Bradley Cooper’s Is This Thing On? is his third directorial effort, and the one that really clarifies his interests as a filmmaker. It also confirms he’s turning into quite a reliably good one. It’s another midlife crisis relationship movie, after his debut A Star is Born remake found an alcoholic country singer on a downward trajectory paused by a whirlwind romance, and his sophomore effort Maestro took composer Leonard Bernstein through biopic struggles with a long-suffering wife. This new one finds Will Arnett as a New Yorker with a finance job who, while stumbling towards divorce, discovers a new hobby: doing stand up comedy at open mics. Meanwhile, his soon-to-be-ex wife (Laura Dern) considers returning to her passion: coaching volleyball. This makes them a fit for Cooper’s other recurring interest: the ways in which the pursuit of performing something cultural and larger than one’s self can make, shape, break, and maybe, just maybe, heal a person. Cooper sees the tension between private lives and public personas; naturally, as one of our last great Movie Stars, he knows a thing or two about that. But in these movies he traces characters’ big emotions and big ideas with a fluid style that matches their moods, and a subtle sense of life. There’s none of the muscular musicality of A Star is Born or theatrical flourishes of Maestro here, and naturally so.
As a smaller movie about intimate moments, Is This Thing On? Is a movie so low-key and unassuming in its scenes and shape, and yet so beautifully big screen in its bright, supple, unobtrusively professional cinematography, that it serves as a reminder that Hollywood craft put toward broad, but appealing, human stories are an abidingly pleasant pastime. Here’s a generous movie about people living lives, shot through with some gentle satire and loving specificity. It cares about them, and wants to see how they navigate life changes, bouncing off supporting characters—well-cast character actors forming a jostling friend group (including a very funny small role for Cooper himself as an endearing dope) and a warmly prickly family—with some crackle and sweetness. Arnett and Dern are two fine actors doing good work in observant and attentive dramatic scenes. Cooper’s feeling for performance, letting actors inhabit a scene and breathe life into fleeting moments, lets the movie lift above its looming sense of the familiar. How often have we been asked to think about the inner lives of comedians in our culture the last couple decades? He finds an interesting angle by simply inhabiting the experience here, watching how it’s therapy both as a compliment and insult, and willing to drift away from that, giving us a picture of a couple with a marriage falling apart as they each activate something deeper and more satisfying in their sense of professional possibilities. The movie’s warm and prickly and funny and ultimately a comfortable slice of uncomfortable life.
Showing posts with label Bradley Cooper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bradley Cooper. Show all posts
Saturday, January 10, 2026
Saturday, May 6, 2023
Rocket Power: GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY: VOLUME 3
Guardians of the Galaxy: Volume 3 pays off a near-decade of investment I didn’t know I had in these misfit sci-fi heroes and this particularly eccentric and isolated corner of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It does so by offering what no other subset of the MCU has managed: an ending, full and complete, exciting and moving, and honest both to its characters and its tone. This is a rollicking adventure with wacky side characters and rambunctious action sequences. But it also really cares about these cartoony weirdos and has, in the end, found a reason to communicate that love through a vision of self-sacrifice in the name of an open-minded community. There’s a real idea here—about the futility of forced homogeneity, the futility of perfection, and the rousing power of ragtag diverse cooperation. And there’s vision of splashy colors and apocalyptic rumblings that set the characters on edge with a palpable sense of danger and finality.
The likes of earnest goof Star-Lord (Chris Pratt) and killer green Gamora (Zoe Saldana) with her blue robot sister (Karen Gillan), talking tree Groot (Vin Diesel), hyper-literal muscle man Drax (Dave Bautista), and simpatico alien empath Mantis (Pom Klementieff) are still a loose, funny ensemble. And here their problems are treated with a genuine frayed edge. The writing gives them a strong squabbling affection and heartfelt duty. They really care about saving their world and their friends and everyone they can. Funny how often comic book movies let that slip away these days. This one populates its widescreen invention with a menagerie of characters we’ve actually come to care about, and who actually care about each other and what they’re doing instead of merely posing in the chaos. How nice that this entry is somehow freed from the treadmill of franchise promises—which so often strand each Marvel movie as just an extended promise that the next one will have the really good stuff. That makes it the only MCU property to emerge from the Avengers cross-overs and Disney+ spinoffs not looking worse for wear. It helps that the Guardians are easily the best parts of the enjoyable Infinity War and hollow Endgame. And that makes one of the biggest laughs in this new one when Star-Lord deadpans a one-sentence summary of the latter.
In this Volume 3, writer-director James Gunn gets to really dig into who these characters are, what they’d need to be happy, and how to send them off with the most satisfying resolutions possible. He’s finishing his neat trilogy of brightly poppy space operas set to a classic rock mixtape backbeat knowing he has the audience goodwill to place the entire film’s emotional and narrative thrust on the tragic backstory of the talking, gun-toting CGI Rocket Raccoon (Bradley Cooper). In the present tense he’s been wounded and his friends need to steal a couple MacGuffins to revive him. We also get flashbacks to the mad scientist who created him, which serves a double duty of exposition seeing as the experimenter in question is also our Big Bad. (Chukwudi Iwuji plays him as a howling, calculating evil, with an eerie calm face literally stapled on.) The two timelines work well to provide a fine undertow of tension and care. So there’s refreshingly a lot jostling and juggling for attention, pleasingly overstuffed and productively messy when so many of its franchise brethren are under-stuffed and tidily hollow. By the time we get to the Guardians hoping to save the villains’ experiments as they revive Rocket, it’s like the Island of Misfit Toys looting Sid’s toy box. I couldn’t resist that hook’s emotional appeal.
It’s a movie overflowing with side-characters and incident, animated by a contagious delight in invention and a specificity in its characters. The main cast are deployed well, and the choice supporting parts are efficiently and effectively drawn, too, like an antagonistic golden super-guy played by Will Poulter as a cross between a terminator on the hunt of our heroes and a sweetheart hoping to do his statuesque mother (Elizabeth Debicki) proud. We also get a few memorable moments with a scruffy space pirate gone good (Sean Gunn) and a telekinetic canine cosmonaut (speaking through a translation collar with the voice of Maria Bakalova) that build neat payoffs of their own. Even the henchmen and thugs and bystanders are given vivid shorthand characterization, fun punchlines, and fleeting touching moments of humanity. Here’s a movie powered on the belief that we should see the characters as characters, and not just action figures or Easter eggs.
This is a bustling picture, a large-scale, all-engines-go sci-fi jaunt powered with enjoyable emotional manipulation. It all comes to a head in a successive series of slam-bang set-pieces in which spaceships careen and laser-guns go kaplow as mutants and aliens and freakazoids of every shape and size ooze and splatter and smash. There are clever, concussive action sequences booming with sound and invention in a living space station, on an exploding planet, and as a space fortress collides with a giant skull. That’s all neat Jack Kirby-style fireworks and design peppered with punchlines. But because it’s driven by this surprising well of affection for the characters, and a commitment to bring them to some kind of conclusion, it works as a crowd-pleasing entertainment, an outsized comic book spectacle with the heart and soul others of its ilk so often miss. In retrospect, it’s a trilogy that put in the work to make us love its characters as much as its creators do, and it’s great to see them fly off on one more grand adventure together.
Thursday, February 10, 2022
Taking Direction: PARALLEL MOTHERS
and NIGHTMARE ALLEY
One of the great pleasures of seeing a new film from a director who has done good, distinctive work over many decades is the comforting feeling of knowing we’re in familiar, reliable territory. Ah, one can think, here’s that recognizable style and those usual preoccupations, done up in their confident aesthetics and in their pleasurably recognizable rhythms. So here’s Pedro Almodóvar’s Parallel Mothers. The latest film from the great Spanish filmmaker is another of his intricate narrative designs that plays out so easily one can still be surprised by its emotional impact despite recognizing its moves. It stars Penélope Cruz—whose expressive features graced a half-dozen of his films—and has other frequent collaborators in supporting roles. It’s set in plush Madrid apartments painted with deep reds and blues and greens, decorated with artful textures, vintage photographs, vinyl records, and jamón on the counter. It flows with the usual sumptuous string score from Alberto Iglesias. It concerns itself with: birth and death, mistaken identity, miscommunications, mothers, daughters, sex, family secrets, fallible men, and things long buried or repressed resurfacing. It is, in other words, an Almodóvar film. For all the familiarity of the surface appeal, it also has the beguiling narrative propulsion, pulled along by powerfully underplayed melodrama, with which his most effective films work best. Watching it, one wonders what will happen next, and how the characters will react, not in an edge-of-the-seat way so much as the deep well of feeling and humanity that comes from closely observed curiosity and earnest empathy.
Here, in delicately doubled parallel narratives that draw closer, separates and draw close again, Cruz plays a single middle-aged photographer whose affair with an anthropologist is the cause of an unexpected pregnancy. She decides, given her age and prospects, to have the child. He doesn’t want to be involved, which is fine by her. She ends up, nine months later, sharing the maternity ward with a teenager (Milena Smit) whose pregnancy is similarly shrouded in the unexpected and the unspoken. They agree to keep in touch. As Almodóvar follows these new mothers, the story develops with complications both normal—women recovering from birth, navigating new living arrangements, rebalancing a career (or adolescent desires to strike out) with their familial obligations—and dramatic. The plot ultimately hinges on a couple paternity tests, dark secrets, some held too long, and others not long enough, and, finally, one big devastating turn. There’s high drama here, or at least potentially. (Almodóvar even provides a running subplot of Cruz’s search for a mass grave in her small home village, where her grandmother long claimed her grandfather was buried during the Spanish Civil War. Talk about drama!) And yet the actors present these turns with such ease and naturalism, speaking in soothing soft tones and melodic warmth even as they might be evading or obscuring their true feelings. The movie sets its enormous emotions on a soft simmer, letting the full weight of its heaviest moments push down unexpectedly in the design.
Similarly, Guillermo del Toro’s Nightmare Alley is a work recognizably his own, with a design that is its own reward. It might even be doubly familiar (or triply) to anyone who’s seen the 1947 Tyrone Power-starring adaptation of William Lindsay Gresham’s novel. It’s a noirish carnival con man picture, relishing the seedy inner workings of the freak show atmosphere. Del Toro usually works his affinity for misfits, monsters, and castoffs. See it expressed in the likes of Mimic, Hellboy, Pan’s Labyrinth and his Oscar-winning The Shape of Water—a real monster mash of a filmography, always asking, who’s the real freak here? In this new film, that kinship finds, in some ways, its most human expression amid the dusty tents and flickering flames of its disreputable environment. Here’s a film that looks unflinchingly at a geek in the old fashioned sense of the term, a desperate man biting the head off a live chicken for a paying audience, clenching his teeth to slowly separate vein from muscle until the neck snaps. The film wonders what kind of a life takes someone to that moment. To answer, Del Toro, with co-writer Kim Morgan, finds a winding road through eccentric characters and blustering schemes. It’s a big cast—Rooney Mara, Toni Collette, Willem Dafoe, Ron Perlman, and Dave Strathairn, among others—of carny types, each given loving attention to the art of their grift and graft. It unfolds the ecosystem of the traveling show so patiently and in such detail I was reminded of Ricky Jay’s histories of magicians. The people in this movie are living on the margins, but there’s some kind of mad skill to what they do wrapped in the soft deception of audience appeal. They, like the film, and like a key image in the film, are a loaded pistol in a purse.
At the center is a charismatically recessive movie star performance from Bradley Cooper, one of those magnetic work of gestures and implication that’s compelling, and then only grows in power when he doesn’t speak. He simply exists, first as a lost man stumbling into this world, and then as a figure of increasing power within his person as he turns on the charm and shines up to move in fancier circles. That gets Cate Blanchett and, later, Richard Jenkins involved as high society becomes the scene of a newer, edgier, more personal con. No more swindling quarters out of gullible folk; it’s time to put on more elaborate faux-psychic charades for the high-rollers. The trick of the movie is how easily it moves between these early-20th-century spaces—the rural outskirts and the electric urban interiors, Dust Bowl chic and Art Deco glamor—with a consistency of tone and style. Here are damaged people damaging people, but their wounded souls are attracted and repulsed by the endeavor, and each other. The movie follows suit. It takes grand delight in the low pleasures of its population, and sinks ever deeper into the melancholic romance and eerie despair, both of which are all part of the game, too. It’s not dissimilar from an Edward Hopper painting in its look and feel some of the time—figures of loneliness in the vastness of (retro) modern life. If the movie sometime feels long, it’s because Del Toro can’t pull himself out of these scenes in these visual spaces with these complicated stock of characters; they’re too well-inhabited and handsomely dressed in sets expertly designed. I didn’t mind spending that time. These days, when movies can often feel so impersonal and bland, to groove on a distinct style and mood can be a tonic.
Here, in delicately doubled parallel narratives that draw closer, separates and draw close again, Cruz plays a single middle-aged photographer whose affair with an anthropologist is the cause of an unexpected pregnancy. She decides, given her age and prospects, to have the child. He doesn’t want to be involved, which is fine by her. She ends up, nine months later, sharing the maternity ward with a teenager (Milena Smit) whose pregnancy is similarly shrouded in the unexpected and the unspoken. They agree to keep in touch. As Almodóvar follows these new mothers, the story develops with complications both normal—women recovering from birth, navigating new living arrangements, rebalancing a career (or adolescent desires to strike out) with their familial obligations—and dramatic. The plot ultimately hinges on a couple paternity tests, dark secrets, some held too long, and others not long enough, and, finally, one big devastating turn. There’s high drama here, or at least potentially. (Almodóvar even provides a running subplot of Cruz’s search for a mass grave in her small home village, where her grandmother long claimed her grandfather was buried during the Spanish Civil War. Talk about drama!) And yet the actors present these turns with such ease and naturalism, speaking in soothing soft tones and melodic warmth even as they might be evading or obscuring their true feelings. The movie sets its enormous emotions on a soft simmer, letting the full weight of its heaviest moments push down unexpectedly in the design.
Similarly, Guillermo del Toro’s Nightmare Alley is a work recognizably his own, with a design that is its own reward. It might even be doubly familiar (or triply) to anyone who’s seen the 1947 Tyrone Power-starring adaptation of William Lindsay Gresham’s novel. It’s a noirish carnival con man picture, relishing the seedy inner workings of the freak show atmosphere. Del Toro usually works his affinity for misfits, monsters, and castoffs. See it expressed in the likes of Mimic, Hellboy, Pan’s Labyrinth and his Oscar-winning The Shape of Water—a real monster mash of a filmography, always asking, who’s the real freak here? In this new film, that kinship finds, in some ways, its most human expression amid the dusty tents and flickering flames of its disreputable environment. Here’s a film that looks unflinchingly at a geek in the old fashioned sense of the term, a desperate man biting the head off a live chicken for a paying audience, clenching his teeth to slowly separate vein from muscle until the neck snaps. The film wonders what kind of a life takes someone to that moment. To answer, Del Toro, with co-writer Kim Morgan, finds a winding road through eccentric characters and blustering schemes. It’s a big cast—Rooney Mara, Toni Collette, Willem Dafoe, Ron Perlman, and Dave Strathairn, among others—of carny types, each given loving attention to the art of their grift and graft. It unfolds the ecosystem of the traveling show so patiently and in such detail I was reminded of Ricky Jay’s histories of magicians. The people in this movie are living on the margins, but there’s some kind of mad skill to what they do wrapped in the soft deception of audience appeal. They, like the film, and like a key image in the film, are a loaded pistol in a purse.
At the center is a charismatically recessive movie star performance from Bradley Cooper, one of those magnetic work of gestures and implication that’s compelling, and then only grows in power when he doesn’t speak. He simply exists, first as a lost man stumbling into this world, and then as a figure of increasing power within his person as he turns on the charm and shines up to move in fancier circles. That gets Cate Blanchett and, later, Richard Jenkins involved as high society becomes the scene of a newer, edgier, more personal con. No more swindling quarters out of gullible folk; it’s time to put on more elaborate faux-psychic charades for the high-rollers. The trick of the movie is how easily it moves between these early-20th-century spaces—the rural outskirts and the electric urban interiors, Dust Bowl chic and Art Deco glamor—with a consistency of tone and style. Here are damaged people damaging people, but their wounded souls are attracted and repulsed by the endeavor, and each other. The movie follows suit. It takes grand delight in the low pleasures of its population, and sinks ever deeper into the melancholic romance and eerie despair, both of which are all part of the game, too. It’s not dissimilar from an Edward Hopper painting in its look and feel some of the time—figures of loneliness in the vastness of (retro) modern life. If the movie sometime feels long, it’s because Del Toro can’t pull himself out of these scenes in these visual spaces with these complicated stock of characters; they’re too well-inhabited and handsomely dressed in sets expertly designed. I didn’t mind spending that time. These days, when movies can often feel so impersonal and bland, to groove on a distinct style and mood can be a tonic.
Saturday, January 29, 2022
Road to Somewhere: LICORICE PIZZA
The main characters in Paul Thomas Anderson’s Licorice Pizza are a couple of young people constantly on the move. They seem to operate with the unspoken assumption: why walk when you can run? They’re running heedlessly into their futures on an abundance of youthful energy and naive restlessness. One, Gary Valentine (Cooper Hoffman), is a sweaty teenage boy with a crush. The other, Alana Kane (Alana Haim), is a twenty-something woman on whom he’s crushing. The fact that they are played by relatively fresh newcomers—he’s Philip Seymour’s son; she’s in the band Haim with her sisters, who play her sisters here, too—gives the movie a genuine sense of fumblingly appealing youthful discovery and charisma. The two of them fall into a funny friendship, finding themselves simpatico in the ways his precociousness (he’s a child actor using his money to start dubious entrepreneurial ventures) and her failure to launch (she still lives at home with her parents) meet. There’s a charge of attraction on his part, but she holds him at a distance from that. They simply enjoy their time together as friends, roaming around California’s San Fernando Valley in the early 1970s. He’s a wheeler-dealer, 15 going on 50, falling into one attempted money-making scheme after the next. She’s not sure what she wants to do with her life, so happily falls into his orbit.
Anderson unfolds their converging and diverging stories through a loose collection of shaggy anecdotal episodes. It’s a movie about that awkward time between when high school seems hopelessly juvenile, but the adult world is still held at a remove of skepticism. As is so often the case with young people, they test their sense of self in every moment, adjusting based on circumstances, comparing to people around them, blustering and bluffing to get by, or receding in the face of a more dominant adult presence. Here is a string of events—by turns funny, yearning, oddball, and suspenseful—that brings these young people’s sense of self more and more into focus for themselves. It’s a process still in motion as they run to the final credits. Through them we meet agents, actors, casting directors, teachers, teenagers, producers, politicians, chaperones, hosts, assistants, parents, siblings, salesmen, restaurateurs, photographers and more.
This assemblage of interesting faces and eccentric personality types is warmly carried out by a wide-ranging ensemble of character actors and marquee names (including Bradley Cooper, Tom Waits, Sean Penn, Christine Ebersole, John Michael Higgins, and Mary Elizabeth Ellis). We see each new situation with these various complicated and problematic adult figures through the eyes of our leads. Anderson situates them in a world of flawed or otherwise half-formed aspirations as they scramble toward maturity in the shadows of showbiz. Despite centering the couple, there’s an egalitarianism to the various sequences, a sense that every character on screen is a full, rich, interesting figure in and of themselves. Even people appearing for one or two scenes carry the sense that we could follow them off into an equally enjoyable film all their own. This gives the movie a full sense of lives in motion—pushing forward through emotions and encounters that our leads are working through to get to…somewhere. They’re figuring it out as they go along.
This loose, shaggy one-thing-after-another Anderson gives the proceedings matches his project—from Boogie Nights and There Will Be Blood through The Master and Inherent Vice—of treating intimate character pieces with the sweep and detail of a historical epic. The twinned comings-of-age here also fits in with Anderson’s other awkward, inscrutable relationship semi-comedies, like Punch-Drunk Love and Phantom Thread, although that’s also a common thread through his films. I suppose that might make Licorice Pizza a quintessential Anderson effort. It has a long-lens close-up approach, a dazzling specificity of character foregrounded amid casually perfect period recreations that fill the frames around the central focus. Here the 70s swagger of vintage tech and indoor smoking, of burgeoning pop culture happenings and gasoline shortages, is just a fact of life for the characters who try to find their way into who they’ll become. There’s an aimless free-spiritedness to the hustle—and a squinting toward possibility that never quite arrives.
Anderson gives the movie that touch of Altman—long noted as one of his favorite inspirations—with whipping up an ensemble of controlled chaos. Sequences in schools and restaurants, parties, shops, and offices spill rough natural jumbled life out of relaxed wide frames that are casually composed. And yet their filmic beauty effortlessly guides an audiences’ eye with a steady hand and a generosity of spirit. There’s a sun-dappled grainy romanticism of the past, carried aloft on a steady stream of vintage records, and a cool-eyed present-tense perspective knowing these characters are as-yet unformed. The characters may not know where life will take them, but there’s fun to be had in watching them drift through it. In one of the film’s most exhilarating sequences, a delivery truck runs out of gas mid-trip, so the leads white-knuckle their way downhill, gritting teeth as they plunge through intersections and take tight turns. It is a movie, after all, about the exhilaration of coasting.
Anderson unfolds their converging and diverging stories through a loose collection of shaggy anecdotal episodes. It’s a movie about that awkward time between when high school seems hopelessly juvenile, but the adult world is still held at a remove of skepticism. As is so often the case with young people, they test their sense of self in every moment, adjusting based on circumstances, comparing to people around them, blustering and bluffing to get by, or receding in the face of a more dominant adult presence. Here is a string of events—by turns funny, yearning, oddball, and suspenseful—that brings these young people’s sense of self more and more into focus for themselves. It’s a process still in motion as they run to the final credits. Through them we meet agents, actors, casting directors, teachers, teenagers, producers, politicians, chaperones, hosts, assistants, parents, siblings, salesmen, restaurateurs, photographers and more.
This assemblage of interesting faces and eccentric personality types is warmly carried out by a wide-ranging ensemble of character actors and marquee names (including Bradley Cooper, Tom Waits, Sean Penn, Christine Ebersole, John Michael Higgins, and Mary Elizabeth Ellis). We see each new situation with these various complicated and problematic adult figures through the eyes of our leads. Anderson situates them in a world of flawed or otherwise half-formed aspirations as they scramble toward maturity in the shadows of showbiz. Despite centering the couple, there’s an egalitarianism to the various sequences, a sense that every character on screen is a full, rich, interesting figure in and of themselves. Even people appearing for one or two scenes carry the sense that we could follow them off into an equally enjoyable film all their own. This gives the movie a full sense of lives in motion—pushing forward through emotions and encounters that our leads are working through to get to…somewhere. They’re figuring it out as they go along.
This loose, shaggy one-thing-after-another Anderson gives the proceedings matches his project—from Boogie Nights and There Will Be Blood through The Master and Inherent Vice—of treating intimate character pieces with the sweep and detail of a historical epic. The twinned comings-of-age here also fits in with Anderson’s other awkward, inscrutable relationship semi-comedies, like Punch-Drunk Love and Phantom Thread, although that’s also a common thread through his films. I suppose that might make Licorice Pizza a quintessential Anderson effort. It has a long-lens close-up approach, a dazzling specificity of character foregrounded amid casually perfect period recreations that fill the frames around the central focus. Here the 70s swagger of vintage tech and indoor smoking, of burgeoning pop culture happenings and gasoline shortages, is just a fact of life for the characters who try to find their way into who they’ll become. There’s an aimless free-spiritedness to the hustle—and a squinting toward possibility that never quite arrives.
Anderson gives the movie that touch of Altman—long noted as one of his favorite inspirations—with whipping up an ensemble of controlled chaos. Sequences in schools and restaurants, parties, shops, and offices spill rough natural jumbled life out of relaxed wide frames that are casually composed. And yet their filmic beauty effortlessly guides an audiences’ eye with a steady hand and a generosity of spirit. There’s a sun-dappled grainy romanticism of the past, carried aloft on a steady stream of vintage records, and a cool-eyed present-tense perspective knowing these characters are as-yet unformed. The characters may not know where life will take them, but there’s fun to be had in watching them drift through it. In one of the film’s most exhilarating sequences, a delivery truck runs out of gas mid-trip, so the leads white-knuckle their way downhill, gritting teeth as they plunge through intersections and take tight turns. It is a movie, after all, about the exhilaration of coasting.
Saturday, May 6, 2017
Spaced: GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY VOL. 2
A moderate blast of novelty was what Guardians of the Galaxy brought to the Marvel formula with a
soundtrack of needle drops and a tone as breezily goofy as the characters it
introduced (a cornball lead, a stoic green lady, a hyper-literal lug, a talking
racoon, and an ambulatory tree man). This allowed the movie to build
considerable affection, despite succumbing to all the worst tendencies of
hectic, anonymous destruction in its protracted climax. So it was surely too
much to hope Vol. 2 could have the
same sense of unexpected. (The only thing that beats the sudden blast of “Come
and Get Your Love” in that film’s opening is probably the trailer’s memorable
use of “Hooked on a Feeling,” fitting for a multi-tentacled franchise whose
films are always also advertisements for itself.) But what Guardians Vol. 2 has going for it is being the rare Marvel
Cinematic Universe production that mostly consists of what works best about
these pictures. Going light on overlong CGI slugfests and interlocking
self-importance, this one is all about the likable characters, eccentric
performances, pseudo-psychedelic visual atmosphere, off-kilter
semi-Shakespearian sci-fantasy pulp family drama, earnest sentiment, a dusting
of sarcasm, comic book splash pages and punchlines, topped off with screwball
fizz.
In fact, for those of us who prefer these behemoths at their
lightest, most frivolous and goofy, this one starts with payoffs and just keeps
returning on that investment. Sure, it gets dragged down at its most static
with long sequences of characters marveling at each other’s squabbles and petty
exposition – worst is a living planet who walks us through tableaus of his life
that are hollow visualizations where an evocative monologue would do. But when
it works it works, a buzzy blast, a popcorn entertainment happy to be a good
hang. Who cares if Chris Pratt (Star-lord) isn’t much of a dramatic performer
and Zoe Saldana (Gamora) has the thankless task of scowling and posing while
slathered in dull green makeup? The rest of the ensemble is crackling, from the
good-natured single-minded Drax (Dave Bautista) to the chattering racoon Rocket
(voiced by Bradley Cooper) to a dancing sapling (cooing voice-modulated Vin
Diesel) to the bit parts made into meals by the appealing likes of Michael
Rooker and Elizabeth Debicki. Best is Kurt Russell playing pure swaggering
charm as what we soon learn is a literal manifestation of ego run amok. They’re
all having fun goofing around in special effects, knowing they can go big and
silly without upstaging the multicolored save-the-universe lightshow
splattering around and behind them.
There’s hardly anything to it, but writer-director James
Gunn stages it with some visual panache, more confidently maneuvering the
Marvel house style into interesting curlicues of delight and surprise. There’s
an opening action sequence set almost entirely in the background of a shot
focused on an oblivious adorable little guy dancing to ELO. (Predictably, but
still successfully, the movie is set to greatest hits from any AM oldies
station.) There’s a whistle powered arrow zipping around a ship, its trailing
red laser beam allowing us to see its progress Family Circus style in the back of slow-mo frames and, later, through
a massive, askew bank of security monitors. The whole movie is nothing
but goofball details – a race of golden humanoids who pilot a hive of drone
attack ships from a command center that looks like the palace of Versailles had
an 80’s arcade; an antennae-wiggling empathic bug lady (Pom Klementieff) who
tries her best but smiles in an unhinged grimace; a god whose
self-justification for abandoning his family hinges on a close reading of the
lyrics to “Brandy (You’re a Fine Girl).”
It adds up to a good time at the movies, with lower lows
that a great many of its franchise compatriots. (Its highs are also lower, but
what are you going to do about it?) There’s still not much of a story going on
here, and for all its zipping around and moments of dramatic import the impact
is gentle and borderline forgettable. But the fizz and fun are good in the
moment. Perhaps that’s the MCU’s biggest success. Barely any of these feel
quite enough because they’re perfectly calibrated to leave you happy but
wanting more.
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Wolves of War Street: WAR DOGS
A true crime story told like a business school case study, War Dogs is about a reckless pursuit of
profit leading straight into fraud and disaster. It’s loosely based on the real
story of how two twenty-something college dropouts blustered and hustled their
way to millions upon millions of dollars in defense contracts during the first
years of the Iraq War. In over their heads, they ultimately cut too many
corners and bring about their own downfalls, but not before getting filthy rich
providing guns and ammo to fuel the military-industrial complex. Recent
history, it’s an object lesson in the downside of an irrepressible
entrepreneurial spirit. Director Todd Phillips, trying his hand at drama after
making the likes of Old School and The Hangover, pitches the movie at the
same coarse bro-centric smarm that powers his comedies. In some ways that’s
smart, making the characters’ proud ignorance and irresponsible greed a dead
ringer for the dominant political climate of Bush-era foreign policy. But the
whole project is too clumsy to really activate what’s most interesting about
the story. The good version of this movie is hiding just underneath the bad
one, which doesn’t trust the audience to follow along.
It begins when the opportunistic Efraim (Jonah Hill) discovers
that the United States has an open bidding process for defense contractors.
Using his knowledge of arms dealing he picked up from his shady uncle, he
lowballs on small bids the big companies mostly ignore, and then fulfills them
through a patchwork of grey-area backchannels and whole sale purchases. Work
pours in, so he asks David (Miles Teller), an old schoolmate unhappily working
a massage therapist job, to join the scrappy upstart company. As the only
employees, they manage to turn a pretty penny. The war is taking off and the
government is willing to look the other way if it means saving money on the
arms race. Phillips shoots these early scenes like a cross between Scorsese’s Wolf of Wall Street – with its slick
excess and loose morals – and Bay’s Pain
& Gain – with dumb guys and big dreams sleazing around Miami Beach
cooking up their not-quite-legal plots. That’s compelling enough, with
intrigue, double-crosses, and the intoxication of sudden wealth before the
hollow pit in the stomach as it threatens to crash down.
There’s something compelling about watching these characters
find room in the margins of the defense budget to siphon off some business for
themselves, fast-talking generals, cooking the books for audits, and even
smuggling weapons into Iraq in a rickety truck with an amusingly blasé local
(Shaun Toub). Hill and Teller work well together as a study in contrasts, one
moving his bulk like a presumptuous smooth fat cat, the other lean and hungry
for any scrap. Hill has a braying laugh and intimidating presence, while Teller
is meeker, ready to go along with whatever is happening as long as it means money
to support his family. His wife (Ana de Armas) exists in the story only to be
extra incentive to make ends meet, and to serve as a moral conscience. She’s
not a character, but a symbol. Then again, so are the guys, who enter the
picture and leave the picture pretty much the same. The plot progresses, but
the movie never deepens their relationships or surprises us with new shadings
or complications.
So it’s not a particularly deep or insightful movie,
ultimately a fairly shallow treatment of a story that could’ve been a better
unraveling of process. Instead Phillips, with co-writers Stephen Chin and Jason
Smilovic, steers into his comic instincts, letting Hill and Teller riff and
spar and joke. Throughout he adds layers of explanatory text – obvious
symbolism, thuddingly on-the-nose jukebox soundtrack spelling out subtext,
endless narration, freeze frames, title cards, and affected chapter headings
named for lines of dialogue we’ll hear later in the section. It never stops
explaining itself, underlining every motivation and walking the audience
through every thought process step-by-step. There’s a great story here, and a
good cast up to the task of selling the emotional and business throughlines.
(Best is a brief appearance by Bradley Cooper, who effortlessly uses every iota
of his star power bringing an infamous arms dealer’s notoriety to life.) But
the movie can’t step out of its own way and let what’s so inherently
interesting play out unimpeded. Phillips provides a terrific surface slickness,
but, like Adam McKay’s The Big Short,
the result is a movie that is too afraid the audience will miss the point to
take full advantage of the material’s potential.
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Smell of Success: JOY
Joy is an inventive young woman with her dreams on hold, a
real George Bailey with no angel coming to her rescue. She’s single-handedly
holding her family together at the expense of her own ambitions. She wants to
make useful things, objects that’ll be admired and owned by everyone, but in
reality she’s stuck in a dead-end minimum wage job, having skipped college to
help her parents. They’re all just barely getting by. But, when inspiration
strikes, she scrapes together her courage and resources to build a prototype of
a self-wringing mop. (It’s also machine washable, a nice feature.) This Miracle
Mop could be her ticket to success. A capitalist parable as feminist
empowerment, David O. Russell’s Joy, loosely
based on the real mop’s inventor, is
the sort of story we’re used to seeing men enact. Take Citizen Kane, or The
Godfather, or countless other canonical classics of business acumen and its
costs. But here the narrative is a woman’s, a perspective that’s long existed
in this area, but gone woefully underrepresented in movies like this.
We meet Joy through the eyes of her grandmother (Diane Ladd),
a kind and encouraging woman who tells her little granddaughter that she’ll do
great things with her life. Ladd narrates the film, giving it a slightly unreal
glow, like a heartfelt business biography picture book read with grandmotherly
warmth. By the time Joy is a young woman (played by Jennifer Lawrence), she’s
trying to run a sprawling, eccentric household with meager emotional and
financial support. Her mother (Virginia Madsen) is a soap opera addict who
stays in bed all day. Her father (Robert De Niro), a small-business owner long
divorced from her mom, was kicked out of his latest wife’s place and moved into
the family’s basement. That’s also where Joy’s ex-husband (Édgar Ramírez)
lives, unable to afford his own house on a mostly-unemployed lounge singer’s
income. They have two young kids who are caught up in this harried maelstrom of
chaotic family life, including a condescending step-aunt (Elisabeth Rohm) who
offers criticisms but little help.
Lawrence’s commanding performance – her best grown-up role
yet – is driven with determination. In the opening scenes of family drama she’s
harried, rushing around trying to fix everyone else’s problems – from cleaning
up spills and planning kids’ days to ripping up floorboards and working on the
plumbing – while trying to make ends meet. Once she decides to try to bring her
invention to market, she ignites her frazzled energy into swaggering
determination, albeit still cut through with self-doubt and ever-present
financial and familial pressures. She’s too motivated to quit, gambling on her
skills and talents. As a result, she’ll either end up wealthy or bankrupt.
There’s not much room for middle ground in this endeavor. The film is an
intimate American epic of domestic chambers and boardrooms, factory floors and
TV soundstages, as she tries to get her mop manufactured and selling. Failure
is definitely an option, and Lawrence brings a great energy, halfway between
self-confidence and nagging doubts, as she strides into difficult situations.
The entrepreneur’s dream is not an easy one. She’s just as
likely to be ground under by others who don’t share her vision, or who view her
as an easy target. Joy’s story may come from the Shark Tank business school, or Horatio Alger stories, but her lean
in isn’t uncomplicated. Russell, working from a script by Annie Mumolo (Bridesmaids), creates a film keenly
aware of the razor’s edge, the stomach-dropping plunges into debt as Joy struggles
to get taken seriously, gain recognition, avoid getting taken advantage of, and
realize her product’s potential. (That Russell fought Mumolo for writing credit
on such a story is a sad irony.) Joy finds her family a doubting chorus, and everyone
in the business world trying to be a bigger success, a more glamorous person,
thinking they can get there through hard work and delusion. A buyer (Bradley
Cooper) sees himself as a studio mogul. A wealthy widow (Isabella Rossellini)
thinks her inheritance is a measure of her business savvy. Money is essential,
but getting it is not a panacea.
Intermingling paperwork, finances, factories, and
salespeople with family squabbles and pains, Russell stages scenes with a
variety of moving plot parts and competing characters’ motivations in
close-quarters drama played at comedy speed. Russell specializes in ragged and
heightened amusing melodramas about squabbling families (Flirting with Disaster, Silver
Linings Playbook, The Fighter). Unlike
his last film, the pretty, but fundamentally phony American Hustle, he keeps Joy’s
comic and dramatic incidents spinning through a variety of tempos and film
stocks, making its inconsistency its consistency, animating Joy’s sense of
hard-charging ambition and precarious insecurities. Intensely felt with a
booming soundtrack of unexpected needle-drops and smooth, emphatic camera
movements (director of photography Linus Sandgren dancing amongst the lively
cast), the unusually unstructured story (a conventional three-act structure told
with a loose rambling quality) pushes forward with relentless momentum. I was
invested in its medley of tones and terrifically sympathetic hero from her
first frame.
Tidily untidy on the surface – with theatrical flourishes,
elaborate visual metaphors, dream sequences, flashbacks, cameos, and even a
musical number – Joy takes, well, joy
in broad characters and boisterous performances, showy filmmaking and layered
writing. I found it gripping and moving, an involving business story smashed up
against an affecting family drama, peppered with lovely touches – a warm voice
from beyond the grave, an exquisite Christmassy sales call montage, a low-key
mother/daughter bond over crayons and blueprints, and a dance of fake snow flurries
accompanying a strut towards victory intercut with a melancholy flash-forward. It
captures the real and unreal aspects of self-mythology, the inherent falseness
of singular up-from-bootstraps triumph, and the odd flukes that lead to both
setbacks and success.
Joy emerges as a great character, an exhausted woman always
with a stain on her blouse from helping others, who decides to become something
more, slowly coming alive and into her own in the spotlight. The movie
surrounds her with endlessly entertaining complications, and great actors (each
a total delight) wonderfully filling in their characters’ eccentricities and
peculiarities. Funny and moving, exciting and sad, it sees the promise and
artifice of the American dream, and the fortuitous incongruities (like a
shopping network in the middle of Amish country) that can lead to accomplishment.
It simultaneously celebrates her hard-working attempt to turn her great idea
into a big business, and also realizes money won’t fix her family’s problems.
Friday, May 29, 2015
Hello Goodbye: ALOHA
Aloha is another
Cameron Crowe picture about a successful man who finds his professional life in
jeopardy while his inner life is restored by romance. Furthermore, it’s another
of his romantic comedies spiked with office drama, like Jerry Maguire was
falling in love while negotiating sports agent business and Matt Damon fell for
Scarlett Johansson while she helped him with his zoo in We Bought a Zoo. There’s also Orlando Bloom’s disgraced suit
meeting Kirsten Dunst in Elizabethtown,
and you could throw the reality-scrambling Vanilla
Sky into the mix, with publisher Tom Cruise crushing on Penelope Cruz, if
you view its twisty ending optimistically. In Aloha, a depressed defense contractor (Bradley Cooper) survives an
explosive encounter in Kabul and is reassigned to Hawaii, where he’s to
negotiate a new roadway through Native Hawaiian territory. His military liaison
is a bright charming young woman (Emma Stone). If you already think he’ll fall
in love and grow a conscience, you’ve been paying attention.
Because Crowe is a warm writer sincere in his
sentimentality, he can usually make his formulaic tendencies work. (Of course,
he’s even better when drifting away from formula. It’s why Say Anything… is still his best film.) What’s most peculiar about Aloha is how everything around this
central romance plot is much more fascinating and effective than what is inside
it. Cooper and Stone have fine chemistry playing two people who have to fall in
love because they’re the stars of the movie and the script keeps pushing them
together. It’s largely unconvincing, following a period of initial irritation,
then intense love, then a tearful misunderstanding, and so on. What’s far more
interesting is watching Cooper’s interactions with other characters in a
breezy, low-key, undemanding story of a man slowly regrowing his conscience.
This growth takes root as Cooper works with his boss (Bill
Murray), a tycoon trying to launch a satellite with the armed forces’
help. One gets the impression Cooper has been unscrupulous in the past. Half-articulated military industrial commentary abounds in a guardedly
biting way, as the rich man’s real aims are hidden from the brass (Danny
McBride and Alec Baldwin). Meanwhile, both public and private interests are all
too willing to manipulate Native Hawaiians to go along with their schemes, trading
them land and assistance to wave construction through sacred spaces. This
thread is far more interesting than whether or not the girl will fall for the
guy, especially when their relationship is so thinly sketched and taken for
granted. The story is dusted with a few intimations of magical realism that
never amounts to anything, and is resolved far too neatly and softly to retain
its teeth, but is a more intriguing element in every way.
Better still is a subplot involving an ex-fiancé of
Cooper’s, played by Rachel McAdams with glowing happiness tinged with a hint of
regret. It's been a dozen years since their break up. She has two kids (Danielle Rose Russell and Jaeden Lieberher) with a
military man (John Krasinski). She loves her family. And yet the appearance of
her old love gets her thinking. This storyline features the best writing and
acting in the film, Crowe at his best drawing relationships that play out with
real compassion and unexpected developments. It’s a reflection of where the
main character’s life went wrong, a cozy family unit he’s invited to spend time
with, but left just on the outside of embracing. There’s too much history
there, and too much pressure to get his job done. If the corruption he
encounters is the seed of his moral reawakening, seeing the love he left is the
fertilizer for this new growth.
There are plenty of worthwhile pieces to Aloha, but Crowe doesn’t put them
together. They play like separate elements instead of a cohesive whole,
connected by character and only faint echoes of each other. It’s telling that
the conclusion finds several final moments, tying up individual threads – an
arrest, several reconciliations, a tearful reveal – without a feeling of
overall finality. This is a film of gentle rhythms and light tropical breezes.
French cinematographer Eric Gautier captures lovely island landscapes and
floats between the performers with ease. Crowe writes a handful of terrific
lines and finds some nice cuts from his record collection for the soundtrack. It’s certainly well
intentioned. But why does it feel so slight and disconnected? The writing lacks
a certain sparkle, and lingers in disjunction between disparate elements. There
are strange asides – a grisly toe injury, a ghostly vision – distractingly out
of place, appearing once, then never mentioned again. Hardly a disaster, it’s
perhaps best to approach Aloha as a
sweet, earnest jumble, likable parts in search of a whole.
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Natural Born Killer: AMERICAN SNIPER
A complicated, unsettling movie, American Sniper is torn between rah-rah hagiography and sober
anti-war lamentation. Director Clint Eastwood takes the story of Chris Kyle,
the late Iraq war veteran the military credits as the deadliest American sniper
in history, and makes a movie that’s simultaneously proud of those accomplishments and sorrowful when confronted with the mental and physical toll
warfare takes on soldiers and civilians alike. It’s a film that sees the same
black and white, good and evil dichotomies as its protagonist, showing enemy
combatants terrorizing the war zone, giving the sequences there an omnipresent
danger (and stereotypes). Then it follows him home to Texas between deployments, where the remembered
sounds of war echo in the silences of daily life. Eastwood wants his audience
rooting for the home team, and then wondering if the
carnage is worth it.
This is a charitable interpretation of Kyle’s memoir, which
was riddled with exaggerations and inventions. Eastwood and screenwriter Jason
Hall have pared back red meat pandering into something
murkier. That’s ambiguous enough to make for some queasy responses, especially
from those prone to take Kyle’s story as unambiguous heroism and
American-might-makes-right flag-waving. But surely only the most sociopathic
patriotism could lead someone to watch the opening scene, in which Kyle stares
down the barrel of a sniper rifle and makes the decision to shoot a child, in
purely heroic terms. Sure, the boy clutched a grenade mere blocks from an
oncoming convoy of American troops. But who could watch the boy flung back with
the force of the shot, blood splattering out behind him as his mother cries,
and feel any amount of pleasure?
Eastwood spent the first part of his career playing the
macho American, gun-slinging cowboys, soldiers, and rogue cops who’d do
whatever necessary to get their version of justice done. The last few decades,
he’s been directing films that dismantled the myth and saw its poison. This
film straddles the line uncomfortably. It says some people need these myths to
survive, without knowing what to make of that idea. We see Kyle sign up to be a
Marine to help his country, with every intention of killing terrorists. He ends
up serving four tours in Iraq, where Kyle’s fellow soldiers often call him a
hero, especially as his reputation grows. But he’s quick to downplay his
accomplishments. When he’s met with questions about the conflict, doubts
expressed by his wife, a buddy, or a psychiatrist, he’s equally quick to shrug
them off. What does he truly, deep down, think about himself? It’s hard to say,
and Eastwood’s not quick to provide his answer.
The answer may be in Bradley Cooper’s performance, one of
his best, which brings shadings to a role that could’ve easily been one-note. He plays Kyle as a man stubbornly
convinced of his duty, single-minded in his unquestioning pride and instinctual
humbleness. This is partly symptomatic of a simply unreflective personality,
but Cooper lets us see it as coping mechanism as well. A clear-cut sense of
right is the only thing keeping him going after all he’s seen. Down bombed out
Iraqi streets, he’s terrorized innocent civilians, invited collateral damage,
driven into ambushes, and seen friends die. He’s most in control when hidden on
rooftops, looking through his rifle’s scope, hand on the trigger, armed with
his sense of purpose. The only way he can maintain his sense of duty, his
righteousness, is to shut out dissenting voices. Cooper brings a lumbering
physicality to the role, sturdy but carrying clear uncomfortable feelings when others try to tell him who he is. He has a look in the eyes betraying a storm of emotions
that never comes to the surface.
The film follows Kyle’s war exploits, presenting them in an
amped up, stripped down Hollywood style. Eastwood’s visual stillness and simplicity (from frequent cinematographer Tom Stern) provides crisp, coherent energy to the combat, but at worst fills the
frames with swarms of enemies that threaten to look like Call of Duty at times. It’s at once intense and depersonalized. It’s
a simple worldview on display. American soldiers are good, individualized,
imperiled. Anyone else is there to be suspicious, dangerous, or dead. Sick thrills
in the combat sequences let pulpy actioner clichés creep in around the edges,
like the enemy sniper who’s a sneering, unknowable villain who leaps to his
next perch with parkour moves.
It’s part of the film’s inability to land on any specific
ideological perspective. This is a serious and sobering movie (grim gore,
funerals, PTSD, tearful phone calls and portent) that also has a scene where a
SEAL makes an impossible shot complete with slow-mo bullet arcing through the
air (ridiculous) and a last minute dash through an increasingly chaotic
sandstorm (thrilling). The film’s able to both satisfy patriotic bloodlust with
vaguely true-to-life, but exaggerated, action-thriller filmmaking, and give
those of us grossed out by such displays enough grey area cover to feel okay
about being unsettled. It’s strategically politically ignorant, and in some
moments the head-spinning cognitive dissonance is perhaps more effective and
destabilizing than either approach would’ve been alone. It’s evenhanded in its
sympathy for every American viewpoint even as it reduces foreign bodies to set
dressing and cannon fodder. The film shuts out implications as a way of narrowing the focus, keeping its gaze on its lead.
In the film’s most politically complicated scene, Kyle and
his wife (Sienna Miller) attend the funeral of a fallen soldier whose mother
reads a letter explaining the deceased’s belief that the war was wrong. Driving
home, Kyle blames the man’s death on that perspective. He calls it weakness,
though it sure looked like hard-earned skepticism to me, especially considering
the man died of enemy fire no pro-war stance would shield. Kyle clings to a
black and white world because he needs it to be that way, because he needs to
feel 100% justified to survive. Eastwood’s film is an ambiguous inhabitation of
that worldview, putting it on display and letting the audience take it for an inkblot test. I saw it as messy, but ultimately more sorrowful than celebratory. Eastwood features real disabled vets in the final scenes, then rolls footage of Kyle's funeral over the credits. Here was a man good at war. Look what war does.
Labels:
Bradley Cooper,
Jason Hall,
Review,
Sienna Miller
No comments:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)










