simon at a store and welcomes him and his wife back to his hometown. They appear to be old friends though Simon doesn’t remember him right away. A one-sided friendship then develops as Gordo appears to practically stalk the couple until Simon has to intervene. These early scenes are the epitome of awkwardness. However, awkwardness soon turns to paranoia after Simon has to harshly end the “friendship” – as it appears something from these men’s past refuses to stay in the past. And that’s where things really start getting fun and creepy.

The film is first and foremost a perfect showcase for superior acting skills. Hall and Bateman are great and as the script unveils more about their past their characters really develop and it comes through in their performances. Edgerton is master in the weirdo department, though not much is learned about him until the movie enters its final act. The screenplay is also incredibly tight and clever. It plays against most of the audience’s expectations. This is a genre we’ve seen before. I’ve heard comparisons from things like “One Hour Photo” to “Fatal Attraction” and other 90s stalker thrillers. And those feel like legitimate comparisons.

“The Gift” is everything its title suggests, it’s a cinematic treat for audiences willing to give it a try. On the surface is appears like a traditional stalker thriller but it’s anything but. It’s a twisted ride with interesting characters, great performances, and an assured and confident directorial debut from someone you’d least expect. It’s truly a rewarding, original, and exciting experience.  GRADE: A-

Trailer for The Gift on TrailerAddict.

Cut to the Chase: New “Vacation” is Decent If Not Particularly Inspired

Hollywood is like a greying head of hair. For every remarkable and original film they release there are 5 or 6 remakes, reboots, and sequels that pop up in its place. And eventually you have to just accept it. As an undeniable movie lover, I tend to just give in to whatever Hollywood wants to throw at me. I can take it. And here we are with “Vacation” a sort of sequel, actually it’s pretty much just a sequel, of the popular National Lampoon series about the Griswold family who can’t seem to have a decent family vacation. The Griswolds are one of those families where the kids have seemed to enter some kind of black hole because they never appear to age past fifteen even though their parents grow older from film to film. Not anymore, Rusty Griswold is now all grown up and has decided to take his own stuck-in-a-rut family on a road trip to the one and only Walley World. Hopefully it’s at least open this time.

As a fan of this series of arguably not very good films, this fifth “Vacation” is thankfully not nearly as bad as one may assume. Sure the trailer is filled with lots of raunchy humor but is anyone really surprised? The first film worked because it mixed aww shucks family dynamic with bizarre, hyper adult humor. Does anyone remember the implied incest in the Cousin Eddy sequence? And what about the comedic fate of poor Aunt Edna? Writer John Hughes knew how to draw a nice line between extreme, dark humor and lighter, fluffier wholesomeness. Many will argue the new “Vacation” is all crass and dirty jokes and it is to a point: but there’s way more heart hear than meets the eye. And for god sakes the writers (John Francis Daley and Johnathan M. Goldstein, who also directed) have actually given these people character arcs and the kids finally have personalities.

The kids, in fact, easily steal the film away from stars Ed Helms and Christina Applegate. Steele Gibbons is Kevin, a nightmarish younger brother, borderline sociopathic, who enjoys tormenting his older brother James (Skyler Gisondo). James is the sensitive, musician type who brings along his guitar and various journals on his vacation. Seeing these two go at it the entire movie was simply hilarious to watch even if the behavior was never exactly realistic… but how is any situation in a comedy like this ever realistic? These people take a dip in raw sewage without even knowing for crying out loud. Helms and Applegate work good together as Rusty and his wife Debbie. The two are sort of on the rocks and Rusty feels like a family trip could bring them all closer together.

Yes this is one of those predicable comedies whether everything that can go wrong does go wrong. It’s nothing new. The writers overcome that generally well by at least not just repeating the same situations from the previous films, though there are plenty of fun nods for fans of the series. “Vacation” is sort of a difficult film to hate. It’s a comedy and it made me laugh even if some scenes didn’t exactly showcase brilliant comedic writing or skills. When the film wants to make an easy joke it does: take for instance the segment in which they visit Rusty’s sister Audrey and her cocky southern husband played by Chris Hemsworth. The guy doesn’t really get to do much but talk with a southern twang and show off the giant fake penis hiding in his underwear. As Audrey, Leslie Mann seems sort of wasted: not to take anything from the lovable Applegate, but I probably would have rather seen Mann in the lead role.

Thankfully the film heads in a direction that was predictable but delightfully familiar: a stop off at Grandma and Grandpa Griswold’s bed and breakfast where Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo make their glorified cameos along with the iconic “family truckster.” This new “Vacation” doesn’t really need to exist and it doesn’t really do anything practically groundbreaking: you get the sense it feels like a nostalgic cash grab, but at least it was funny and like most family vacations, it wasn’t nearly as bad as you were expecting.  GRADE: B

Trailer for Vacation on TrailerAddict.