Due to the vagaries of 2020 releases and corporate rejiggering, Disney ended up barely releasing Fox’s long-shelved horror movie The Empty Man last fall. It was only in theaters with no promotion and no critic screenings in the middle of a raging pandemic at a time when most exhibitors were closed and the few that weren’t were mostly empty anyway. So of course it went almost entirely unremarked upon and certainly barely seen. That’s a shame. The movie is strong stuff, the feature debut of David Prior, previously a creator of DVD features who now proves himself a filmmaker of style and distinction. I hope he makes it a habit. The film stretches over two austere hours. It’s patient with widescreen compositions, understated sound design and softly insinuating score as it takes a standard missing persons setup and grows weirder and more haunted by the scene. In approach there are echoes of David Fincher or Ari Aster in the bold use of deliberate tone and exquisite punctuation of editing and titles. It’s the sort of picture that’ll boldly declare “Day One” during a deeply creepy extended, mostly unrelated, tone-setting curtain raising sequence that ends with the film’s name followed by the introduction of our main character nearly 20 minutes into the feature. Prior quickly conjures a thick, mesmerizing atmosphere in which the tingling possibility of the physically uncanny and psychically unwell grows heavier with well-earned portent.
This is a confidently unsettled mood that matches the exhausted collapsing temperament of its lead character. James Badge Dale stars as the type of mournful lonely guy who’d get dragged into a mystery in these sorts of stories. He has a tragic backstory slowly unraveled for us, but from the instant we see him alone in a chain restaurant, sipping beer and sadly trying to slip the waitress a “Free Birthday Meal” coupon, we know that he’s a pitiable, sympathetic figure. And because we’ve felt the genre tremors and we’ve seen the mysterious going on in the opening — as, years earlier, three hikers meet a spooky fate lost in the mountains of Bhutan — we know that his friend’s runaway teen daughter is mixed up in some bad stuff. The movie takes on shades of Richard Kelly as an elaborate subterranean paranormal conspiracy starts to unravel, with the dark corners and quiet alleys Dale sleuths down getting him entangled with a rash of disappearances and suicides possibly connected to a creepy cult with a doughy wild-eyed leader (Stephen Root) who worship (or are maybe possessed by, or drawn to, or working for, or all of the above) the Slender Man-like figure of the title. It builds to unusual crescendos of shivery compositions preyed upon by heavy hair-on-the-back-of-the-neck-tingling moments. It arrives at its scares earnestly, not in jumpy jack-in-the-box trendiness, but through stillness and insidious simmering unease.
Another satisfying 2020 horror film lost in the pandemic shuffle is Freaky, a giddy jolt of a slasher riff that grafts a Freaky Friday twist onto the old hack-hack-hack kill-kill-kill tropes. It comes to us from Christopher Landon, whose Happy Death Day and Happy Death Day 2 U took Groundhog Day for a similar ride. All three are hugely enjoyable crowd-pleasers with exuberant set-ups and payoffs that know how to wring out a clever hook for all it’s worth. They have the tone of Craven’s Screams without imbuing the characters with those films’ teasing self-awareness. They can figure out the big genre conceits well enough, but don’t turn to each other and monologue about horror tropes. They just run through them energetically and enthusiastically. (One guy running from danger shouts, “You’re black! I’m gay! We are so dead!”) Where Freaky one-ups Landon’s previous pictures is in the gore, with several bloody shock moments of bodies cleaved in two or smashed apart. They’re of a piece with the slasher tradition, and deliver the did-I-just-see-that? gross-out glee of the genre’s best. And it somehow doesn’t tip the balance of what is a weirdly sweet and very funny teen comedy, complete with booming pop music and vibrant colors, surrounding the kills.
It has a mousy, unpopular, insecure high school girl (Kathryn Newton) nursing a crush, commiserating with two best friends, and dealing with family problems, and who finds all that taking a backseat to the main event: the serial killer (Vince Vaughn) who, through a simple use of a magic dagger, switches bodies with her. It gives Vaughn his best role in years, and he rises to the occasion playing a petite high schooler in his lumbering middle-aged bulk, convincingly matching the girl’s energy and able to play scenes opposite her crush or her friends in ways that aren’t condescending and track the emotional stakes. Similarly, Newton’s performance takes on a skulking dangerous swagger and, though it might stretch credulity that the maladjusted creep would have such a good sense of style, he seems to enjoy the easy access to vulnerable teens this great disguise gives him — and isn’t that all any slasher film villain wants? Like any good body swap comedy, it gets a lot of mileage out of its terrific lead performances, who take it seriously while understanding the lark of it all. And then the slasher beats get layered upon it, and the whole thing is a finely proportioned, sugary satisfying genre parfait. The film runs through its paces quickly and enjoyably, never swerving too far into the unexpected, but serving up the expected with style. Landon clearly enjoys delivering so thoroughly on a high concept premise, there’s no way he’d let it go to waste.
Showing posts with label Vince Vaughn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vince Vaughn. Show all posts
Monday, March 15, 2021
Friday, November 11, 2016
Thou Shalt Not Kill: HACKSAW RIDGE
Hacksaw Ridge is a
war film about a man who refused to take up a weapon. It’s a true story of a
World War II soldier who saw the world tearing itself apart and felt called to help
put it back together. He volunteered as a medic, determined to save life while
everyone around him was taking it. Alas, this doesn’t sit well with his
commanding officers, who eventually force him into a court martial during his
time at basic training. He refuses to even touch a weapon. They say he’s
disobeying orders. He says he’s following his conscience. This is a fine setup
for moral dramaturgy, and an intriguing challenge to Truffaut’s insistence that
any anti-war film would, by presenting its subject matter, be inescapably
exciting. That the director here is Mel Gibson adds another wrinkle. Here is a
filmmaker who creates displays of hyperbolic violence, transforming stories of
rebellion into gory sacrifice (Braveheart),
stories of religious uplift into contemplations of flayed flesh (The Passion of the Christ), and whose
clear masterpiece is an all-out, non-stop action splatter (Apocalypto) with violence and brutality as its subject rather than
its conduit. His latest is his most self-conscious about cutting against the
grain of his usual preoccupations while upholding his every interest.
It’s an old-fashioned movie, a widescreen, serious,
straight-faced, unironic, conventional, period piece about strong, silent, and
noble suffering. We see the young man (Andrew Garfield, playing humble
aw-shucks simple sturdiness) in his small-town youth, smitten with a pretty
nurse (Teresa Palmer). He shows up to donate blood just to get the opportunity
to talk to her. Here we are right off the bat with an eye on plasma and its
loss, willing or otherwise. There’s also the man’s tearful drunk brute father
(Hugo Weaving), a struggling World War I vet with clear psychological scars
from his deployment. He weeps near the graves of his fallen comrades, at one
point dramatically smashing his booze bottle on a headstone, his blood artfully
dripping across the top of the smooth white stone. Gibson’s not shy about
drawing these connections with obvious and emphatic splashes. When an early
childhood tableau of brothers fighting escalates to one tween swinging at the
other with a brick, he draws the camera close to the impact, hears the sick
thunk, but then follows the boy into the house where he stares at religious
iconography on the wall. The birth of a pacifist is there, as well as an
intermingling of guilt and duty, spirituality and conviction.
By the time we get to boot camp, the movie becomes broad
cliché, introducing a bullying commander (Vince Vaughn) slinging out nicknames
to a stock group of platoon movie types: the southerner, the pretty boy, the
Italian-American, and so forth. They don’t emerge as characters so much as people
we can vaguely recognize once the soldiers end up on the battlefield. They
don’t look kindly on their medic, who insists he won’t be using a gun, even in
self-defense or in protection of his fellow soldiers. They beat him, but he
won’t break. He’s jailed, but he won’t back down. He’s court martialed, and
still insists he be allowed to help on his terms. He wants to heal, not hurt.
Eventually he gets his wish, and Gibson doesn’t do much to milk the suspense of
the court proceedings. Instead, he’s eager to follow the men to war, staging a
lengthy and overwhelming battle sequence with buckets of gore chased with awe
for its man of anti-violence behaving so heroically while still maintaining his
ideological purity. The movie’s quaint sturdiness is unmistakably Gibson’s,
with a religious fervor and belief in the power of bloody movies sitting side
by side.
The movie’s grand finale, an extended and overwhelming work
of blood-and-guts filmmaking, is a battle to take a ridge on an island in the
Pacific. It earns the name Hacksaw through its waves of soldiers mowed down on
both sides of the fight. And through it all, armed only with a spirit of
decency and a desire to help, the medic sets about helping. Gibson surrounds
him with meat-grinder battle scenes: dripping wounds, cacophonous ammunition,
fog of war dirt and grime, loose limbs, arterial spray, demolished faces,
gutted corpses, rot and rats, mud and muck, clouds of organs and tissue. And
yet Gibson doesn’t simply focus on the horror, but pulls attention to the man
refusing to participate. He ducks for cover, darts out with gauze and morphine,
eager to get foxhole to foxhole to better save lives. There’s clear admiration
here, and through the film’s earnest broad passion for the story, there’s
something quietly moving within the surrounding bombast. Garfield wears a
bewildered expression of simple duty, head down, hard at work.
In one pivotal moment, when danger is closest, he picks up a
rifle. I tensed, wondering if Gibson would give in to his goriest blood lust. Instead,
the man simply needed it to help drag a wounded soldier to safety. He sticks to
his principles and the movie respects that. Although the movie is too often
lumpy in construction or heavy-handed in its message, it represents a
refreshing and ennobling concern for dissent in the face of wrongheaded
assumptions, and the radical idea of peace in a time of war. The soldier who
wishes only to heal and not to hurt is treated as aberrant, allowing him on the
battlefield seen as punishment. And yet as he helps the people cut down by
senseless bloodshed, he becomes their hero. He lived in dark times, and was
called to be a light. We live in dark times. A movie like this, however
imperfect, is a welcome reminder to be the light where you can, in all the ways
you can, for all the people you can.
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Baby Daddy: DELIVERY MAN
There’s something sneakily warm, humane, and even a little
moving at the center of Delivery Man,
a cluttered, sickly sweet, and not particularly funny comedy that’s almost
impossible to recommend without piling on caveats and disclaimers. It stars
Vince Vaughn as one of his usual responsibility-resistant motormouths, this
time a guy who is nearly fired by his father from the family business, crushed
under a debt of thousands he owes some shady characters, and all-but-dumped by
his exasperated girlfriend. On top of all this, he’s tracked down by an
attorney who tells him the sperm bank to which he donated over 600 times over
20 years ago mistakenly overworked his samples and now 533 young people would
like him to drop his anonymity and meet them. In fact, they’re suing him to do
so. What a predicament. With such a strained comic premise, the film has to
work hard to back into its gooey sentimentality, but earns some unexpected
charm along the way.
What I liked best about the film was the diversity of
children Vaughn’s character suddenly discovers he fathered in scenes that play well with what the characters know or don't know about the situation. We find out about
the kids as he does, impulsively picking them one by one out of a case file his
lawyer (likably played by Parks &
Recreation’s Chris Pratt) advises him not to open. If he didn’t want him to
open it, why does he give him a copy? But I digress. Vaughn approaches them one
at a time, acting only as a stranger to them. He discovers his secret children
are a varied bunch: a struggling actor, a professional basketball player, an
amiable drunk college kid, a busker, a drug addict, a historical reenactor, a
special needs child, and more. These young people in their teens and twenties
have only their unknown father in common. Some he’s immediately proud of.
Others he feels the need to help. Still others, he’s disappointed when
confronted with their life situations. But the sneakily humane and moving part
is the way he’s instantly and totally struck with deep fatherly love for them,
proud of them simply for existing.
Andrew Solomon’s recent extraordinary book Far from the Tree powerfully explores
the concept of parents truly, deeply, fully loving children who are not what
they would expect or have hoped for in a variety of difficult situations. I
never would’ve guessed that an otherwise silly and misshapen trifle like Delivery Man would rub up against the
same nerve as this great book, but so it does. When Vaughn tells his lawyer
that he wants to be their guardian angel, it’s sweet. The concept may be wildly
impractical – who could possibly be a real present father to over 500 kids,
most of whom are already legally adults? – but the core sentiment rings with
some degree of authenticity about finding and accepting one’s family and all
the diversity of experiences that can encompass.
Would that the film devoted less time to financial thugs who
show up precisely twice to threaten Vaughn to pay up. Who are they? Where do
they come from? Why did they lend him money? Who knows? The movie cares not a
bit about the answer, failing to characterize the threat even a token amount.
Similarly, there’s an unfortunate detour involving one of Vaughn’s mystery kids
who learns his father’s identity and attempts to extort some father-son bonding
time. These two malnourished subplots load down the film with unnecessary
clutter, distracting from the emotional journey that Vaughn would go through
far more convincingly and poignantly without such contrivances.
In addition to the unfocused plotting, supporting roles are
universally anemic, especially poor Cobie Smulders in the thankless girlfriend
role that’s only around for the super schmaltzy but kind of effective emotional
climax. Such problems come with the material, which Canadian writer-director
Ken Scott is recycling from his own 2011 French-language film Starbuck. It’s too bad the process of remaking
his own film didn’t allow him to clear away the tangle of distracting subplots
that gathers up around the nice emotional center or write in some better jokes.
The film is sweet and soft. But what makes it such a nagging disappointment is
the missed opportunities. Instead of devoting time to that debt or extortion
sidetracks, why not nod to the mothers of all these children, who are
conspicuously missing entirely from the equation. What do they have to say
about all this? In the end, it’s so focused on ending with a feel-good group
hug of an ending, it’s hard not to feel at least a little cheated by how
sloppily we got there.
Labels:
Chris Pratt,
Cobie Smulders,
Ken Scott,
Review,
Vince Vaughn
No comments:
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Google Hangout: THE INTERNSHIP
The Internship is
an amiable hangout movie. It’s little more than a chance to spend time with an
appealing cast playing pleasant types. At the center of its appeal is the duo
of Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson, reteaming for the first time since their
successful 2005 comedy Wedding Crashers.
They’re both fast talkers, but where Vaughn muscles through with nonstop
bravado, Wilson has a spacier syncopation. When both motormouths get up to
speed, they find a fine, easy rhythm. This new comedy finds them surrounded by
a capable cast that rises ever so slightly above glorified reaction shots in a
plot that’s loose to put it generously. And yet I found myself enjoying sitting
with this film much more than Crashers,
which I’ve always found to be a tad on the grating side. I didn’t realize until
I saw this one that my biggest problem with the earlier film was all that pesky
plot. Sometimes a good, agreeable hangout is just what’s needed.
As the film begins, Vaughn and Wilson lose their jobs when
the company they work for closes. Desperate to find better prospects, they
bluff their way into summer internships at Google, where they quickly find
themselves bewildered on the wrong side of a generation gap. The interns are
placed into teams and the kids – a young manager (Josh Brener), a cute
collegiate nerd (Tiya Sircar), a too-cool-for-school dude (Dylan O’Brien), and
a self-conscious, socially awkward computer whiz (Tobit Raphael) – who get
stuck with the old guys are none to happy about it. They’re an awkward bunch,
but if you suspect they just might eventually, reluctantly learn to love each
other and work as a team by using each member’s best skills you’d be on the
right track. The team that wins the most points in various challenges over the
summer, everything from coding to Quidditch, will win jobs at Google. Nods
toward typical slobs (our protagonists) versus snobs (led by Max Minghella)
plotting, as well as the basic competitive drive, make up the movie’s loose
throughline.
It’s not often you find a light, summery comedy about how
terrible the job market is. For a while, I remained unconvinced that it would
work. But a funny thing happened as I sat there and let the movie play out: it
won me over. The way the script by Vaughn and Jared Stern locates the anxieties
of the two leads right inside the generation gap – they’re too young to ignore
technology, too old to fully “get” it – becomes a somewhat productive dialogue.
They grow progressively open-minded about younger people and new ways of doing
things, while their teammates grow more open-minded about the value of input
from people with more of an old school skill set. It’s a soft movie, but a few
of the points it dances around are more perceptive than I anticipated. There’s
a nice moment where Wilson and Vaughn chastise the younger interns for being so
cynical about their future careers and when the response comes – “Do you even
know what it’s like to be 21 today?” with a college degree no longer
guaranteeing a job, if it ever was – they’re actually taken aback and consider
it.
None of this would work without the cast. Director Shawn
Levy, of Cheaper by the Dozen and Date Night, keeps the scenes casual and
sociable, letting the ensemble fall into comfortable grooves to fill the
scripted sequences with a bit of a loose feeling. Vaughn and Wilson have a
relaxed chemistry that’s very appealing. Various supporting roles filled by the
likes of Rose Byrne, Aasif Mandvi, and Josh Gad are fine bits of color around
the edges. I was most taken with the work of O’Brien and Sircar, two of the
college-aged interns who spar and banter with the main guys. Their winning
performances are charming and feel like they’re circling some sort of
generational truth, mediating their experience through smart phones and
admitting to a technologically enabled imagination that’s wilder and more
experienced than their real world lives to date.
This isn’t anything great, but it’s sweeter than expected.
It’s refreshing to find a big studio comedy that’s just plain nice. (It’s also
likely the only Hollywood comedy you’ll see in some time to purposefully allude
to a Langston Hughes poem.) The movie hates jerks, lets characters feel bad
about bad decisions, and angles for encouragement and hope above all else. It’s
miles more humane and watchable than Ted
or The Hangover Part II or any other
corrosive-yet-popular comedy of the past several years. If this core decency
leads the film into its biggest misstep, so be it. The approach to its setting
feels miscalculated, so dewy-eyed about how great it is to work at Google –
just shy of Wonka in the whimsy department, if the production design filled
with pedal-powered conference tables and nap pods is to be believed – that it
shoots past elaborate product placement and ends up feeling like it’s having a
goof. Still, this is a movie that’s enjoyable to be around. Simply spending
time together may not actually solve generation gaps, but it’s nice to think so
for a couple hours.
Friday, July 27, 2012
Suburban Space Invaders: THE WATCH
Turning out to be nothing more than a belabored, R-rated
commercial for Costco (actual dialogue: “They really do have everything we need!), The
Watch is a halfhearted action comedy content to do nothing surprising. The
story, such as it is, kicks off when the local Costco manager (Ben Stiller)
shows up to work one morning to find that the store has overnight turned into a
crime scene. The local cop (Will Forte) informs him that the night watchman has
been mysteriously murdered. Shaken up, Stiller puts out a call for his sleepy
suburb to form a neighborhood watch and is a little disappointed that the only
people who respond are a needy middle aged motormouth (Vince Vaughn) who just
wants a break from intruding upon his teenager’s social life, an awkward
wannabe vigilante (Jonah Hill), and a bumbling British man (Richard Ayoade) who
wants to join a group to fit in with the locals.
Eventually it turns out that the murderer is an alien who is
simply one of many who are already in the town, poised to phone home and start
the invasion proper. So, it’s up to the four flawed guys to stop the space
creatures before they can move forward with their plan. Not that the film
gathers any momentum from this threat. No, the movie just meanders through
typical moments of male gross-out humor bonding, stumbles into a lame Invasion of the Body Snatchers lite and
then lazily gets up the effort to squeak out a typical shoot-‘em-up
climax. Altogether it feels like
the result of letting a bad Apatow knockoff write and direct a Hollywood remake
of Attack the Block. It’s lazily
paced, painfully predictable and unimaginative in all aspects, like two faded
copies of copies placed one over the other.
It didn’t have to be this way. The talent involved here is
promising. The cast is made up of funny, skilled performers and I haven’t even
mentioned Rosemarie DeWitt, relegated to a thanklessly underwritten role as
Stiller’s wife, or Doug Jones, the incredible performer behind so many great
screen creatures (not the least of which is Pan’s
Labyrinth’s terrifying Pale Man) who suits up to play the aliens. But the
story, written by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg (of the great raunchy teen
comedy Superbad) and rewritten by
Jared Stern (of the not-so-great Mr.
Popper’s Penguins), is beat-by-beat dull and rote. It feels slapped
together in a way that makes everyone involved appear to be shrugging towards
paychecks. Everyone on screen has been vibrant and energetic, funny and
sympathetic in other roles. Here, though, they’re all playing characters that
are thinly sketched and vaguely off-putting while just going through the paces
in a movie that can’t quite get its act together. It is witless and lame every
step of the way.
The anemic script is certainly the key problem here, but it
doesn’t help matters that its tone is so unformed. When it opens on Stiller
narrating us through a typical day in the life of his character, the film
appears to be sharpening its satirical claws on the gleaming store shelves and
perfect suburban subdivisions, looking with scorn upon the hollow homogenized
lifestyles of the characters. But, as more characters come into focus and the
gears of the plot slowly get up to speed, it’s clear that this movie’s going
nowhere fast. Strange detours into the kinky life of a creepy neighbor (Billy Crudup)
and a half-formed subplot about a leering teenager (Nicholas Braun) after
Vaughn’s daughter sap away momentum and cloud the tone. Are we supposed to
actually validate the overzealous behavior of the central characters in so
thoroughly, incompetently, poking around where they don’t belong? They’re hard
to root for and when the plot resolves, it does so almost by accident.
The biggest disappointment here is the direction from Akiva
Schaffer, not because it’s especially bad – it’s slick and competent – but
because it’s so devoid of energy and creativity. After directing so many terrific, hilarious Digital Shorts
for Saturday Night Live and the
smart-stupid new cult comedy classic Hot
Rod, it’s unfortunate to see him deliver something so uninspired. There’s
just about nothing here worth talking about or reacting to. I saw the movie
amongst a boisterous crowd of people who, as the movie started, fell silent. As
the movie played, we stayed silent. Then, a little over 90 minutes later, we
all filed out. I went in hoping for a few laughs and left feeling dispirited.
It’s not just bad; it’s nothing but missed opportunities all around.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Funny Business: THE DILEMMA

The funniest thing about The Dilemma is that, despite being sold as director Ron Howard’s return to comedy, it’s not very funny. In fact, every time it tries to be funny in a broad, silly way, it falls embarrassingly flat. The comedy seems jammed up into the corners of a somewhat serious drama. If it weren’t for all the straining for laughs in Allan Loeb’s screenplay, this could be a much better film.
It stars Vince Vaughn as a man who plans on proposing to his longtime girlfriend (Jennifer Connelly), following the advice of his happily married best friend (Kevin James). As he scopes out the perfect spot to pop the question, a lovely botanical garden, he notices his friend’s wife (Winona Ryder) making out with some younger guy (Channing Tatum). He takes it upon himself to learn more and ends up sneaking around town peeping in windows and trying desperately to avoid revealing anything before he’s sure of all the facts.
Now saddled with secrets and questions, he squirms about and ends up making each and every social situation more and more difficult as he struggles under the pressure of being the only person in the room tuned in to all of the nasty subtext. So many comedies draw their laughs from the unspoken comedic tensions between characters, that it’s strange, but not entirely unpleasant, to see one throw away the comedy to focus solely on the tension.
After wading through deadly dull scenes of formulaic comedy windup, especially a nonstarter of a subplot involving an awfully miscalculated use of Queen Latifah, things get interesting. For the majority of its runtime, the film functions well as a compelling, wild-eyed melodrama, a darkly depressing look into seemingly normal relationships with deep dysfunction hidden just below the surface. Funnily enough, there are some genuine laughs found amidst the pleasurably agonizing drama in sequences of acute social discomfort. As the web of secrets that supports these characters’ interactions grows more prominent, the romances and friendships involved threaten to collapse altogether.
And then, the movie deflates the tension quickly and clumsily. Tension falls away in favor of a queasily pat and tonally odd ending that feels like it belongs to the opening attempts at comedy instead of the moments it follows. It’s a movie that recovers very nicely from an opening stumble only to fall back into the same traps by the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





