Red 2 (2013)

Is this summer of sequels nobody was expecting or asking for?  There was Grown Ups 2 a few week ago and now we have Red 2.  The difference is that I at least enjoyed Red.  I'm struggling trying to remember anything about it though.  I had to look up if Morgan Freeman was in it, and even then I still couldn't remember anything about his character or what he did in the film.

Sadly, Red 2 is even more forgettable than Red.  The way I feel about Red 2 is the way I feel about a lot of family oriented comedies or TV shows.  It's silly and harmless.  I'm actually at a loss as to why it was rated PG-13.  There's barely a drop of blood in it, and I don't recall any objectionable language.  I saw families bringing younger kids with them and nobody seemed to have any issues.  All I heard was laughter at the silly humor.

We pick up with Frank (Bruce Willis) and Sarah (Mary-Louise Parker) as they are shopping at a Costco.  Frank is trying his hardest to have a normal life, but Sarah seems to be a little bored.  Marvin (John Malkovich) tracks them down and warns that people are after them again.  As they were leaving Costco, Marvin's car explodes, but there's no suspense to this as we're only five minutes into the film and know that Malkovich is in the movie more.  It just seemed like pointless misdirection and even in the film nobody is fooled by it.

Also, I had to call B.S. as Frank and Sarah leave Costco empty handed, despite seeing them load up a shopping cart in the previous scene.  Nobody leaves Costco empty handed.  NOBODY!  It's was nothing more than one of many examples of product placement throughout Red 2.  There's also Papa John's and probably the most creative use of Pringles I've ever seen on film.

Anyway, Frank is brought in for questioning in his relation to an operation called "Nightshade", but Frank has no recollection of this.  During the questioning, a group of people led by Neal McDonough, barge in killing everyone, before Frank gets away.  I was still invested at this point as I always seem to enjoy McDonough's performances.  He's become one of those delightfully creepy, scenery-chewing actors in the mold of William Fichtner.  I love it when you can tell an actor enjoys playing a villain.  Unfortunately, he's not given much else to do in the film beyond this point.

The trio hop from place to place trying to figure out what's going on.  Besides McDonough, a top contract killer is on their trail, as well as Victoria (Helen Mirren) who is hired by MI6.  The contract killer, Han (Byung-hun Lee), was previously screwed over by Frank, so he's extra motivated to kill.

Then, they run into a Russian agent that Frank used to have a relationship with (Catherine Zeta-Jones), and track down an information broker called "The Frog" (David Thewlis).  They eventually find out that Nightshade involved smuggling a nuclear bomb into Russia, and was related to a physicist named Dr. Bailey (Anthony Hopkins), who Frank and Marvin used to protect, but believed was killed.  Dr. Bailey is actually alive and has been locked away in an asylum for the last thirty years.  They break him out to find where the bomb has been hidden.  Are you still with me?

Besides the overall silliness, the main problem I had with Red 2 is that the plot is ridiculously convoluted.  There wasn't a real need to have a story this all over the place.  Simple is fine when you have this many characters and settings.  Maybe even trim a few of them to make it easier to follow.  This is compounded by having character allegiances that change on a whim, people with unclear motivation, and all kinds of backstabbing.  We finally learn that the bomb was actually made out of something called red mercury, which is supposed to be some kind of super weapon, but it's not clear why.  They said something about it having minimal fallout, but wouldn't that make it slightly less dangerous or minimize collateral damage?  SPOILER - They let the bomb explode at the end and nobody seems too concerned about it, so what was the big deal?

There's another moment at the end where something happens that makes absolutely no sense, and there was no explanation as to how.  Wanna know why there was no explanation?  Cause it couldn't have happened unless Frank had magical powers.  There's no Oceans Eleven type scene that clarified it after.  Here's another thing that bugged me.  How come bad guys never shoot at the ground?  When you start firing into a room at waist or chest level, you have to know the people inside are going to drop to the ground.  Maybe all the gunmen could alternate shooting high and low.

I think even the film was worried you might not be following along.  They show an establishing shot of The Pentagon and actually bothered to put "The Pentagon" on the screen, as if anyone watching the film wouldn't know that you're looking at The Pentagon or be unfamiliar with the general shape.  I kept expecting them to put up other obvious things like "Outside" or "Costco".

I have to blame the script more than the direction.  These are the guys (Erich and Jon Hoeber) that wrote the masterpiece that was Battleship, after all.  I don't get it, you write a piece of shit like Battleship and they hire you to write more movies?  I guess Kevin Smith was right when he said in Hollywood you fail upwards. I actually like director Dean Parisot, as I think he's done some fun movies and shows, and I think that's what he tried to do here.  Just keep it fun, and the cast seemed like they were having a good time and playing off each other well.  Even Bruce Willis seemed to be enjoying himself more here when compared to his performance in the last Die Hard.  There are a few fun action scenes, so it isn't all bad.  I didn't even realize this was based on a DC Comics series until I saw their logo at the beginning, and once I realized that I forgave a lot of the cartoony action.  I also liked how the scene transitions were done in a drawn, comic book style.

As I've said earlier, the humor of the film is very tame and silly.  There are a lot of repeated jokes and gags that weren't really funny in the first place.  I will admit that I laughed a few times overall, but I cringed at the bad jokes even more.

Red 2 is a bit of a mess and too silly at times, but it's harmless enough.  It tries to get by on a good cast and a few entertaining action scenes, but tonally it's all over the place and just kind of lazy.  You'll forget you saw this movie after a few days.  I didn't hate it, but I can't recommend it as anything other than a rental.

2 (out of 5) Death Stars

Side Effects (2013) - Movie Review

You're going to want to make sure you're sufficiently caffeinated before seeing Side Effects.

That's not to say that Side Effects will make you sleepy, but while it does have a slow build up, if you aren't paying attention, especially in the second half, you might find yourself a little lost.  There are so many twists and layers to Side Effects you may need another viewing to capture them all.  In fact, I just watched a clip of the film again that has a totally different subtext to it now that I've seen the whole film.

Emily (Rooney Mara) has been anxiously awaiting the release of her husband Martin (Channing Tatum), who's been in prison several years for insider trading.  One thing I appreciated right away was that it didn't go into too many details about what Martin did or setting him up as good or bad.  He did what he did, and now he's just interested in getting back to his life and working again.  Bogging the plot down with a bunch of financial mumbo-jumbo probably wouldn't have been the best way to start your film.

It turns out that Emily has been a long sufferer of depression, and with all the stress of her husband's release and concern about their financial future, it triggers again and she attempts to kill herself.  She sees a psychiatrist, Jonathan Banks (Jude Law), who in the process of helping her prescribes a series of anti-depressants, but none seem to work.  In fact, most of them make her feel worse.  After seeing Emily's original psychiatrist (Catherine Zeta-Jones), she suggests he prescribes a newer, experimental drug.  This is the drug that finally works for Emily, but there's a side effect, she begins to have bizarre sleepwalking episodes.  Something happens, and I won't spoil it, but it is setup by the opening scene of the film.

I was thinking about why the opening telegraphs such a big event in the film, but then I thought without that opening, would you have kept watching?  Normally, I'd be upset at the spoiler, but I think it worked here.  Otherwise, you'd just be watching kind of a drab, but well acted, story about a couple dealing with depression.  Even knowing that something's on the way, it still catches you by surprise and there was a collective gasp from the audience.

Due to the publicity surrounding these events, Jonathan's life is in turmoil and many aren't convinced he prescribed the right treatment to Emily.  Even he has his doubts, so he does his own investigation and what he finds leads him down a completely different path.  That's part of the fun of Side Effects.  It beautifully sets up many things, and has you going in one direction, but then smacks you in the face from another.  There were a few times where I thought the movie was going to play out much differently, only be surprised by what happened next.  It isn't too twisty for its own good though, or gets confusing.  The twists play out very linearly, as opposed to stuff you see in the Ocean's films where it jumps around a little.  However, lose focus for a scene or two, or pick the wrong time to go to the bathroom, and you can miss something pretty vital to how it concludes. Screenwriter Scott Z. Burns seems to have a knack for writing smart, complex stories, as shown in his previous Steven Soderbergh collaborations, Contagion and The Informant!  Side Effects is his best work yet.

It's not just the writing that's smart either, Soderbergh's way of setting up scenes through use of music or the way a scene is framed it what really makes this stand out from just being a standard thriller.  These small details are why multiple viewings may be necessary.

What is it about Steven Soderbergh and how he manages to release great films at typically slow times of the year?  Maybe that's been part of his strategy to make his films look even better by comparison (I'm kidding).  The timing of the release is a double edged sword, as it's finally the first really good film of 2013, but was it released too early in the year to still get any Oscar consideration?  If this has been released in December, I can imagine there'd be a huge amount of buzz around it. There's also lots of talk going around that this may be Soderbergh's last theatrical film, while others are saying he may just be taking a sabbatical.   If this is really Steven Soderbergh's last film, all I can say is that at least he's going out on a high note. As I fan, I have to plead with Mr. Soderbergh to please not retire.  He's been one of the most consistently good directors in the past 25 years, tackling many different genres and almost never disappointing.  Hell, he was the reason I actually wasn't dreading watching Magic Mike, and I ended up enjoying that film.

Speaking of Channing Tatum, Soderbergh seems to always get the most out of his actors, and Tatum wasn't bad again.  It's a smaller role, so he's not asked to do much, and I even noticed he seems to have cut back on his 'twang' a bit.  Catherine Zeta-Jones is also fine in her role, but Side Effects was really a two-man game between Jude Law and Rooney Mara.  I had once written off Jude Law as just another generic, pretty-boy from the UK, but he really has evolved into an good character actor, and this may be his finest performance to date.  You genuinely root for his character, and that's a credit to Law's performance. Rooney Mara in her short career has proven to be a bright actress with a brighter future.  As much as I liked her in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, I think she was even better here.  There's more nuance to her performance, but I can't say too much about it without spoiling her character arc.

It's only February, but Side Effects is easily the best film of 2013 so far.  Smart, complex, thrilling and carried by two great performances.  It may not be Steven Soderbergh's best film, but it's still a very good one, and I really hope it's not his last.  I highly recommend seeing this as soon as you can, but again, you might want to down some caffeine beforehand.

4 (out of 5) Death Stars

Broken City (2013) - Movie Review

It might be a broken city, but it somehow feels like a lot of other cities.

Mark Wahlberg plays a Billy Taggart, a former cop (shocker, I know) turned private investigator in Broken City.  The prologue shows us that he beat a murder rap, but due to the circumstances of killing Mayor Hostetler (Russell Crowe) and Chief of Police Faribanks (Jeffrey Wright) tell him he's still off the force.  Hostetler thinks Taggart is a hero though, as the person he murdered was a suspected rapist and murderer that got off on a technicality.

Seven years later, Taggart is barely getting by as a P.I.  He's too nice and letting people get away with not paying him in a timely manner, or just not paying him at all. Mayor Hostetler comes to the rescue when he offers Taggart $50,000 investigate his wife (Catherine Zeta-Jones), whom he suspects is having an affair.  Hostetler is in the political fight of his life as the election looms around the corner, and if the affair is true it could be really damaging to his campaign.  Taggart investigates, things are discovered, and we learn there's a lot more going on than just a simple affair.

I think that all of that 'going on' is the problem with Broken City that prevents it from being a much better film.  The plot gets needlessly complex and twisty for it's own good.  There are lots of threads that drag the story down or don't have any kind of payoff.  It wants to be smarter than it is, but when you find out what's really going on, it's kind of let down.  This was writer Brian Tucker's first film, and it's not a bad effort. The story doesn't insult the intelligence or anything like that, but it only manages to be a very paint-by-the-numbers thriller. The other problem with the script is that there no snap to it at all.  It's not that it needed more humor, but considering all of the threats and politics involved, you'd think there'd be more bite.

I've often criticized Mark Wahlberg for not having a lot of range, and this is another role that doesn't challenge him at all, but I actually thought he was well cast here.  The role needed that tough, no nonsense guy, and that's pretty much exactly what he is.  One the unnecessary subplots involved Taggart's girlfriend (Natalie Martinez), and while it explains the murder at the beginning of the film, it only amounted to giving Taggart an excuse to go off the rails for a minute.  You see him hit rock bottom, but then he immediately bounces back, as if it was just something he needed to get out of his system.  This whole part could have been removed, and it would have tightened the movie up quite a bit.

I did enjoy Wahlberg's chemistry and relationship with his assistant (Alona Tal) though.  They have a few nice scenes where he's showing her the ropes, and I would have liked to see a little more of that in the film.  It doesn't hurt that Alona Tal is a looker either.

The strength of the film is the cast.  Russell Crowe does a good job here, and I this the first film in a while that I really enjoyed him in or I didn't think he was completely phoning it in.  The problem with the character is that he plays out very predictably, but that's not Crowe's fault.  Catherine Zeta-Jones is the adulterous wife, but there wasn't enough to her character to justify getting such a well known actor to play the role.  Jeffrey Wright is also good as the Police Chief that you don't like at first, but come around to.  Barry Pepper returns to the big screen as Jack Valliant, the man running against Hostetler, and Kyle Chandler also has a small role as his campaign manager.

Allen Hughes (of "The Hughes Brothers" that directed The Book of Eli) does a descent job with the direction.  It's capable work, but there aren't any surprises, and there's nothing distinctive about the visuals or style.

Broken City isn't a broken movie (I don't quite understand the hate on rottentomatoes for it), nor a bad one, but it's also not a particularly good one either.  It's well acted and moves along enough to be fairly entertaining, but doesn't have enough originality to stand out or be all that memorable.  This is the kind of film you'll enjoy enough when you're bored and need to kill some time.  Rent it on a rainy day.

3 (out of 5) Death Stars