Tribeca Spotlight: brilliantlove

The Tribeca Film Festival is currently in full swing in downtown Manhattan, and I had the pleasure of sitting down with filmmaker Ashley Horner and stars Liam Browne and Nancy Trotter Landry earlier this week to discuss their film, “brilliantlove,” which premiered at the festival last week. Described as a film that pushes limits American films are afraid to, “brilliantlove” is the story of two people with an extraordinarily intimate physical relationship whose lives become less than private when a pornographer comes across some photos shot by Manchester of his girlfriend Noon after Manchester accidentally leaves them in a bar.

Liam Browne and Nancy Trotter Landry star as Manchester and Noon
Horner is astounded by the “serious rollercoaster ride” which has brought him and his film to Tribeca. He says he heard from a publicist only seven weeks ago after having just locked the picture but not yet finished production, and that the rest of the film had to be quickly finished in order to be ready only days before the film’s premiere last week. Horner says that people either love it or they “fucking hate it,” addressing the film’s stark showcase of uncensored full-frontal nudity and masturbation. Stars Browne and Landry say they were initially apprehensive about watching the film with audience, but according to Browne, the “sex scenes looked really good and really sexy,” and therefore it seemed to work. All three individuals believe that the film will be received with some skepticism in the United States and the United Kingdom, but shouldn’t cause much of a stir in the rest of Europe.

Director Ashley Horner discusses the film
Horner believes that independent films need to be pushing the limits, and that “if you’re making films with little money, why not make original films?” He is very pleased to see his film achieve success at Tribeca, and he says that if anyone walks out in the middle of his film, he considers it more a problem for the individual than for him. He is more than content with the emotional responses he has seen from audience, describing them as ranging among “funny, beautiful, scary, and traumatic.”

Stars Liam Browne and Nancy Trotter Landry discuss the film
Browne and Landry stress that Manchester and Noon are “totally connected and find each other fascinating,” and that in their relationship, “a lot of the time, they don’t have to say something.” Most of their interactions are either silent, physical intimate, or through listening to a tape-recorded story by one designed to arouse the other. The film starts out with a scene without dialogue, featuring the full-fledged nudity, intimacy, and passion of these two young people in love. Browne and Landry, in their first-film roles, with some help from Horner and screenwriter Sean Conway, have created two people who have sealed themselves off from the rest of the world and found a way to share something real. The explicitness of their affair may offend some, but according to the people who made it, this is the face of a true independent film.

Thursday American Cinema Classic

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Thursday American Cinema Classic. I’m taking a course called American Cinema Since 1960 where we’re charting the history and development of American Cinema from the 1960s to the present. We’ll be watching some pretty iconic films, some of which I haven’t seen before. Each week, I’ll be providing a short review of one contemporary classic from the annals of recent history.

Top Gun
Directed by Tony Scott
Released May 16, 1986



Like last week’s entry, “Jaws,” this is another film with an extremely recognizable musical score. In this case, it’s not one that provokes fear but instead nationalist pride (and considerable laughter for audience members all too familiar with it). This All-American film is a fantastic capsule portrait of the 1980s, chock full of corniness and plenty of homoerotic insinuations. As an action movie, it’s a lot of fun even if it’s terribly predictable. Tom Cruise is fantastically unhinged and completely hilarious, walking around as if he owns the world. His attempts to seduce Top Gun instructor Charlie (Kelly McGillis) are so over-the-top and incessantly funny. The movie, though less than twenty-five years old, feels hopelessly dated and gloriously excessive in every possible way. The flying is fun, and though the dialogue ruins pretty much all of the dramatic effect, it’s still enjoyable and a little bit thrilling. It probably works better as a satire than as a film taken at face value, and it’s immensely entertaining, cheesy music and all. Relieve the ridiculousness with this terrific YouTube montage set to the eternally memorable theme. It’ll take your breath away.

Movie with Abe: The Losers

The Losers
Directed by Sylvain White
Released April 23, 2010

This action blockbuster is the kind of movie that academia and film snobs will likely scoff at as a piece of cinematic garbage. But for comic book fans and those open to a nice old-fashioned good time, this is superb fun. It’s a fantastic exercise in blowing things up and having a blast while doing it, but there’s a surprisingly coherent setup behind it which actually works pretty well. Not everything has to make complete sense, and this movie does a fine job of maintaining a general theme of logic and coherence while managing to provide fantastic entertainment that doesn’t feel dumbed down to be compatible with its PG-13 rating.

The most exciting part of this film is the fantastic ensemble that’s been assembled to play these so-called losers. Leading the charge is Jeffrey Dean Morgan, best known as the dying Denny on “Grey’s Anatomy,” rehashing his performance in last year’s “Watchmen” as a similarly smarmy but far more decent human being with a knack for shooting guns and killing people. By his side is Idris Elba, fresh off a guest stint on “The Office” and an amusing supporting turn in “RocknRolla,” here serving as the angry-prone, aptly-named Rogue, the foil to Morgan’s cocky but far more sensible colonel. Columbus Short and Oscar Jaenada are fun additional members of the team, as well as Zoe Saldana and Jason Patric in other roles, but the real standout is Chris Evans (“Fantastic Four”), who truly appears as if he’s having the time of his life and loving every minute of it. The carefully coordinated T-shirts he wears in each scene are especially inventive, clever, and enjoyable.

It’s that same token emphasis on serving up the most entertainment possible that makes this film work as it does. A relatively short and decisively inciting introduction to why these losers are outlaws who need to find both justice and a way back home is just right in terms of setting a proper tone for the film. A roughly one hundred-minute runtime is also fitting, and the movie doesn’t overstay its welcome in the slightest sense. It also sets itself up well for a sequel, and while most intellectual moviegoers probably won’t want to spend another two hours with this motley crew, it’s likely that they have the capacity for plenty of additional adventures left in them. This is still a compact and complete experience in itself, but this is the kind of team that could come back for a second round and make it work.

B+

Wednesday Oscar Retrospective: The Big Snub of 2005

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Wednesday Oscar Retrospective. The Big Snub is the second in a series of projects looking back at the past eight years of the Oscars, dating back to the first ceremony I watched and closely followed.

Each year, the Oscar nominations announcement presents several notable omissions. This series is devoted to analyzing the biggest and most shocking snub of all (in any category). It has nothing to do with personal opinion but rather with what seemed likely at the time and what most people were predicting. Once again, this is a film/director/actor who didn’t even earn a nomination.

The Big Snub of 2005:

“Walk the Line” for Best Picture
Why it was all set to happen: Let me first preface this by saying that this is likely to be the least convincing installment of this series. 2005 was not a year big surprises, and I thought that saying “a lone director nominee” or “Star Wars Episode III” for Best Visual Effects wouldn’t have held up in court. This is instead the major omission that surprised me back in January 2006 when nominations were announced. The PGA lineup preserved only three of the Golden-Globe nominated Best Pictures, adding “Capote” and “Crash” into the mix. The DGA list matched that, but left “Walk the Line” off in favor of Steven Spielberg’s “Munich.” With those four films vying for three slots alongside “Brokeback Mountain” and “Good Night, and Good Luck,” three seemed to have an advantage because of their stars who were getting nominated for and winning awards, leaving “Munich” out in the cold with no attention for lead actor Eric Bana. “Walk the Line,” on the other hand, won all three of the Golden Globes it was nominated for (Best Motion Picture – Comedy/Musical, Best Actor, Best Actress) and Reese Witherspoon had also won the SAG Award several days before the nominations announcement.

Why it probably didn’t: Only two of the Golden Globe nominees for Best Picture ended up with corresponding Oscar nominations for the top prize. This was the first time in almost twenty-five years that the Best Picture and Best Director nominees matched up perfectly, mirroring the DGA’s list. Joaquin Phoenix and Witherspoon may have been locked, but “Walk the Line” director James Mangold was never truly in the running to accompany his film. That’s not a deal breaker, but when the main competition is a film directed by Steven Spielberg, who did earn a Golden Globe nod (as well as a mention for Best Screenplay) despite the film’s snub in Best Picture. Without a doubt, it occupied the sixth slot and would have certainly made it in had the field been expanded to ten, or even just six, nominees.

Who took its place: “Munich”

Consolation prize: The film earned five nominations – for both actors, costume design, and sound. Witherspoon took home Best Actress.

Come back next week for a look at the Big Snub of 2004. If you have a prediction or a suggestion, please leave it in the comments. Unlike 2005, the big snub of 2004 is extremely notable and especially staggering, especially looking back on it six years later.

Movie with Abe: The Secret in their Eyes

The Secret in their Eyes
Directed by Juan José Campanella
Released April 16, 2010

The Argentinean film that bested “The White Ribbon” and “A Prophet” for the Best Foreign Film prize at the Oscars last month has finally made its way over to the United States. It proves to be an extensive tale just as comprehensive and time-spanning as those of the other two aforementioned films. One man’s spirited investigation into a murder takes its effect on the victim’s husband, the perpetrator, the man himself, and all those who come into contact with him. The passion with which federal justice agent Benjamin Esposito pursues the case for a number of years is inspiring, and it’s a fiercely intriguing and engaging film.

As suggested by its title, “The Secret in their Eyes” is a film that delves deep into the souls, motivations, and characters of the people whose lives it features. It comes at its subject matter from two different angles in the form of time periods twenty-five years apart. The story is exposed both in the present and the past, and it’s a fitting way to get to know the characters and see just how much they’ve changed before fully understanding why they do what they do. It’s as if there are twice as many characters to meet – the past and present forms of these protagonists, so different in their novice and elder forms.

What makes “The Secret in their Eyes” such an invigorating, enchanting, and thrilling film is a solid story that’s legitimately interesting and full of intriguing plot developments, properly spacing out the twists and turns throughout the whole of the film’s runtime. Four main performances also serve to shape, enhance, and guide the film. Ricardo Darin is an excellent public servant who charges himself with much more than what lies in his job description as protagonist Benjamin Esposito. Guillermo Francella provides some much-needed comic relief as Esposito’s partner and friend Sandoval, ultimately proving to be a loyal and devoted companion for Esposito in his quest to find justice. Pablo Rago is exceptional and sympathetic as Ricardo Morales, the man who quietly demands justice for the senseless and brutal murder of his wife. And then there is the marvelous Soledad Villamil, first seen in her older, far more sophisticated form and then introduced as the object of Esposito’s affection. Villamil is mesmerizing as Irene Menendez Hastings, and her interactions with Darin’s Esposito are among the film’s best moments. This is a movie equally about story and characters, and it excels in both areas.

B+

Tuesday’s Top Trailer: Cyrus

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Tuesday's Top Trailer. One of my favorite parts about going to see movies is the series of trailers that airs beforehand and, more often than not, the trailer is far better than the actual film. Each week, I'll be sharing a trailer I've recently seen. Please chime in with comments on what you think of the trailer and how you think the movie is going to be.

Cyrus – Opening July 9, 2010



This trailer caught my eye before a Friday movie a few weeks ago, and in searching for a good preview to spotlight this week, I recalled this one, which stuck with me. It’s unclear exactly what kind of movie this is because it seems at times like a starkly serious drama, but most of the time, it looks to be an offbeat, deadpan comedy that feels very much like an independent film like “The Squid and the Whale.” It comes from a directing duo, the Duplass brothers, who have previously made very, very independent films like “Baghead.” This still doesn’t seem too much like a studio production, featuring semi-famous stars and an accessible, low-resolution feel. It’s great to have John C. Reilly back in a somewhat serious leading role, since I despised “Walk Hard” but did find Reilly’s work impressive in the little-seen 2004 film “Criminal.” Catherine Keener and Marisa Tomei are both lovely actresses capable of both comedy (“Being John Malkovich,” “My Cousin Vinny”) and drama (“Capote,” “In the Bedroom”). Jonah Hill to this point has done only more comical and immature work, and therefore it’s fun to see him in this role as the creepy son of Reilly’s character’s new girlfriend, played by Tomei. The trailer is very entertaining, and I enjoyed lines like “I’m going to have some conversations” and “you are flirting with me? I’m like Shrek!” This definitely looks like a weird movie, mostly due to Hill’s character and the way he treats Reilly’s leading man. It looks like a fun summer indie, and I think I’ll enjoy seeing it. What’s your take?

Monday Movies You Aught to See: Thank You For Smoking

Regardless of whether the decade ended already ended in 2009 or will end at the close of the current year, the 2000s were a wonderful period of cinema with many treasures that deserve to be remembered. Check in at Movies with Abe on Mondays for Movies You Aught to See, a look back at memorable movies from the aughts. They are posted in no particular order, and if you have a great film from the 2000s that you think merits consideration, leave a note in the comments!

Thank You For Smoking
Directed by Jason Reitman
Released April 14, 2006



Before he made “Juno” and “Up in the Air,” Jason Reitman wrote and directed his first and arguably best film. The story of a likable tobacco lobbyist bristles with hilarious contradictions in the form of its antihero and the nonsensical but convincing words that come out of his mouth. The script is excellent, and the trailer should convey much of the film’s brilliance to those who have not yet had the opportunity to see one of 2006’s greatest films. The cast includes William H. Macy, J.K. Simmons, Rob Lowe, Robert Duvall, and plenty of others, but this is lead actor Aaron Eckhart’s show, delivering in the role of a lifetime as Nick Naylor. This is a marvelously enjoyable, witty, and surprising film.

Sunday Standout Performances: March

Welcome to a new semi-regular feature here at Movies with Abe. A lot of great performances from the first half of the year are forgotten by the time Oscar movies roll out and awards season comes around. This feature is designed to pay tribute to those actors and actresses who have demonstrated excellence in movies that likely will not be remembered at the end of the year. Maybe praise like this can help. Each edition of Sunday Standout Performances will look at a different month, referencing my reviews of the films mentioned. Here’s a look at the best performances from March.

Hye-ja Kim (Mother)
“…it’s the performance of Hye-ja Kim as the mother that really ties the film together. She throws herself completely into the role and presents a woman so fiercely loyal to her offspring whose dedication other proud mothers might yearn to mimic, albeit in a less eccentric and crazed manner. After all, the film is about one mother in particular, but the title doesn’t contain her real name. It may be a stretch to say that this film is a cinematic realization of the maternal instinct, but if any film could be classified that way, this would be it.”

Helena Bonham Carter (Alice in Wonderland)
“It’s an entirely magical world brimming with wonder, and even if Alice isn’t ready to accept it as truly existing, audiences can watch with amazement at the stunning visuals and visualization of this classic locale. Nothing is spared in the creation of this universe, and the three-dimensional animation helps to maximize the majesty of this place and instill a sense of enchantment in everything that occurs within its bounds. Helena Bonham Carter is hilarious as the bigheaded Red Queen, and the way she cries out “off with her head” is absolutely terrific.”

Ciarin Hinds & Iben Hjejle (The Eclipse)
“The caliber of the performances more than matches the depth and complexity of the characters. Ciaran Hinds, whose previous credits include background characters in ‘Munich’ and ‘There Will Be Blood’ and Julius Caesar on HBO’s ‘Rome,’ is mesmerizing as Farr. He is muted and solitary but his face says so much when he speaks to his kids and to Morelle, and takes on an entirely different expression of terror when he faces the unknown in the form of a visiting ghost. Iben Hjejle is equally excellent as Morelle, and the way she interacts with Farr and with an egotistical writer named Nicholas Holden (Aidan Quinn) reveals so much about her.”

Movie with Abe: The City of Your Final Destination

The City of Your Final Destination
Directed by James Ivory
Released April 16, 2010

Part of the allure of international travel is a chance to experience a new place with a completely different culture, people, landscapes, and traditions. In a film, the best way to visit an uncharted location is to follow a novice character on his journey to somewhere others have come to call their home, where he can have a guide to escort him and the audience through the magnificent wonders of this international place. In “The City of Your Final Destination,” one man experiences a somewhere new, but he also has the opportunity to get to know a different way of living.

Omar (Omar Metwally) is a professor seeking to write a biography of a famous author, Jules Gund, who has recently died. Denied permission by his surviving family members, he travels to Uruguay to change their minds. When he arrives, he is greeted with open arms by Gund’s mistress Arden (Charlotte Gainsbourg), with kindness and courtesy by his brother Adam (Anthony Hopkins), and with nothing but unsubtle hostility by Jules’ widow Caroline (Laura Linney). Omar’s stay at their enormously rich property allows him the chance to understand how the three coexist and what kind of rewards a magical life of plentiful solitude can offer.

“The City of Your Final Destination” is both an excellent dramatic character study and a surprisingly funny exploration of what happens when a small group of people spends far much time around only each other. The character oppositions are incredibly stark, exemplified by the controlling, stone-cold women embodied in Caroline and Omar’s girlfriend Deirdre (Alexandra Maria Lara), the kind-hearted souls given the gift of luxury and not keen to forget what they’ve received – Arden and Adam’s partner Pete (Hiroyuki Sanada) – and those simply trying to explore life: Adam and most especially Omar. The interactions of these varied personalities are especially intriguing and enlightening.

Director James Ivory’s frequent writer Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, who won Oscars for penning Ivory collaborations “Howard’s End” and “A Room with a View,” has crafted an excellent script based on a novel by Peter Cameron. The story sparkles with lively, interesting characters and fascinating conversations designed to elicit more about each of them. The movie is beautifully filmed and wonderfully guided by Ivory’s careful hand, as much an ode to the culture of the land as it is to the people involved. The cast is universally outstanding, featuring terrific breakout crossover performances from the likes of Sanada (“Lost”) and Lara (“The Reader”). It’s a majestic return to form for veteran actors Anthony Hopkins and Laura Linney, and a veritable sign that they should be working for years to come. All in all, it’s an amazingly charming movie that manages to be great without being violent, starkly serious, or even remotely unpleasant.

A-

Movie with Abe: Paper Man

Paper Man
Directed by Kieran & Michele Mulroney
Released April 23, 2010

Movies about writers have a tendency to take on a life of their own. Even if there isn’t a coherent story, play, or film within a film at work, there is still some part of the writer’s mind which seeps out of his brain and onto the pages of the film’s screenplay. In this case, author Richard Dunne (Jeff Daniels) maroons himself in Montauk and brings with him his superhero creation, the spandex-clad Captain Awesome (Ryan Reynolds). Left to his own thoughts, Richard is kept company and constantly annoyed by a character he himself brought to life, externalizing his conscience in the form of a smirking blond superman.

The story in “Paper Man” is a familiar one, a story of a man so caught up in his own unproductiveness that he is unable to connect with his wife or most other people, for that matter. A chance meeting with a young girl named Abby (Emma Stone) permits him the occasional escape from loneliness, and the time he spends with only his thoughts is briefly interrupted by the light of youthful energy. The plot of “Paper Man” is not highly original and takes many predictable turns without offering genuine surprises in return. It’s hardly a deal breaker, however, since the movie includes a number of sharply written and memorable lines which elevate it from a forgettable take on a recognizable tale to a worthwhile and entertaining film in its own right.

The most wonderful part of “Paper Man” is the chance for actress Emma Stone to break out with a fiercely committed and enjoyable dramatic role. The 21-year-old has starred in comedies like “Superbad,” “The Rocker,” “The House Bunny,” and “Zombieland,” and here she proves that she can hold her own in a tight, small cast and handle more serious material deftly. Reynolds provides as much amusement as he can by milking all of his scenes for as much as they’re worth, doing the best he can to enhance a rather silly character. Jeff Daniels, the film’s questionable anchor, isn’t quite as serious as he should be, playing Richard as a hapless and clueless man with no real connection to reality. He should look to his own performance in “The Squid and the Whale” for the kind of acting that might have been more effective here. This is a movie about a man who excels when he puts himself on paper, however, and therefore it’s extremely fitting that the script should be its strongest asset.

B+

Thursday American Cinema Classic

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Thursday American Cinema Classic. I’m taking a course called American Cinema Since 1960 where we’re charting the history and development of American Cinema from the 1960s to the present. We’ll be watching some pretty iconic films, some of which I haven’t seen before. Each week, I’ll be providing a short review of one contemporary classic from the annals of recent history.

Jaws
Directed by Steven Spielberg
Released June 20, 1975



This is one film that pretty much everyone in the world has heard of, and for good reason. It was director Steven Spielberg’s first big hit, and broke the box-office record at that time, besting the take by “The Godfather” three years earlier. “Jaws” stills stands as the seventh highest-grossing film of all time, having earned nearly $975 million adjusted for inflation. The screening of this film was designed as an example of the rise of the blockbuster, and it was either this or “Star Wars,” which was released two years later. This fun flick helped to instill terror in beach-going audiences for years to come with the deadly shark chewing up multiple human victims and taking a boat or two with him in the process. Thirty-five years later, the film is devastatingly corny but just as awesome as it is hilarious, and the cast is a big part of that. Richard Dreyfuss is at his neurotic, nerdy best as a visiting oceanographer with a particularly passion for studying sharks. Roy Scheider is a great do-gooder who always knows what’s best even if his sea legs aren’t that strong, and Robert Shaw is fantastically unhinged as a hardened and insane shark hunter. The three of them together make for quite an oddball, entertaining team. The movie is just as much an adventure film as it is a horror movie, and the visual effects contribute to the effectiveness greatly. The film’s most spectacular asset, of course, is its incredibly iconic score by legendary composer John Williams, only just beginning his prolific career. This is a wonderfully enjoyable and fun film, and it’s one I don’t feel I need to recommend highly because I suspect that most readers have already seen it.

B+

Wednesday Oscar Retrospective: The Big Snub of 2006

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Wednesday Oscar Retrospective. The Big Snub is the second in a series of projects looking back at the past eight years of the Oscars, dating back to the first ceremony I watched and closely followed.

Each year, the Oscar nominations announcement presents several notable omissions. This series is devoted to analyzing the biggest and most shocking snub of all (in any category). It has nothing to do with personal opinion but rather with what seemed likely at the time and what most people were predicting. Once again, this is a film/director/actor who didn’t even earn a nomination.

The Big Snub of 2006:

“Volver” for Best Foreign Film
Why it was all set to happen: After first winning an Oscar for Best Foreign Film in 1999 for “All About My Mother,” director Pedro Almodovar earned a nomination for Best Director for “Talk to Her” in 2002 after the film was not submitted by Spain as their official entry in the foreign film category, and even picked up the award for Best Original Screenplay. While his next film, “Bad Education,” didn’t get very far on the American awards circuit, his latest protect had an actress very well-known in the United States in the leading role. Penelope Cruz was on track to earn her first Oscar nomination, and the film was sure to come along with it.

Why it probably didn’t: “Volver” stood out at the Golden Globes when it was up against not-quite-foreign films by American directors, “Letters from Iwo Jima” and “Apocalypto,” and eventual Oscar frontrunners “The Lives of Others” and “Pan’s Labyrinth.” 2006 was a rare year in which almost all of the nine finalists on Oscar’s list for Best Foreign Film were in theaters during or shortly after Oscar season. The competition was stiff – the three aforementioned films, “After the Wedding,” “Avenue Montaigne,” “Days of Glory,” “Water,” “Black Book,” and the unreleased (at the time) “Vitus.” The theory is that everyone thought that someone else would be voting for “Volver” and decided to throw their support behind another equally compelling foreign entry from the rich field that year.

Who took its place: “The Lives of Others” and “Pan’s Labyrinth” were joined by the phenomenal “After the Wedding,” the terrific "Days of Glory," and the awfully boring and inexplicably praised “Water.”

Consolation prize: Cruz earned the first of her three Oscar nominations (and should have won). Unfortunately, their next collaboration fared even worse, as “Broken Embraces” received no nominations at all. At least they’re still producing excellent and wonderful films!

Come back next week for a look at the Big Snub of 2005. If you have a prediction or a suggestion, please leave it in the comments. Suggestions are especially welcome for this year since the nominations announcement was one of the most predictable and uninteresting in recent years.

Tuesday’s Top Trailer: The Other Guys

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Tuesday's Top Trailer. One of my favorite parts about going to see movies is the series of trailers that airs beforehand and, more often than not, the trailer is far better than the actual film. Each week, I'll be sharing a trailer I've recently seen. Please chime in with comments on what you think of the trailer and how you think the movie is going to be.

The Other Guys – Opening August 6, 2010



I caught this trailer before an opening day showing of “Date Night,” and along with last week’s Tuesday Top Trailer, “The Kids Are All Right,” this was a breath of fresh air that looks like it will enliven the summer. The trailer gets off to a fun false start, showing The Rock and Samuel L. Jackson as uber-cool cops who live life on the edge and get all the glory back at headquarters for their actions. This film takes its title from the revelation that its focus is about the other guys, who spend most of their time chained to a desk watching everyone else get all the credit for their hard work. Mark Wahlberg proved several years ago in “The Departed” that he is capable of playing a hilariously irritable cop, and seeing him do that again should be fantastic. Will Ferrell has also often been at his best playing a subdued funnyman, in films like “Stranger than Fiction.” Teaming the two up makes for several stellar moments in the trailer, like Wahlberg yelling at Ferrell for humming and throwing coffee on his shirt. The introduction of Eva Mendes as Ferrell’s smoking hot wife also elicits quite a reaction out of Wahlberg. The two should make quite a pair and it looks like the film should be an awesome and enjoyable action-comedy. The best line from the preview comes after an explosion forces the duo to the ground and the blowback surprises Ferrell: “the movie industry is completely irresponsible for the way they portray explosions!”

Monday Movies You Aught to See: Catch a Fire

Regardless of whether the decade ended already ended in 2009 or will end at the close of the current year, the 2000s were a wonderful period of cinema with many treasures that deserve to be remembered. Check in at Movies with Abe on Mondays for Movies You Aught to See, a look back at memorable movies from the aughts. They are posted in no particular order, and if you have a great film from the 2000s that you think merits consideration, leave a note in the comments!

Catch a Fire
Directed by Phillip Noyce
Released October 27, 2006



Before three films from 2009 (“Invictus,” “Skin,” and “District 9”) explored race relations in South Africa through history and metaphors, this small film from the director of “Rabbit-Proof Fence” and “The Quiet American” provided a complex and moving look at the apartheid conflict. It’s a fascinating portrait of a man who, after being arrested, tortured, and falsely accused of being a terrorist, decides that it’s time for him to take a stand and join resistance members in their fight. It showcases excellent performances from Derek Luke as the insurgent in question and Tim Robbins as the officer who pursues him. It’s a subtle film that cuts deep into racial tensions and offers an intriguing look at cause and effect in the most volatile of situations. Check out the preview above to get a taste of this underrated film.

Movie with Abe: Handsome Harry

Handsome Harry
Directed by Bette Gordon
Released April 16, 2010

There are some movies that dig deep into a character and really get to know him. Often those films feature a stellar central performance that overwhelms and outshines the rest of the movie. It takes a truly great director and great lead actor to craft such a film where the whole cast is permitted to shine equally, and where the same effect of delving into the mind of a character is achieved. Fortunately, that is the case here, with Jamey Sheridan spearheading a stunningly accomplished ensemble in Bette Gordon’s new drama.

Handsome Harry is the nickname by which popular, unassuming Harry Sweeney (Sheridan) is called by a dying ex-Marine he served with, Thomas Kelley (Steve Buscemi). Kelley’s death kicks off an intense period of self-exploration during which Harry travels the country to locate all of the members of his unit and piece together the memories of a tragic and violent night Kelley couldn’t stop thinking about on his deathbed. Harry’s journey across the country is one that helps reveal much about him as well as the people he encounters.

What sets “Handsome Harry” apart from other films about the reunion of any given set of people is the extraordinarily talented cast it features that helps to define a generation. The members of Harry’s unit are a parade of veteran actors, each more talented than the previous performer. Sheridan, Buscemi, John Savage, Aidan Quinn, Titus Welliver, and Campbell Scott make up one of the finest ensembles recently seen on screen. They all possess the same general sensibility and attitude towards the world, though each exhibits a fascinating variation on that worldview. Each of Harry’s visits is equally meaningful and powerful, and all of the interactions are superbly acted. Sheridan himself is a gifted performer who manages to be believable, relatable, and personable without stealing the show.

As a film, “Handsome Harry” is a moving series of revelations that helps the audience connect to the title character and to live his experiences. It starts out unassuming and generally pleasant, and as its secrets slowly unravel, it becomes even more accessible and engaging. There is never a dull moment in the movie, and every scene, particularly any featuring John Savage and Aidan Quinn, feels like it could explode at any moment. Yet “Handsome Harry” never loses a sense of the story it’s telling, and remains an invigorating and magnificent endeavor the whole way through.

B+

Music Movies with Abe: When You’re Strange & Who Do You Love

When You’re Strange: Directed by Tom DiCillo
Who Do You Love: Directed by Jerry Zaks
Released April 9, 2010

These two films have so much in common, but they couldn’t be more different. Both take their titles from the name of a song and are just as much about a style of music as a specific musician or band. Both feature the story of an executive who took a chance on something or someone no one else believed in and emerged on the other side smiling, and both narratives lead up to an untimely death which cut short what might otherwise have been an endless tale. Both movies base themselves on recent historical figures in the music world, though “When You’re Strange” is a documentary and “Who Do You Love” is a dramatic reimagining of real-life personalities.

Where the two films start to diverge relates to what they’re trying to accomplish. “When You’re Strange” is subtitled “A Film About the Doors,” chronicling the meteoric rise of the rock band. “Who Do You Love” was originally titled “Chess,” saving its focus for the man who helped spread the reach of the blues to the rest of the country rather than the musicians who played it. In this case, it’s a definitive disadvantage for the latter film, because Chess as a character isn’t anywhere near as interesting as the musicians he represented, and featuring so many different artists for such brief periods of time when they interacted with Chess doesn’t do any of them justice. “When You’re Strange” devotes an immense amount of screen time to lead singer Jim Morrison, but it also makes sense since he was the true star of the band, and the movie does an appropriate job of filling in the biographies of the other members as well.

Taken from a standpoint of providing worthwhile education about the musicians in question, “When You’re Strange” is a marvelous success while “Who Do You Love” doesn’t quite get it right. “When You’re Strange” dives in with the members of the Doors before they were famous and sticks with them through their rise in popularity right up until Morrison’s shocking death at a young age. “Who Do You Love” simply plucks characters out of oblivion for minutes and scenes at a time and then tosses them right back into the ether, choosing instead to closely follow Chess and his own downward spiral. Compared with “Cadillac Records,” the 2008 film featuring the same story and characters, “Who Do You Love” is hardly an improvement. The earlier film, however flawed, provides a far more complex and informative history of the music industry and the performers involved. Alessandro Nivola tones down Adrien Brody’s overenthusiastic turn to the extreme, interpreting Chess as an inconsolably grumpy and gruff unsympathetic soul. David Oyelowo delivers the only memorable performance in the newer film as Muddy Waters, and like Jeffrey Wright in the first film, the writing is nowhere near on the same level as his talent.

Comparing a feature narrative film with a documentary isn’t exactly fair, but there is a stark difference in the effectiveness of the two movies that goes beyond their formats. The sharp editing employed in “When You’re Strange” helps to reveal the downturn of the volatile Morrison and the rollercoaster ride experienced by the Doors. “Who Do You Love” spends more time blending dramatic music with contemplative facial expressions to drive home the same point without achieving the same desired effect. “When You’re Strange” feels like an opportunity to get to know the Doors personally, while “Who Do You Love” is more of an unfriendly meeting with the talent’s manager. Seeing the band up close and in action is far more fulfilling.

When You’re Strange: B+
Who Do You Love: C-

Movie with Abe: The Joneses

The Joneses
Directed by Derrick Borte
Released April 16, 2010

There’s something not quite right about the Joneses, the new family that moves into a home in an elite community. Besides their ominously standard surname, something about the way the family functions doesn’t add up. Their presence does not seem threatening or dangerous, but rather out of place. It’s as if the danger posed to them were their secret revealed would be greater than whatever threat they themselves might realistically pose to anyone else. The Joneses are marvelously evocative of the Malloys on FX’s short-lived drama “The Riches,” where these people seem like they want to fit in but will never quite be able to, no matter how hard they try.

The situation isn’t nearly as serious as that of the Malloys, however. The Joneses are merely salespeople whose lifestyle is their occupation. They religiously sport clothing and products in an effort to get those around them to become envious and purchase the items themselves. Their presence as a family unit is just a cover, and Mrs. Jones (Demi Moore) has had many fake husbands in her time with the company. Mr. Jones (David Duchovny), however, is on his first assignment, and he may be too friendly and caring to achieve number one salesperson status in the cutthroat organization. The “kids” (Amber Heard and Ben Hollingsworth) have their own vices, but as a whole, the family functions extraordinarily well.

The premise is cool, and the product placement is not intrusive. It’s exciting and fun to see how they subtly sell their lives to the people around them. The incorporation of products provides an excellent and smooth balance between comedy and drama. Even when things seem like they’re going great, there is still a foreboding air reminiscent of the mood in “A Serious Man.” The plot twists, which are for the most part fairly conventional, still work because they are executed in a proper and intriguing manner.

The acting is equally impressive on all counts. Duchovny always seems to play the same role, that of the flirtatious alpha male who actually has a good heart, but it’s what he knows and does best, so his casting here is perfect. Moore does a terrific job of chewing scenery and chewing out her fake husband, attracting the admiration of all the men and women around her in the process. Character actor Gary Cole stands out as a neighbor who quickly disobeys the commandment about coveting your neighbor’s goods. Like the mysterious family that shows up on the street and takes the community by storm, this film starts out shrouded in mystery and proceeds along as an enjoyable and mesmerizing experience.

B+

Thursday American Cinema Classic

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Thursday American Cinema Classic. I’m taking a course called American Cinema Since 1960 where we’re charting the history and development of American Cinema from the 1960s to the present. We’ll be watching some pretty iconic films, some of which I haven’t seen before. Each week, I’ll be providing a short review of one contemporary classic from the annals of recent history.

The Last Picture Show
Directed by Peter Bogdanovich
Released October 22, 1971



This Best Picture nominee is a trip way back in time, both when it was originally released in 1971 and in the present day, painting a colorful (albeit black-and-white) picture of the 1950s. It’s particularly interesting to look at the film in terms of the performances showcased, especially since most of the actors, now in their sixties and seventies, are still actively working today. Seeing Jeff Bridges in one of his first big film roles (and his first Oscar nominated-one) is quite a sight after his career-encompassing, Oscar-winning performance in “Crazy Heart” last year. Timothy Buttoms seems such an innocent soul at this young age, and he’s quite different from his parody of George W. Bush as seen on the short-lived TV farce “That’s My Bush” from 2001. Cloris Leachman, who made this film before she earned any of her twenty-one Emmy nominations, already seems very old compared to the rest of the cast, but delivers a meaningful and impressive performance. Ellen Burstyn steals all of her scenes, which isn’t much of a surprise, and Cybill Shepherd is magnetic in her first film role. The cast are just part of the experience of this tribute to an ailing Texas town, and it’s a wonderfully complex exploration of friendship, relationships, sex, and movies. Watch the opening of the film with the YouTube clip embedded above.

B+

Movie with Abe: Clash of the Titans

Clash of the Titans
Directed by Louis Leterrier
Released April 2, 2010

Anyone going into this movie pretty much knows what to expect. This is not a stern historically accurate account of ancient times, nor is it a smart epic seeking to earn a dozen Oscar nominations. This is a film that shows its lead character holding a decapitated head on its promotional posters. Gore, violence, and combat between mythic creatures is what’s on the menu in this reimagining of a Greek myth and a cult 1981 film. Anyone anticipating anything else is in for a brutal disappointment.

There certainly exists an audience for this kind of movie, but those who will enjoy it most will likely find themselves laughing throughout all of its supposedly dramatic and intense scenes. One moviegoer excitedly shouted out, “the shit’s about to hit the fan!” when a new sea creature emerged from the depths of the ocean midway through the film, and he was having a great time. Rip-roaring action is key to the success of this kind of film, and for that one attendee at an early Friday morning show last week, the amount of action appeared to be satisfactory.

In actuality, there is surprisingly little truly exciting action, and it seems like a Staples “that was easy” button should have been distributed to each of the characters at the film’s conclusion. This is one of those epics that is too short rather than too long, clocking in at less than two hours. Anything more, however, would have been even more grueling and unbearable for those who don’t side with the enthusiastic gentleman mentioned above. Throughout the entire film, there is not one ounce of character development, intelligence, or coherence. The movie has more scenery than “300,” but no more sense. Learning the names of the characters isn’t worthwhile because they might as well all be one, save for those associated with deity, namely Perseus, the half-human, half-god son of Zeus. Actor Sam Worthington, following up on his leading role in megahit “Avatar,” looks as angry as any movie character has ever been, and, tragically enough, he delivers probably the best performance in the film, though Mads Mikkelsen (“Casino Royale,” “After the Wedding”) puts forth a commendable effort in a silly role. The film doesn’t even seem clear on what woman Perseus should end up with, and it’s plagued with nonsense and stupid plot detours. Trying to catch all of the plot holes and stupid devices employed by the film enhances the experience considerably, because there’s nothing remotely decent about this movie.

F

Wednesday Oscar Retrospective: The Big Snub of 2007

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Wednesday Oscar Retrospective. The Big Snub is the second in a series of projects looking back at the past eight years of the Oscars, dating back to the first ceremony I watched and closely followed.

Each year, the Oscar nominations announcement presents several notable omissions. This series is devoted to analyzing the biggest and most shocking snub of all (in any category). It has nothing to do with personal opinion but rather with what seemed likely at the time and what most people were predicting. Once again, this is a film/director/actor who didn’t even earn a nomination.

The Big Snub of 2007:

Angelina Jolie (A Mighty Heart) for Best Actress
Why it was all set to happen: Jolie was previously a one-shot wonder, winning the Best Supporting Actress trophy in 1999 for “Girl, Interrupted.” She didn’t have any Oscar-worthy roles over the next few years, opting instead for action movies like “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider” and “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” and big-budget flops like “Alexander.” Her ultra-serious performance as the wife of kidnapped reporter Daniel Pearl earned her Golden Globe and SAG nominations, setting her up perfectly for an Oscar bid.

Why it probably didn’t: Despite earning positive reviews, her movie carried no other buzz, putting a dent in Jolie’s chances since it was considerably easier for voters to forget about her film altogether. She fell prey to a surprising joint scenario where both an unexpectedly strong nominee and a contender without any precursor mentions both snuck in, ousting her from the lineup while Marion Cotillard, Julie Christie, and Ellen Page were safe.

Who took her place: Cate Blanchett is a force to be reckoned with, going into the awards season with three previous nominations and one win. Most expected the attention for her to be on her supporting role in “I’m Not There.” Her Golden Globe nod for the reprise of her Oscar-nominated performance in “Elizabeth: The Golden Age” seemed unimportant because there are many filler slots at the Globes, but her subsequent SAG nod helped translate to double nominations at the Oscars that year (Ryan Gosling in “Lars and the Real Girl” wasn’t so lucky). With Blanchett in rather than out, Jolie lost the fifth slot to a revered actress who hadn’t popped up on many awards rosters that year – Laura Linney from “The Savages,” which also earned a nomination for Best Original Screenplay.

Consolation prize: Jolie did make it all the way to Oscar the following year, earning a Best Actress nomination for her performance in Clint Eastwood’s “Changeling.” She even had the good fortune of being accompanied by the film’s cinematographer, art director, and set decorator.

Come back next week for a look at the Big Snub of 2006. If you have a prediction or a suggestion, please leave it in the comments.

Movie with Abe: Chloe

Chloe
Directed by Atom Egoyan
Released March 26, 2010

Infidelity is very probably one of the most common themes in movies, dating back to the origins of cinema (see 1932’s “Trouble in Paradise” for an example of how little has changed in 75 years). Temptation emerges as the threat to a deep bond initiated and sealed by the law, and one or both members of a couple may fall prey to that temptation, often prompting the eventual dissolution of their marriage. It’s difficult to find a fresh take on a subject so often probed in so many films, and for all its faults, that is one place in which “Chloe” succeeds brilliantly, launching with a tempting premise that immediately demands attention.

Julianne Moore stars as Catherine, a woman who is led to believe that her husband, David (Liam Neeson) has slept with one of his students. In order to test his loyalty, Catherine hires Chloe, a friendly prostitute, to seduce her husband and see how he reacts. Predictably, the test spirals out of control, but intriguingly, Catherine also finds herself entranced by Chloe’s appeal. Without spoiling too much, it gets to the point that Catherine begins to feel closer to her wayward husband by hearing Chloe tell her about the details of her affair with David. The two form an unexpected bond based on affection for, and more importantly, knowledge of intimacy with, the same man.

Unfortunately, the film can’t sustain the intriguing beginning for the whole of the movie. Interesting as it is, Catherine’s initial move is highly risky and more than a bit of an overreaction, and her seeming nonchalance, coupled with Chloe’s own enthusiasm to undertake the project, detracts from its effect. Like the Clive Owen-Jennifer Aniston film “Derailed,” the film takes questionable turns that make it hard to follow the logic. The story just doesn’t quite add up in a sensible and realistic way, and that becomes problematic because the movie tries to position itself as a narrative that focuses on ordinary people.

The performances, disappointingly, are just as uneven as the film. Moore has delivered exceptional turns in starkly serious period roles like “Far From Heaven,” “The Hours,” and “A Single Man,” but her contemporary role here is nowhere near as magnetic. Moore’s Catherine already seems disgruntled, detached, and ready for failure before she even suspects her husband of cheating, which makes her less of a dynamic character. Neeson’s husband is barely seen, though he gives his all to the few scenes he actually inhabits. Amanda Seyfried, usually the sweetheart in light movies like “Mamma Mia!” and “Dear John,” has the sex appeal down but isn’t believable as the character she’s been cast as here. Chloe is a fierce, memorable personality, but the impression the film leaves is not as strong or lasting as its lead character.

C

Tuesday’s Top Trailer: The Kids Are All Right

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Tuesday's Top Trailer. One of my favorite parts about going to see movies is the series of trailers that airs beforehand and, more often than not, the trailer is far better than the actual film. Each week, I'll be sharing a trailer I've recently seen. Please chime in with comments on what you think of the trailer and how you think the movie is going to be.

The Kids Are All Right – Opening July 7, 2010



I caught this trailer before “Date Night” on Friday, and it was truly refreshing. It looks like a fun summer comedy which incorporates a fabulous ensemble and makes the most out of an unusual and entertaining family dynamic. It’s wonderful to see Annette Bening and Julianne Moore in light, comic roles after seeing them both recently try and undertake much more stoic and serious parts, in the forthcoming “Mother and Child” and “Chloe,” respectively. The idea of them as a couple is a dream come true because they are such lovely and talented actresses, and brings back marvelous memories of Bening in “American Beauty” and Moore in “A Single Man.” My favorite exchange between them from the trailer is definitely “Go easy on the wine, hun, it’s daytime” / “Okay, same goes for the micromanaging.” Casting Mark Ruffalo in the Benjamin Bratt role of not-quite-deadbeat sperm donor seems like a nice choice, and he certainly has the disheveled charm down pat. Any chance to see Mia Wasikowska onscreen is a blessing, and therefore having her as the inquisitive, quirky daughter should be a delight. This reminds me of “Something’s Gotta Give,” a fun movie that isn’t necessarily anything too spectacular, but should definitely suffice as above-average quality entertainment.

Monday Movies You Aught to See: The United States of Leland

Regardless of whether the decade ended already ended in 2009 or will end at the close of the current year, the 2000s were a wonderful period of cinema with many treasures that deserve to be remembered. Check in at Movies with Abe on Mondays for Movies You Aught to See, a look back at memorable movies from the aughts. They are posted in no particular order, and if you have a great film from the 2000s that you think merits consideration, leave a note in the comments!

The United States of Leland
Directed by Matthew Ryan Hoge
Released April 2, 2004



It’s hard to describe the incredible impact of this film. The story is tragic, based on an incomprehensible situation with a number of people struggling to make sense of and comes to terms with it. It boasts one of the most powerful endings I have ever seen, and it probes and provokes meaningful questions. Ryan Gosling is mesmerizing as the title character, and Jena Malone delivers an astonishing performance. It’s also a terrific showcase for ensemble players Chris Klein, Michelle Williams, Martin Donovan, Lena Olin, and Kevin Spacey. It is a must-see film that precious few have had the chance to see, and easily one of the most underrated films of the past decade.

Movie with Abe: Date Night

Date Night
Directed by Shawn Levy
Released April 9, 2010

As posters for this film suggest, the big excitement behind it is the chance to unite NBC’s superstar actors Steve Carrell and Tina Fey in the same movie. The anchors of “The Office” and “30 Rock” team up in what starts as a chronicle of the boring lives of one married couple and ends up being a whacked adventure ride. It’s perhaps a bit too off-the-wall and unfettered for its own good, and might have worked better if it had allowed its stars to use their natural talents instead of forcing them into a hyperactive situation which relies on the moment to be funny instead of giving the actors free reign to do what they do best.

Instead of a more relaxed comedy scenario like each start has been in before, like “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” for Carrell and “Baby Mama” for Tina Fey, the two stars are thrust into a sort of action-comedy without much action to speak of where they’re constantly on the run from forces out of their control and desperate to find a clever way to outsmart their pursuers while at the same time becoming closer and renewing the romance of their marriage. The plot is exactly the kind of inane story that belongs in this kind of movie, which isn’t really a compliment. It’s ripe with plenty of corruption, cheesy villains, implausible scenarios, and silliness to detract from its potential. Carrell and Fey both ham it up but it doesn’t quite work because each is alternately trying to play the straight man, and it’s somewhat off-balance as a result.

This is a film that should be funnier but seems held back by a desire to stay tame and safe. When Carrell’s Phil Foster finally spits out a four-letter word, it’s a time for joy and celebration, as if he’s been holding it back for the whole movie and is finally ready to release his inner badass. Director Shawn Levy’s resume includes family-friendly fare like “Night at the Museum” and “Cheaper by the Dozen,” and he seems ill-equipped to handle the “that’s what she said” level of humor regularly practiced by the actors in question. That’s not to say that both Carrell and Fey should be relegated to the roles they’re currently performing on television, but rather that they have a bright future that includes less limited options. To its credit, the film does get much funnier towards the end, and it it’s still an enjoyable experience. It didn’t need to be an R-rated romp, but maybe just a film that took a bit more advantage of its PG-13 rating.

B-

Movie with Abe: After.Life

After.Life
Directed by Agnieszka Wojtowicz-Vosloo
Released April 9, 2010

At their best, thriller or horror movies feature a well-mixed blend of startling jump scenes and unsettling, thought-provoking themes. Decent films of either genre can also feature only one of the two and still create a decently terrifying and disturbing movie. “After.Life,” the new film about a schoolteacher named Anna (Christina Ricci) who wakes up in a funeral home to find its director telling her that she is dead and only he can communicate with her, includes neither, and it ends up being quite an unsatisfying, boring trip down a road lined with questions, none of which are answered by film’s end.

It’s much clearer what “After.Life,” possessor of an obnoxious period in the middle of its title to make it sound like some hyper-technical forward-thinking URL, is trying to do and trying to stir up in its audience. Death can be a sudden, unexpected thing, and it’s often very hard to accept that it has actually occurred and is both finite and irreversible. But what about the dead themselves? It must be near impossible to come to terms with the fact that life has ceased, especially if the final resting place appears to be a mortician’s table. That’s about as thought-provoking as it gets, however, and most of those ideas come from the synopsis of the film rather than its actual content.

A script possessing at least a little bit of intelligence might have helped elevate this film from dud to decent. But when a quarter of the film’s lines are “I’m not dead…I can’t be dead,” uttered over and over by a ghostly Ricci, that’s not going to be the case. Emphasizing dream sequences and visual tricks designed to confuse and shock the audience don’t provide answers to vital questions, and instead serve as annoying, time-wasting substitutions. There’s a whole lot of intrigue, but little to no satisfactory attempt at addressing any of it. The empty look in Anna’s eyes contrasted with the knowing look in the funeral director’s seems designed to guide the audience toward some kind of higher truth, but that’s not the case.

Then there’s the matter of the cast. Christina Ricci is no stranger to uncommon perceptions of the afterlife, having spent one of her breakout movie roles hanging out with Casper the friendly ghost. Ricci’s unenthusiastic nature certainly mimics that of a person no longer alive, but it’s a flat performance that irritates far more than it evokes sympathy. Justin Long has done both comedy (“Zack and Miri Make a Porno”) and action (“Live Free or Die Hard”) well, but he fails miserably in this dramatic role as Anna’s would-be fiancée unwilling to let her go without a fight. Liam Neeson is a cut above the material, but when he’s sinking to the level of this movie, even his performance seems over-the-top. This film flops as a combined result of miscasting, a sloppy script, and a defiant attitude toward provide any kind of resolution to the mysteries raised in the film. It’s hardly worth sticking around in this afterlife.

F

Movie with Abe: Hot Tub Time Machine

Hot Tub Time Machine
Directed by Steve Pink
Released March 26, 2010

What could be more entertaining than watching four dudes travel back twenty years in time via an extraordinary powerful hot tub and gain the opportunity to change their pasts in the 1980s? The answer, as it turns out, includes a great many things, namely all the films parodied and skewered in the course of this grand 80s send-up. Also on the list of more enjoyable and worthwhile films are most of the projects worked on by the cast and director Steve Pink, who made the mediocre but harmless film “Accepted.” This film is merely a sloppily-executed exercise in trying to craft a legitimate movie around a premise based only on a clever-sounding title.

The first misstep undertaken by the creative minds behind “Hot Tub Time Machine” is the casting of the four people in the universe least likely to be friends. Despite having starred in many of the iconic 80s films being roasted in this movie, John Cusack has no place hanging out with this crew and he doesn’t fit in at all. Rob Corddry is completely unhinged, depraved, and off-the-wall. Craig Robinson tries hard never to show any expression on his face, in contrast to Cusack’s constant frustrated shouting and Corddry’s continuous bouts of hysteria. Young Clark Duke sticks out like a sore thumb as the obnoxious representative of the younger, apparently wiser generation. These four misfits are completely unbelievable as friends, but trying to make them seem like a realistic unit is the least of the film’s problems.

After the success of R-rated comedies like “Knocked Up” and “The Hangover,” it’s especially frustrating to see films that still put most of their creative emphasis on potty humor. This isn’t a film that should be loaded with depth, but it’s nothing more than a collection of cheap jokes and surface references. Putting aside the stupidity of the time traveling, it’s also a film whose enjoyability depends largely on preexisting knowledge of the nods being made to the definitive films from the 1980s and can’t be nearly as fulfilling or fun to those unfamiliar with the material. It fails miserably in its use of veteran comedian Chevy Chase, playing a hot tub repair man whose role is painfully devoid of any entertainment, and infinitely inferior to Christopher Walken’s less-than-impressive role in “Click.” References aside, “Hot Tub Time Machine” has little to offer other than gross, disgusting humor whose hilarity is dependent mostly on the (im)maturity of the audience. There does exist an audience for this film, but it’s hardly as broad or encompassing as the oeuvre that has included the works of Judd Apatow and his many friends. It’s certainly not a movie that deserves favorable comparison to a movie that takes a similarly wacky concept and runs with it effectively like “The Hangover.”

F

Thursday American Cinema Classic

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Thursday American Cinema Classic. I’m taking a course called American Cinema Since 1960 where we’re charting the history and development of American Cinema from the 1960s to the present. We’ll be watching some pretty iconic films, some of which I haven’t seen before. Each week, I’ll be providing a short review of one contemporary classic from the annals of recent history.

Easy Rider
Directed by Dennis Hopper
Released July 14, 1969



This film serves as an excellent example of the counterculture in the 1960s featuring Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper as bikers heading south to reach New Orleans in time for Mardi Gras. It’s a film that indulges in lengthy drug trips and truly gets inside the minds and mindsets of these men. The soundtrack and images are iconic, and it’s a truly classic film. Fonda is subdued and compelling as Captain America Wyatt, and Hopper, also working behind the camera, is magnificently unhinged and crazy as his loudmouthed buddy Billy. The best performance, hands-down, in the film is tha of Jack Nicholson as crooked lawyer George Hanson. It was Nicholson’s first Oscar nod, and it’s clear that this actor has an incredible amount of potential. He displays the token Nicholson traits that have become so familiar over the past forty years, though he seems so innocent and youthful at only 32. He’s only onscreen for a very limited amount of time, but it’s an extraordinarily memorable turn. Watch the clip above for an excerpt of his brilliant portrayal. The feel of this movie is one of unfettered exploration, and it’s certainly an experience. By its end, it gets more than a bit caught up with its drug trip sequences, but that’s all part of it, and part of what makes it such a singular film representative of an era.

B+

Wednesday Oscar Retrospective: The Big Snub of 2008

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Wednesday Oscar Retrospective. The Big Snub is the second in a series of projects looking back at the past eight years of the Oscars, dating back to the first ceremony I watched and closely followed.

Each year, the Oscar nominations announcement presents several notable omissions. This series is devoted to analyzing the biggest and most shocking snub of all (in any category). It has nothing to do with personal opinion but rather with what seemed likely at the time and what most people were predicting. Once again, this is a film/director/actor who didn’t even earn a nomination.

The Big Snub of 2008:

“The Dark Knight” for Best Picture
Why it was all set to happen: The most popular film of the year seemed like a sure bet by the time nominations were going to be announced. After Heath Ledger was posthumously awarded a Best Supporting Actor trophy at the Golden Globes, the film’s only nomination, the movie rallied with mentions from the DGA, WGA, and PGA. Ledger was unstoppable in the Best Supporting Actor race, and director Christopher Nolan seemed overdue after being snubbed for both “Memento” in 2001 and “Batman Begins” in 2005. The Best Picture lineup had solidified when “The Dark Knight” and “Milk” knocked out Globe-nominated Kate Winslet films “Revolutionary Road” and “The Reader” and joined “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” “Frost/Nixon,” and “Slumdog Millionaire” as the DGA, WGA, and PGA honorees. In short, the Best Picture lineup appeared to be sewn up before nominations were announced.

Why it probably didn’t: Its “sure thing” status was going to defy the odds. The first Batman film from Christopher Nolan didn’t earn any major nominations. Few sequels have ever earned Best Picture nominations, and none without the first film being recognized as well. Its nomination would also have catered to the idea that the Oscars do in fact represent public opinion in some way, and its snub only served to reinforce the opposite belief.

What took its place: Instead, a movie that grossed almost $500 million less and earned mixed reviews (58 on Metacritic, 61 on Rotten Tomatoes), took its place. In addition to promoting Kate Winslet to leading actress, “The Reader” earned five nominations after having only the Golden Globes as a successful precursor, knocking “The Dark Knight” out of the top three categories.

Consolation prize: “The Dark Knight” was still the third most-honored film, with eight nominations. It won two, for Heath Ledger and for sound editing. Its most significant victory was the expansion of the Best Picture field to include ten nominees the following year, when popular, crowd-pleasing films like “The Blind Side” managed to earn a nomination.

Come back next week for a look at the Big Snub of 2007. If you have a prediction or a suggestion, please leave it in the comments.

Tuesday’s Top Trailer: The Losers

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Tuesday's Top Trailer. One of my favorite parts about going to see movies is the series of trailers that airs beforehand and, more often than not, the trailer is far better than the actual film. Each week, I'll be sharing a trailer I've recently seen. Please chime in with comments on what you think of the trailer and how you think the movie is going to be.

The Losers – Opening April 23, 2010



I saw this trailer for the second or third time before a showing of “Hot Tub Time Machine” this weekend (review of that coming soon), and I’m pretty excited. It is possible that I won’t ever go to see it, but it looks like a strong combination of “Wanted” and “RocknRolla,” two films I very much liked while most weren’t so convinced by the brilliance of their plots. The crew of misfit deadly weapons is led by Jeffrey Dean Morgan, exuding the same oily charisma he did in “Watchmen,” with Idris Elba (“The Office”) and Chris Evans (“Fantastic Four”) tagging along to make for one wild team. New hot commodity Zoe Saldana, fresh off of twin successes with “Avatar” and “Star Trek” last year, is the femme fatale who teams up with the boys to combat their nemesis Max (Jason Patric). This will likely be one hell of an action-packed, depraved extravaganza with more attention paid to effects than to a coherent story. Evans’ Jensen pointing his fingers at people with real guns and then having them taken out is a bit over-the-top, but the awesome tip of the hat he gets from Oscar Jaenada’s Cougar when the camera zooms out to reveal him makes it worth it. Hopefully there are many more scenes like that in the film, and its level of violence and amount of people trying to kill each other could rival “Smokin’ Aces” (which I cite here as a positive example of this type of movie). I see this as a movie with a penchant for mindless destruction and a small army of fugitives dedicated to wreaking havoc on their oppressors, and to me, that sounds like a good time. My one concern: the PG-13 rating. While it’s probably a good thing that gruesome, excessive violence isn’t shown, does that mean that this movie will be hopelessly toned down? I certainly hope not, and I’m still pumped. What do you think?

Monday Movies You Aught to See: 25th Hour

Regardless of whether the decade ended already ended in 2009 or will end at the close of the current year, the 2000s were a wonderful period of cinema with many treasures that deserve to be remembered. Check in at Movies with Abe on Mondays for Movies You Aught to See, a look back at memorable movies from the aughts. They are posted in no particular order, and if you have a great film from the 2000s that you think merits consideration, leave a note in the comments!

25th Hour
Directed by Spike Lee
Released December 19, 2002



This powerful drama is easily one of the most underrated films of all time. It’s one of Spike Lee’s strongest movies about race relations, worthy of side-by-side comparison with “Do the Right Thing,” exemplified by the astonishing scene I’ve selected above, in addition to being an insightful portrait and questionable celebration of New York City. Edward Norton delivers one of his finest performances ever as a man headed to jail with the rest of his life flashing before his eyes during the twenty-four-hour period leading up to his incarceration. The ensemble cast includes tremendous tour de force turns from Brian Cox and Barry Pepper, as well as Philip Seymour Hoffman, Anna Paquin, and Rosario Dawson. The score by Terence Blanchard is astonishing and beautiful, and the power of the ending sequence (watch it here if you’ve seen the film) can’t be described with words. If you haven’t seen this one yet, check it out immediately.

Movie with Abe: Breaking Upwards

In lieu of a review, please enjoy this feature that will appear in the next issue of the Jewish Voice at NYU:

Breaking Upwards
Directed by Daryl Wein
Released April 2, 2010

Breaking Upwards is a movie about two people who aren’t ready to give up completely on their relationship. To see how they cope with spending less time together, they take a few days a week off from contact with each other. Their relationship still functions the same during the rest of the week, but those blocked-off days are reserved for them to live their own lives. Their experiment is a fascinating exploration of what it’s like to move forward without quite putting a romance on hold and the expected challenges semi-monogamy presents. The movie is a look at the lives of two young Jewish twentysomethings as they struggle to navigate the various obstacles that pop up in life.

Daryl Wein and Zoe-Lister Jones star as versions of themselves, and both were heavily involved behind the scenes in the production of the film. They collaborated on the script, and this was Daryl’s first time behind the camera as a director. Daryl and Zoe are both Jewish, and as a result their experiences were incorporated into the movie. A memorable scene takes place at a synagogue meet-and-greet designed to pair off young Jewish singles, and another pivotal scene plays out smack in the middle of a Passover seder. Zoe grew up attending a Conservative synagogue in Park Slope, while Connecticut native Daryl says that his Judaism had more to do with the importance of tradition rather than spiritual values.

Their film can be described as “culturally Jewish,” explains Zoe, and the humor is distinctly Jewish. According to Daryl, they wrote Judaism into the film simply because it’s part of their lives. Daryl cites Woody Allen as a strong influence of his, which becomes quickly apparent with the film’s representation of a family as Jewish in a more of a life-shaping rather than life-guiding fashion. These are secular Jews who go to synagogue on the high holidays and practice Jewish traditions because it’s what they’ve always done. “We wrote what we knew and who we were,” summarizes Zoe. That tactic seems to have worked extraordinarily well considering the general reaction to the film.

Neither of the filmmakers anticipated the extremely positive reception the film has received thus far at Jewish film festivals. They are both very aware that, with the recent release of movies like A Serious Man and An Education, many onscreen representations of Jews are problematic. Because it’s so widely accepted to be a self-loathing Jew, the filmmakers say, there should be more of a perspective presented from Jews themselves. As a nod to the film’s crucial seder scene, Zoe jokes that they are considering making Matzah boxes with the title of the film on them. Daryl and Zoe also emphasize the need for Jews especially to come and see the film since it opens on Easter weekend.

As alumni of NYU, Daryl and Zoe weren’t very involved in the Jewish community. Zoe points out that in acting school, Friday nights are full of play rehearsals. She is, however, optimistic in regard to young Jews who are in currently in art school due to the amazing Jewish arts community in New York City. Daryl encourages aspiring filmmakers to make their own work and be confident. As a young Jew, he recommends, think about the best way to represent Jews in the best light possible, and the same is true for representing Jewish identity. In their opinion, their film stands out particularly because, at Jewish film festivals, there aren’t usually a lot of films about young Jews that feel fresh and hip. Breaking Upwards showcases an unconventional approach to testing the waters in a relationship, and it’s an independent film that, for once, seems to show Jews in a positive way.

Movie with Abe: The Greatest

The Greatest
Directed by Shana Feste
Released April 2, 2010

Movies about personal tragedies and the way they affect the people close to a victim are a difficult subject to really get right. Often the trauma can be overdone and overemphasized to the point that it becomes melodrama, and it can also be woefully underrepresented and therefore severely lacking in the sympathy it is supposed to be producing. “The Greatest,” which chronicles a family’s attempts to cope with the sudden untimely death of their teenage son in a car accident and their new relationship with his grieving girlfriend, manages to be successful on all fronts and tell a compelling and moving story.

One of the most significant descriptors of “The Greatest” is that it’s Carey Mulligan’s follow-up role to her Oscar-nominated breakout turn in “An Education.” Mulligan showed enormous potential with her wondrous performance in last year’s British drama, and her subsequent role was obviously going to be spectacular, and it’s not a disappointment at all. She’s easily as good, if not better, as the girl who must struggle to be accepted by the family of a boy she loved but barely knew. It’s a majestically layered and tremendous performance that deserves to earn her another Oscar nomination.

Mulligan is moving fast and smartly in terms of her acting career, and she’s even outpacing veteran actors. Pierce Brosnan and Susan Sarandon star as the couple mourning the loss of their son, and while their performances are not nearly as strong or consistent as Mulligan’s, they definitely have their moments. Each has at least one mesmerizing scene, and the rest of their performances don’t minimalize the impact of the film at all because their characters are very strongly written. Young actors Johnny Simmons and Zoë Kravitz are more impressive standouts, and contribute to making the film feel devastatingly real.

Director Sharon Feste has struck gold on her first trip behind the camera. This is a remarkable debut that showcases excellent direction and writing from Feste, and she really knows how to work with the actors and maximize the intensity and successful execution of the story she wants to tell. She doesn’t pull any cheap tricks to force an emotional response from her viewer. The story and the scenes are all legitimate and powerful on their own. Feste’s film is an extraordinarily effective film that is both heart-wrenching and extremely emotional in the best possible way, featuring another knockout performance from rising star Carey Mulligan.

B+

April Movie Montage

In celebration of the start of April, please enjoy a video tribute to the films I have seen that have been released thus far this year! "The Greatest" and "Lbs" are not included because I had not seen them when I made the movie, and "Leaves of Grass," which is included, was initially slated to open today but has now been postponed to summer. Leave a comment about the film either on this post or at the original video on YouTube!

Thursday American Cinema Classic

Welcome to a new weekly feature here at Movies with Abe, Thursday American Cinema Classic. I’m taking a course called American Cinema Since 1960 where we’re charting the history and development of American Cinema from the 1960s to the present. We’ll be watching some pretty iconic films, some of which I haven’t seen before. Each week, I’ll be providing a short review of one contemporary classic from the annals of recent history.

Night of the Living Dead
Directed by George Romero
Released October 1, 1968



The horror genre is one I’m generally unfamiliar with since I’m not a fan of the supernatural and the frightening things that come about as a result of its involvement in a film. It’s therefore especially interesting to see one of the first and most influential major horror movies. I’m much more intrigued and willing to see this kind of movie, that doesn’t feature excessive jump scenes and unnecessarily gory-looking and fearsome undead villains. However corny it may seem now or may even have seemed then, the way this movie works and serves to create fear is extremely effective. These zombies start wandering and maiming humans while it’s still light out, fueling clueless main character Barbra’s fears about being in a cemetery. They’re unresponsive and don’t want anything other than to kill and eat humans. Inside the house in which Ben and Barbara end up boarded up, the only connection to sanity and the real world they have is the very sterile-seeming news broadcasts they watch on television. There are obvious undercurrents of meaning implied in the film related to the events of the time when the film was first released. It’s very layered, but it’s enjoyable even just on the surface level as a cheesy zombie movie that produces more laughs than scares. There’s even more to discuss about the film’s ending, but I’d like to avoid that here in order not to spoil it for anyone who hasn’t yet seen it. This is definitely a cult classic that’s worthy of watching if you’re a diehard zombie movie fan or even just a casual moviegoer without any particular inclination for seeing the undead rise. Check out the clip above of the film’s opening scene and enjoy.

B+