Hitchcock - Fun But Uneven Look At The Master of Suspense!

Alfred Hitchcock, never won a competitive Academy Award for directing, despite being nominated five times. It wasn't until 1968 that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences awarded Hitch the Irving G. Thalberg award honoring him for his work as a producer. The last of those five nominations for best director, was for the 1960 film, "Psycho" which is arguably the director's most famous and best work.

The making of that classic horror film is also the subject of a new movie, "Hitchcock", starring Anthony Hopkins in the title role. It's an enjoyable if not always true retelling of how "Psycho" got made and the toll it took on the director's health and his relationship with wife and collaborator, Alma Reville.

Written by John J. McLaughlin, the film is based on the 1990 book, "Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho," by Stephen Rebello who also worked as a consultant on "Hitchcock." Although Rebello's book focused more on the artistic production of "Psycho," this film uses Robello's work as a backdrop to the complex relationship between the aging film genius and his loving but longsuffering wife.

Directed by writer-turned-director Sacha Gervasi, "Hitchcock" opens in Plainfield, Wisconsin in 1944, with real-life murderer, Ed Gein (played by Michael Wincott) killing his older brother Henry in a fit of rage. The camera then suddenly pans to the right where we see Hopkins as Hitchock commenting on the crime in an obvious nod to the 1950's TV series, "Alfred Hitchcock Presents." It's a device that works at first, but as the film progresses, the balance of comic commentary versus dramatic exposition proves uneven at best.

Yet, "Hitchcock" still packs a favorable punch thanks primarily to the performances of it's entire cast, starting with Hopkins. His Hitchcock is part impression, part curious take on the reserved film genius. His best moment comes near the film's end, in a riotously funny scene depicting Hitch's reaction to the audience's first exposure to the famed "Psycho" shower-scene. It’s moments like this that comment on the making of the film at hand that are by far the most interesting to watch.

As for the actors playing the stars of “Psycho”, they are all reminiscent of the iconic movie’s cast. Scarlett Johansson doubles for Janet Leigh along with Jessica Biel as Vera Miles. But it's James D’Arcy as Anthony Perkins who is downright uncanny as the famed Norman Bates. It's disappointing however, that such little attention was given to Perkins in the script. D’Arcy embodies Perkins so well, that a biopic of his own seems in order.

But by far the most compelling performance belongs to Helen Mirren as Alma Reville. As Hitch’s wife and collaborator, Reville worked on many of the master-of-suspense’s films as both an editor and script doctor, not always receiving on-screen credit. In “Hitchcock,” Mirren’s Alma is trapped in what seems to be a loveless marriage to a man who is often more interested in his blond-bombshell stars than his devoted wife.

As Alma pursues creative outlets on her own with former script collaborator Whitfield Cook (played by Danny Huston), Hitch becomes suspicious and confronts her.  Alma’s response is an impassioned one and by far the dramatic high-point of the film. Mirren’s work is solid here and worthy of Oscar consideration.

The only drawback to this focus on Alma and Hitch's troubled relationship, is that if often overshadows the behind-the-scenes look at the making of the master-of-suspense's most famous film. It was hard to know what aspects about the Hitchcock's relationship covered in the film were true or just artistic license on part of screenwriter, McLaughlin. For that reason, I often felt I was watching a made-for-TV biopic, and not a feature film.

What I found the most hard to reconcile in “Hitchcock” was the filmmaker’s choice to have Ed Gein, the real-life serial killer who inspired the “Psycho” story, interacting with Hitch in several scenes. The two never really met and having the creepy Gein comment on what’s happening in Hitch’s personal life seems far fetched and unnecessary.

Despite the brief ‘making-of’ portions devoted to “Psycho,” this film spends most of it’s time peering into the personal life of it’s subject. Most of it is light and fun, but the uneven patchwork of drama, comedy and commentary keep it from ever achieving the classic status of the film “Psycho” itself.

Take 2 Movie Review: Lincoln

By DAVID BJORKGREN

Managing Editor

Is there nothing Steven Spielberg can’t do? In his latest film, “Lincoln,” Spielberg takes his cameras back in time and records one of the nation’s pivotal moments when it passed the 13th Amendment and abolished slavery. And he convinced President Abraham Lincoln to play himself in the film.

Well, not really, but it feels that way sometimes thanks to a convincing performance by Daniel Day-Lewis, a thoughtful screenplay by Tony Kushner and some good period piece lighting.

Day-Lewis gives us a mostly gentle, often humorous and folksy Lincoln who nevertheless shows the ruthlessness and political brilliance required to guide the nation through one of its darkest periods. In his Lincoln, we see not so much his human frailties, but rather the turmoil our 16th President felt trying to steer a divided nation past the institution of slavery and through the last moments of its Civil War. Lincoln’s devotion to the United States comes through, even as he occasionally tampers with its Democratic principles in order to preserve it.

And not once did he brandish an ax or try to kill off a vampire.
As with most film treatments of historical figures, we can only guess how close Day-Lewis hit the mark in portraying the actual Lincoln, but his is a Lincoln that felt real to the touch, visually and in personality.

Given the circumstances of January 1865, it seems incredible that Lincoln was able to orchestrate the House of Representatives into passing a Constitutional amendment to end slavery. The Civil War was still raging and even without the seceded southern states in play, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives was 20 votes short of getting the two-thirds majority it needed to pass the amendment. The concept of freed slaves was not a popular idea with many of the Democrats of Congress, from whose ranks many of the southern secessionists had come. There were even detractors among the Republicans.

And there’s a time limit. The South, depleted after four years of fighting, is sending emissaries north to talk about ending the war. The president’s in a quandary. If peace comes before the amendment passes then the South, readmitted to the Union, will be able to stop it. If he delays a chance to end the war early so the amendment can pass, then thousands more will die unnecessarily.

Most of the film focuses on Lincoln’s work behind the scenes to get support for the amendment before its final vote on Jan. 31. It is at these moments we appreciate Lincoln’s sheer will of personality. That personality was brought to bear against hesitant Congressman to swing them over to the “yes” column, as well as to members of his own cabinet who were often at odds over the best course of action to follow.

Day-Lewis is supported by a strong cast that has no problem sharing the room with him.

Tommy Lee Jones shines as Pennsylvania Congressman Thaddeus Stevens. This outspoken and sarcastic radical wanted slavery abolished and even pushed the idea that blacks and whites were equal. In a key scene during the House debates that resonates powerfully, Stevens must decide to put his tongue in check for the good of the amendment. Jones has raised the role of sarcastic, obstinate old man to an art form and he does not disappoint here. But beneath his humorous diatribes, Jones also shows us a man of deep character and principle.

Sally Fields gives us a stronger and smarter Mary Todd-Lincoln than history has often shown us. Yes, she struggles with depression and grief over the death of her sons, Edward and William, years before.

But at this point in her life, before future tragedies completely wear her down, she is still a strong and practical woman, devoted to her husband and politically-savvy when necessary. Fields shares a wonderful scene with Jones, when Mrs. Lincoln takes jabs at Congressman Stevens, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. Stevens is critical of the money Mrs. Lincoln has spent to refurbish the White House and even tried to have her jailed. The White House, she counters, was a pig sty when they moved in and accuses him of withholding funds because he viewed the president and herself as hicks who didn’t need or deserve more lavish accommodations. At another point, in a bit of clairvoyance, she laments to Lincoln that she will only be remembered as that crazy woman who made her husband miserable.

David Strathairn plays Lincoln’s Secretary of State, William Henry Seward, a strong ally in the president’s efforts to pass the amendment. Seward had lost the Republican Presidential nomination to Lincoln, but in time turned from bitter foe to staunch supporter as a member of Lincoln’s cabinet.

Veteran actor Hal Holbrook plays Preston Blair, a combative Lincoln advisor and southern politician who opposed the 13th amendment and wanted instead a peace treaty with the Confederacy and a sooner, rather than later, end to the war.

Lincoln’s efforts to secure the necessary votes were aided by three political operatives, played sometimes for laughs by John Hawkes, James Spader and Tim Blake. These men worked in secret, offering patronage jobs to lame-duck Democratic Congressman in order to win their vote for the amendment.

Two characters in the film, Congressman Steven’s housekeeper, Lydia Hamilton Smith (S. Epatha Merkerson) and White House seamstress Elizabeth Keckley (Gloria Reubenoffer) provide a black perspective on the historic events of 1865, reminding us that real lives are in the balance while the politicians debate.

Spielberg, as usual, has done a great job of creating a visually stunning piece. Scenes are lit naturally or seemingly with whatever artificial lighting was available in 1865. The dimly-lit scenes create intimacy between the characters and the audience that draw you in. The landscapes, from interiors of the White House to exteriors of Washington D.C., to the battlefields, range from elegant to gritty.

This will not be a film to everyone’s tastes. It is not action-adventure. It is historical political intrigue. It is the spoken word and it is an intimate exploration of a bigger-than-life presidential figure with noble ideas. The cinematography, as good as it is, is mere backdrop to the actors that carry the day.

I give “Lincoln” 8.5 story-telling, top hat-tipping presidents out of 10.


By Arthur Ryan

Correspondent

Steven Spielberg is no stranger to historical drama. He won his first Oscar for Best Director in 1994 for “Schindler’s List” and then again in 1999 for “Saving Private Ryan.”

Films like “Munich” would follow as well as his work as a producer on such projects as “Band of Brothers” and “The Pacific.”

Spielberg has a great talent for interpreting history on film and with his latest effort, “Lincoln” which opened in movie theaters across the country this past weekend, he has outdone himself and delivered a breathtaking snapshot of a seminal moment in the life of our country and it’s 16th President.

Based in-part on historian, Doris Kearns Goodwin’s 2005 book, “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln,” Spielberg’s “Lincoln” concentrates for the most part on one month, January 1865. The Civil War was almost over and Lincoln’s decision to amend the Constitution and make permanent his wartime Emancipation Proclamation, set’s off a political battle of wits and backroom horse-trading that seem all too familiar to the polarized times we live in today.

Daniel Day-Lewis is nothing short of brilliant in the title role of Abraham Lincoln. His cool, calm and collected Lincoln is steadfast, amusing and at times impassioned, and not at all unwilling to play politics to reach his goal of ending slavery. His onscreen performance is one for the ages, up there with James Cagney’s George M. Cohan and Marlon Brando’s Vito Corleone. There is no doubt that for generations to come, when people think of President Abraham Lincoln, they will picture him as Day-Lewis.

Sally Field also shines as Lincoln’s tormented and extremely protective wife, Mary Todd. Molly, as Lincoln calls her, is still suffering emotionally from the death of their son, Willie, two years earlier. When their oldest son, Robert (portrayed by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) hopes to enlist in the union army, it proves almost too much for Mrs. Lincoln to bear. The scenes between Day-Lewis and Field are exceptional and bring great insight into their relationship.

In a film filled with commanding supporting performances, Tommy Lee Jones shines as Republican Congressman, Thaddeus Stevens from Pennsylvania. His ardent abolitionist stand works both for and against Lincoln’s hope to pass the 13th Amendment and end slavery. His fiery rhetoric on the floor of the House of Representatives is a highlight, but Jones is equally as effective in more subtle scenes especially near the film’s end.

In at least two of those scenes at “Lincoln’s” conclusion prove why Spielberg is arguably the best living film director of our time. One is of course the assassination of President Lincoln and the other a lesser known footnote from Thaddeus Stevens’ biography, both of which are handled by Spielberg in the most inventive of ways.

His choices here are brilliant from a historical perspective. Spielberg and screenwriter Tony Kushner know just the right moment to reveal information about a main character along with finding new perspectives in which to shed light on known historical events, many of which have been filmed before.

With great restraint, Spielberg’s camera offers a more intimate look at history this time around, one with less sweeping camera moves and obvious musical cues than in his movies of the past. In other words, there’s less John Ford and more Sidney Lumet.

Unlike so many other directors in the past who have played very loose with the facts, Spielberg’s “Lincoln” only embellishes along the margins. A handful of historians have taken only minor issues with Kushner’s script, most of which have to do with character motivation and physical appearance. But as is so often the case in translating history to the big screen, time constraints often have some characters appearing more real than others. And today more than ever, there are some historians who will see on the screen what they want to, based on their own modern political ideologies.

There is no doubt in this reviewer’s mind that “Lincoln” and it’s stars Day-Lewis, Field and Jones will be up for Oscars come February along with writer Kushner and director Spielberg. And for the first time in a long time, the hype around a film and its chances of winning Oscar gold will be entirely justified.

Spielberg has given America a gift, one that will live on in the memory of movie-goers and historians for decades to come. And following the election of 2012, he may have also given his fellow Americans the best kind of medicine, the kind in a form of a movie that allows old wounds to heal and offers something other than a political party to rally around.

Take 2 Movie Review "Skyfall"

BY ARTHUR RYAN

CORRESPONDENT

James Bond is getting old. In fact, he first appeared on the big screen, back in 1962 in “Dr. No,” the first of the Albert “Cubby” Broccoli produced Bond films 50 years ago.

And that fact is not wasted in the newest 007 film to hit movie theaters this past weekend. “Skyfall” has an aging James Bond coming to grips with his own usefulness as well as that of the intelligence agency he works for.

“Skyfall” opens, as do all Bond films with a heart-stopping chase scene, this time through the busy streets of Turkey. The chase ends up on-top of a speeding train where Bond’s on the hunt for a stolen computer hard-drive that contains the names of several undercover British agents, who are at risk of being revealed and in turn endangering their lives.

The search takes 007 all the way to Shanghai, China, where a clue in the form of a casino chip, left behind by an assassin has Bond traveling again to Macao in hopes of finding who is behind the missing hard-drive. At the same time the names of five of the British secret agents start to show up on YouTube and in turn the British spy agency comes under fire, and agency director, M (played for the seventh time by Judi Dench) is called before a committee in parliament to explain herself.

Bond’s search leads him to a deserted island where a computer genius and former disgruntled agent reveals himself as the master behind the plot to discredit M and the agency he once worked for.

Directed by Oscar-winner Sam Mendes (American Beauty), “Skyfall” is different then most Bond films in that it’s probably the first with the most at stake for its main characters. It turns out that the disgruntled agent, Raoul Silva, played with great charm by Javier Bardem, has it in for M and will not rest until he has his revenge.

Bond, played for the third time by Daniel Craig, finds himself in an ever-changing world. A world where enemies are no longer known by their country, and their threats are more high-tech and less mechanical than in the past. And to combat these modern threats, means a younger, more tech-savvy generation must step up to the challenge. So, when Bond is sent to meet the new Quartermaster or “Q” as he is known in most Bond films, he is shocked to find a young 20-something filling in where traditionally a gray-haired old man once stood.

Ben Whishaw plays Q with a nerdy brilliance and wit that does justice to former Q’s, played by John Cleese and Desmond Llewelyn. His gadgets take a back seat in this Bond, to his computer skills and tech savvy which are much more needed in these computer-based times we live in.

Albert Finney shows up in a small but pivotal role, and is charming and colorful as usual. I must admit it was a bit sad to see him looking so old, but with so many great films in his past, one can’t help but think a role like this comes very easy to him. At least he makes it look that way!

“Skyfall” is a solid Bond thriller with an intelligent script which makes a tricky plot easy to follow and more timely then most 007 films in the past. Cinematographer Roger Deakins uses a colorful pallet in painting a gorgeous looking 007 film, capturing the electronic brilliance of Shanghai, the lamp-lit waterways of Macao and the foggy moonlit moors of Scotland with breathtaking results. Whether you’re a Bond fan or not, this secret agent outing is aimed to please most moviegoers on many levels, not the least being a splendid visual feast for the eyes

By DAVID BJORKGREN

Managing Editor

I have never seen a James Bond film, unless you want to count “Moonraker,” which most people don’t.

So as a 007 neophyte I wasn’t sure what to expect when I caught the latest incarnation of the secret agent franchise.

I’m happy to say that “Skyfall” works, even if you’ve never lived in the James Bond universe. For those who love all things Bond, the film is a stylish homage to its predecessors, particularly to the more straightforward and less contrived earlier films. James Bond is a cultural icon that seems to transcend his 50-year film history so even without the detailed history of the series, I still got most of the references and occasional inside jokes.

Those who have been following the more recent versions of James Bond and the characters that surround him will see those relationships challenged as “Skyfall” dismantles his world from the inside.

Weaving in and out of the action scenes there is some human drama unfolding. In between the gun fire, the explosions and the elaborately-staged fight sequences, there is still time to explore issues of trust, loyalty, betrayal, getting old and becoming obsolete.

“Skyfall” also takes aim at the emergence of cyber-terrorism and the impact of technology on the espionage field. That includes poking fun at the overindulgence of gadgets in previous Bond films. This time out the secret agent is armed only with a radio transmitter and a gun coded to fire by his hand alone. When Bond questions Q (Ben Whishawhe), a young computer genius, about his limited tech aids, Q replies that they really don’t do the exploding pen thing anymore.

The film opens in Istanbul, where Bond (Daniel Craig) finds a critically wounded agent and a hard-drive missing. Said hard-drive contained the names of NATO agents working undercover in terrorist organizations. Bond dukes it out with a hit man on the top of a moving train, while his partner, Eve (Naomie Harris) takes aim. Eve is concerned she might shoot Bond by mistake but Bond’s boss, M (Judi Dench), orders her to take the shot anyway. She fires and Bond appears to fall to his death. Roll the opening credits.

Back in London, M is in hot water because of the missing hard drive and she is urged to retire as head of Britian’s secret MI6 operations, but she refuses. Next thing you know, someone’s hacked into M’s computer. The hacker triggers an explosion which destroys M’s office, taking out several MI6 agents. The death toll continues to mount when the hacker starts to release the names of the NATO agents from the stolen hard drive. These are dark times for MI6 and M must prove her and her agency’s relevancy in these modern times of computer terrorism.

Bond, who of course survived his fall, returns to London and offers his help. This is not the energized Bond we have come to know. He seems tired of the espionage game, resentful to M for her decision to fire on him and physically not quite up to the task. Nevertheless, M reinstates him, sending him to Shanghai to find the hit man from Istanbul. In Shanghai, we are treated to some beautifully filmed city landscape scenes reminiscent of “Lost in Translation.”

He finds the hit man but he inconveniently falls to his death before he can reveal anything about his boss or the missing hard drive. Bond’s journey takes him to a luxurious casino where he survives komodo dragons and other attempts on his life before hooking up with Severine, (Bérénice Marlohe), a beautiful woman and sex slave who welcomes him on board a yacht. They end up on an abandoned island where they meet Severine’s employer, a former MI6 agent, Raoul Silva, played with creepy, light-hearted abandon by Javier Bardem. Silva, a hacker genius, feels M abandoned him to the enemy and he is hell bent on revenge.

In true Bond style, the agent captures Silva and returns him to Great Britain, but Silva escapes into the London underground with Bond in pursuit. One train wreck later Silva has given him the slip.

Silva shows up at a hearing where M is being questioned about the problems at MI6, but Bond whisks her away taking her to his boyhood home, Skyfall, in Scotland, where no computer can reach them. The film offers a tip of the hat to its predecessors when they make the trip in his Aston Martin DB5, ejector seat and front machine gun mounts still intact.

They hook up with the caretaker for Skyfall, Kincade (Albert Finney) and they booby trap the home in anticipation of Silva’s arrival. Arrive he does and the film lets loose with a wide range of pyrotechnics.

But wait, we’re not done yet. M, wounded in the assault, has been spirited away by Kincade to a nearby chapel. Sadly, Silva spots them and, in a final showdown with M, plots their mutual death.

But where’s Bond? Destroyed in the fire? I don’t think so. He slips out through some underground tunnels and confronts Silva seemingly in the nick of time. It’s a happy ending, except for one thing that I can’t tell you.

“Skyfall” is a roller coaster ride that pauses occasionally to give us a peek at what the characters are feeling. Director Sam Mandes ruled with a firm hand, giving us a storyline easy to follow, despite its many twists and turns.

Craig offers a wonderful performance as an aging and somewhat weary Bond, who nevertheless charms his way through life, as he outmaneuvers and out fights his enemies. Dench, in a continuing role that now spans six Bond films, is terrific as the nonplussed, iron-willed M, who is forced to face her own frailties and the consequences of her decisions.

For the uninitiated, “Skyfall” is a great way to enter the world of Bond, but there’s a lot here that the devoted fans will love as well.

I give “Skyfall” (double 00) seven well-dressed cool men under fire out of 10

Take 2 Revie ARGO

Hot Films Hit The Big Screen This Fall

By Arthur Ryan - Correspondent

As fall approaches, along with the welcomed change in weather the season will also usher in a new batch of films at movie theaters around the world. But for residents of Philadelphia and especially Delaware County, probably the most anticipated film this fall will be "Silver Linings Playbook" which opens this November.

Starring Bradley Cooper and Robert De Niro, the film was shot last year all around Delaware County and when the trailer hit local movie theaters this past summer, audiences were treated to familiar shots of Lansdowne Avenue and the Llanerch diner. In the film, Cooper plays a recently divorced man who moves back home with his "Philadelphia Eagles Obsessed" parents. Something tells me the movie will be sold-out on opening night in movie theaters across the region.

Of course you don't have to wait until November to see what movies this fall will bring. This coming weekend Clint Eastwood, fresh off his bewildering appearance at the RNC, will be seen in "Trouble With The Curve", directed by his longtime producing partner, Robert Lorenz. In fact, it's the first movie Clint hasn't directed himself in since 1993! In "Curve", Clint plays an aging and ailing baseball scout who takes his daughter (played by Amy Adams) along for one last recruiting trip. From the trailer, the film looks like it's going to be either an instant classic, or a clichéd mess.

The week of September 28th brings the first of two animated kids fare that share a spooky theme. “Hotel Transylvania” is a computer animated family friendly horror fest that looks a lot like 1967’s “Mad Monster Party”. Only here, Frankenstein, Dracula and their contemporaries are held up in a “monsters only” resort when Dracula’s teen-aged daughter disrupts the peace by dating an unwelcome human visitor. The film features the voices of Adam Sandler, Kevin James and Selena Gomez and looks to be fun for the whole family.

Then just one week later on October 5th, another animated fright fest aimed at kids will come in the form of “Frankenweenie”. Tim Burton has updated his live action short from 1984 with this puppet-animated full length feature which tells the story of a Frankenstein-like house pet resurrected from the dead, only to reek havoc on his peaceful neighborhood. The film features the voices of SCTV vets Marin Short and Catherine O’Hara, as well as horror legend, Christopher Lee.
Lee Daniels, director of “Precious” debuts his follow up film with the pulp thriller / exploitation film, “The Paperboy’ this October. The movie did well at Cannes earlier this year, and features an all-star cast including Nicole Kidman, Matthew McConaughey, John Cusack, Macy Gray and Zack Efron.
The film centers around a smalltime reporter who returns to his Florida hometown to investigate a death row inmate. The film which highlights a deviant subculture should have no trouble sparking controversy.

Also this October, Actor-director Ben Affleck’s film “Argo“,  which offers up one of those strange-but-true stories that centers around the 1970s Iranian hostage crisis, is getting a lot of early Hollywood buzz. The film stars Affleck as a CIA specialist who concocts a bizarre plan to rescue six American’s held up in the Canadian embassy in Iran, by staging a mock science fiction film shoot in the Iranian desert. The cast in this dark comedy/drama includes Bryan Cranston, John Goodman, Kyle Chandler, and Oscar-winner Alan Arkin.

Another anticipated fall film with a middle east theme is “Zero Dark Thirty”. Kathryn Bigelow, Oscar-winning director of “The Hurt Locker” follows up that best picture winner with a detailed look into the raid that killed 9/11 mastermind, Osama bin Laden. The film is already sparking controversy over the White House and CIA’s apparent cooperation with the filmmakers. As well as the producer’s pledge to not release the film until after the November election. Whatever your political affiliation, the trailer promises to be an intense and action packed film much like the one that made Bigelow the first woman in history to win an Oscar for Best Director.

For presidential politics of an older kind, Steven Speilberg’s long awaited “Lincoln” lands in theaters on November 9th, just days after the election. Spielberg has been in production on this film for several years, first planned to star Liam Neeson in the title role, but in the end Daniel Day-Lewis will appear onscreen as our nation’s 16th President. The film is based in-part on historian, Doris Kerns Goodwin’s book, “Team of Rivals” and focuses on the last few months of Lincoln’s presidency. There’s Oscar buzz all around on this one, and with a stellar cast that also includes Tommy Lee Jones and Sally Field as Mary Todd Lincoln, how can Spielberg miss? But will movie goers be tired of politics by November 9th?



Well, if so they can also look forward to “Skyfall” the latest James Bond film released on the same day as Spielberg’s “Lincoln”. Will it feature a sky-diving Queen Elizabeth II along side Bond star, Daniel Craig? I doubt it, but Craig fans will be lining up for this latest Bond adventure nevertheless. This time James Bond’s loyalty to M is tested as her past comes back in ways she’d like to be forgotten!

December holds some big names and big films too, starting off with the release of Peter Jackson’s “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.” Another first film in what is expected to be a two-part prequel to the three Lord of the Rings films Jackson gave us in the past. Ian McKellen returns along with others in J.R.R. Tolkien’s tale of curious Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins who along with a gang of dwarves searches for stolen treasure among the mountains. All of the elements are in place for another successful fantasy filled pair of epic films by the master filmmaker from New Zealand.

It’s been a while since a musical captured the movie-going public’s fascination, and will a big-screen adaptation of the popular Broadway classic, “Les Miserables” be the next? Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe and Anne Hathaway head up the stellar cast, but can they sing? Well, we already know that Jackman can hold his own on Broadway and in the West End, but the verdict is still out on Crowe and Hathaway, and one only has to think of Lucille Ball’s “Mame (1974)” to see how a star’s lack of talent as a singer can sink an otherwise good film fast. This adaptation of the classic Victor Hugo novel is being directed by Tom Hooper who gave us last year’s “The King’s Speech”, so expectations are high to say the least. Look for it when it opens on December 14th.

The end of this year will be a mix-bag of comedies and violent dramas that will test movie-goers tastes as 2012 closes. Quentin Tarantino’s ultra violent “Django Unchained” starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Jamie Foxx will shake up the history of slavery in America much in the same way Tarantinos’ “Inglorious Bastards” did to World War II Germany, as Foxx plays a slave-turned bounty hunter who sets out to rescue his wife from a southern plantation owner played by DiCaprio.

If audiences are in a mood for more moderate fair after the holidays, they’ll find comfort in two comedies released the same week as “Django.” First up is “The Guilt Trip” starring Barbra Streisand as mother to inventor Seth Rogan as they set out on a unlikely road trip. But Streisand will be battling at the box-office with Bette Midler who teams up with Billy Crystal for “Parental Guidance”. Crystal and Midler play grandparents who battle with daughter Marisa Tomei on how to raise her kids. No doubt, a lot of star power in one weekend for movie-goers to chose from. And just who will win the day? Well, we’ll all have to wait till after the new year to find out!

Take 2 Review - Hope Springs

Ernest Borgnine 1917 - 2012

To say I’m an Ernest Borgnine fan would be the biggest understatement for anyone who knows me. I’ve been a lifelong Borgnine-obsessed fan since I first saw “The Poseidon Adventure (1972)” when I was about 10 years old. I have since watched that film every New Year’s Eve for the last 23 years, at my annual New Years celebration.

It seems I’ve always been aware of Ernest Borgnine. I can remember watching re-runs of “McHale’s Navy” after school as a child. And being half-Italian I discovered his Oscar-winning performance in the title role of 1955’s “Marty”, watching it many times over the years with family and friends. Borgnine beat out James Cagney, James Dean, Frank Sinatra and Spencer Tracy for the Oscar that year. It’s a performance that has stuck with me as I forayed into the acting field myself typically cast in the same kind of roles on local stages as was Borgnine.

Then, one night when I was a teen I remember watching the late-late show and seeing Borgnine play a sadistic depression-era train engineer opposite Lee Marvin in director, Robert Aldrich’s “Emperor of the North Pole (1972)”. It’s a larger-than life performance by Borgnine in a film that has garnered a legion of fans and train aficionados through the years.

As I got more and more into movies throughout my life I started seeing more of Borgnine’s work in such classics as “From Here To Eternity (1953)”, “Bad Day At Black Rock (1955)“, “Dirty Dozen (1967)” and “The Wild Bunch (1969).” All memorable supporting roles for sure, but there were also other lesser known efforts that were just as worthy. In particular the 1956 film “The Catered Affair” also starring Bette Davis. The film recently had a short-lived revival as a musical on Broadway, which tells the story of a Bronx cabbie, originally played by Borgnine who along with his wife, Davis struggle to pay for the wedding of their daughter, played by Debbie Reynolds. Borgnine and Davis make a great pair, and would team up again 15 years later in the laughably bad, “Bunny O’Hare (1971).

“The Poseidon Adventure” wasn’t the only disaster-themed film of Borgnines, he starred opposite Jimmy Stewart in the 1965 airplane crash film, “The Flight of the Phoenix.” Again another film, like “Poseidon”, and “Willard (1971)” which also enjoyed remakes in recent years. In fact another redo of a Borgine favorite of mine, “John Carpenter’s Escape From New York (1981)” will hit movie theaters next year.

Many of Borgnine’s films over the years have achieved cult status. Horror & Sci-Fi films like “The Devil’s Rain (1975)”, “The Black Hole (1979)”, “Deadly Blessing (1981) ” and the aforementioned “Willard.” But there were also dark comedies like “Law and Disorder” from 1974 which costarred Carol O’Connor who along with Borgnine play auxiliary neighborhood cops in New York city with disastrous results.

To try to mention each and every Borgnine film would be futile, he appeared in over 100 films and TV programs. One of my favorite small screen efforts of his was the 1977 mini-series, “Jesus Of Nazareth” in which Borgnine played a centurion. It’s a heartfelt performance and a more subtle one than we are used to from Borgnine in that period. Another fine work of Borgnine's that received very little notice was in director Sean Penn's segment "USA" in the controversial 2002 film "11'09"01." Borgnine plays a widower and shut-in whose life changes from one of darkness to light following the collapse of the twin-towers. It's a medaphoric look at life before and after 9/11 and handled brilliantly by Borgnine.

Ernest Borgnine worked right up until the end, his final appearance was in last year’s “Red” starring Bruce Willis and Morgan Freeman. Along the way when he wasn’t making film classics or cult favorite’s he supplied voice-overs for everything from “The Simpsons” to “SpongeBob SquarePants!” And if you can get a hold of a copy of the 1997 documentary, “Ernest Borgnine On The Bus”, a hysterical look at the movie star driving across country in an RV, it’s an absolute treasure.

In the end Ernest Borgnine proved to be one of Hollywood’s most unlikely stars. His average looks and gap-toothed grin were not what we think of when we think “leading-man.” Yet, as “Marty Piletti”, a Brooklyn butcher he won the hearts of Americans and audiences around the world and began a 60 year career as one of Hollywood’s most reliable performers.

Ernest Borgnine Movies

Andy Griffith 1926 - 2012

Andy Griffith’s passing got me thinking about how little television I watch nowadays. In fact I watch so little TV anymore that I got rid of my extended cable package in favor of the basic offering of only three major broadcast networks and a handful of PBS and local channels. I did this a little over a year ago, and I have to say I don’t feel I’m missing all that much.

The 24 hour “news” channels became so loud and obnoxious with nothing but shouting ideologues hurling lies and misrepresentations at each other, that I, like so many have turned to the web and the handful of local newspapers left to get the news.

The variety of sitcoms and TV dramas that could reasonably pass the time a few nights a week has dwindled to such a precious few that it hardly justifies paying out all that money for an expensive cable TV subscription.

Nowadays we’re bombarded with useless “reality” programs that flood the airwaves with no intellectual or educational value at all. My guess is that the only reason they have become so popular is the cornucopia of “real” persons who make up the casts whose only talents are stripping down and behaving badly in front of millions. Whenever I come across someone behaving ignorant or rudely in public anymore, I can’t help but feel that they are influenced by watching others act so selfishly on TV.

So, when the news of Andy Griffith’s death came I found myself longing for that time when I huddled around a TV with my family and watched the old TV shows of my youth. Shows like “The Andy Griffith Show” which besides being riotously funny could be wholesome and genuine and so appropriate for the entire family. I don’t think we could ever find room for a show like that on modern TV anymore.

In 1979 Griffith tried for a television comeback with the short-lived Sci-Fi series, “Salvage 1” that captured my 13 year-old imagination and made me believe that I could build a spaceship in my backyard just as he did on the show. But, this would not be his triumphant return to a weekly TV series, it would only last 19 episodes, and we would have to wait till “Matlock” for Griffith to find success again on the small screen.

Ironically Mr. Griffith’s passing also reminded me of his great performance in the 1957 film, “A Face In The Crowd”, where as the character Lonesome Rhodes, he eerily foreshadows the likes of Glenn Beck and other modern day charlatans of our airwaves. It’s a mesmerizing performance and an acting lesson that will be studied for generations to come.

Those who create most of what we watch on TV these days haven’t an ounce of the grace that could be found in a man like Andy Griffith. He made a hit out of a TV show that during the turbulent changing times of the 1960s, spoke to a simpler more humble way of life that those of us watching even in reruns could somehow identify with. What Andy Griffith will most be remembered for is the eight seasons of great television he created that offered a sense of family and community in a fictional but so very familiar town called, Mayberry!

Take 2 Review: Seeking A Friend For The End Of The World

Take 2 Review: Prometheus

'Prometheus' is good on style, but muddled

By Art Ryan
NEWS Movie Critic


The first movie I ever rented on videocassette was the 1974 cult Sci-fi comedy, “Dark Star.” It was directed by John Carpenter who also co-wrote the script with the film’s star, Dan O’Bannon.  The film was a send up of the Stanley Kubrick classic, “2001: A Space Odyssey” complete with a talking bomb taking the place of  the HAL 9000 computer and a hilarious “beach- ball-with-claws” alien thrown in for good measure.

In 1979, O’Bannon’s ridiculous beach ball alien became the inspiration for a much more frightening movie monster in O’Bannon’s screenplay that year for “Alien”, starring Sigourney Weaver. “Alien” was directed by then newcomer, Ridley Scott who with only one previous film under his belt, had a lot to prove. Following blockbusters like “Star Wars” and “Close Encounters…”, the task was daunting, but Scott delivered a masterful film that blended both science fiction and horror in a way that hadn’t been seen before.

For me what made the original “Alien” film so appealing was the claustrophobic atmosphere that Scott and his fellow artist created that allowed us the audience to feel trapped onboard along side the film’s stars.
Let’s face it the original “Alien‘s” plotline was a simple survival story that was executed to mere perfection.

Although released to mixed critical reviews, the original “Alien” was a hit and spurned four sequels and countless imitations. Director Scott would go on to direct several films over the years including 1982’s “Blade Runner”, another milestone in the science fiction film genre.

So now over thirty years later Ridley Scott has teamed up with two of “Alien’s” original producers to bring us “Prometheus”, a prequel of sorts which after getting off to a promising start, ends up asking more questions then necessary about the original film’s origins.

Following an intriguing opening sequence showing a human-like alien life- form withering away off the coast of Scotland in the distant past, “Prometheus” then jumps to the year 2089 where archeologist discover identical star-maps drawn on the walls of caves of ancient civilizations. These maps will eventually lead a scientific vessel called Prometheus to a far away moon where the ship’s crew search for possible “engineers” of life on earth.

Weighty ideas to be sure, although not new to science fiction. Carl Sagan’s “Contact” covered similar territory brilliantly, minus the horror angle. “Prometheus” fairs well for about an hour until too many subplots and too many implausible twists and turns make a comprehensible outcome all but impossible.

What “Prometheus” does very well is deliver on look and style. Although the H.R. Giger drawings that inspired the original Alien look are far less prevalent here, the other-worldly look to the alien moon in “Prometheus” is nothing less than spectacular. The film’s visual style will hold your attention throughout despite the eventual rambling of its storyline.

By far the most interesting character that writers Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof have come up with for “Prometheus“, is an android named David. David, played with great charm and mystery by Michael Fassbender spends two years alone while journeying to the alien moon as his fellow crewmembers are in hibernation. He passes the time by studying Peter O’Toole’s performance in the film “Lawrence of Arabia”, and even colors and combs his hair in an attempt to appear more like Lawrence and in turn, more human. None of the other characters here are as well drawn as David or even come close to the stellar cast of characters made famous in the original film. This made me wonder what “Alien” creator Dan O’Bannon could have contributed this time around. Sadly, O’Bannon passed away in 2009 following a battle with Crohn’s disease.

But even Fassbender’s fun performance can’t save the muddled mess of the last 40 minutes. Even David starts doing things that don’t make sense for his character, and none of it gets explained. And with all due respect to director Scott, it’s a bit disingenuous after 30 years to make us sit through a long awaited prequel only to find out that we have to wait until the prequel’s sequel to get answers to questions the prequel should have answered in the first place.

Don’t get me wrong, “Prometheus” is worth the cost of admission, there are some genuine scares and a lot of eye popping visuals to keep it moving despite the muddled narrative. But once again as in most special effects driven movies these days, “Prometheus” unnecessarily has to throw every computer generated gimmick in at the end in hopes of making up for what it’s lacking in plotline.

After seeing “Prometheus” I couldn’t help but think of the now famous scene from the original “Alien’ where the first murder committed by the title character is shown mostly through the reaction of the on board cat, Jones. It was a daring move for a young director back in 1979, who trusted his instincts as well as his audience. I wish that young director was on hand this time around to bring a bit more originality coupled with simplicity that could have made this Alien outing as thrilling as it’s predecessor.

'Prometheus' dazzles but doesn't delight

By David Bjorkgren
NEWS Managing editor

   It’s a good thing the crew of the Prometheus doesn’t work for NASA.  This group of future space travelers would have easily washed out of the astronaut program.

   Not only do they not work well as a team, they don’t even follow the basic safety protocols that go with the dangers of space travel.  They land on an unknown world and sloppily expose themselves to all kinds of environmental and biological hazards. Guys this stupid deserve to be eaten by aliens.

   And that was just one of the implausible things I found in “Prometheus,” the latest offering in the 33-year “Alien” franchise.

   The film is striking visually. There are harsh alien worlds, cavernous spaceships, exotic-looking humanoids, a whole menagerie of morphing aliens ready to devour you in several disturbing ways  and some nice-looking future hardware (the mapping probes are pretty cool).  Credit has to go to director Ridley Scott, who directed the original “Alien,” along with the film “Bladerunner.”

   Kudos also to the filmmakers for examining two of humanities most profound questions, “Who made us?” and “Where do we come from?”  Exploring those ideas, coupled with all the eye candy, makes for a pretty interesting first hour or so.  If they had stuck with that, thrown in a little more eerie tension and given us a scary alien assault every once in a while, the film would have earned its rightful place in the “Alien” saga.

   The film revolves around an “ancient astronaut” moment when archaeologists discover a cave painting of a large humanoid pointing to a group of stars. This star map is discovered at several ancient sites and could point to the origin of humanity. The idea sparks the curiosity of Peter Weyland, founder of the Weyland Corporation. He funds a mission to follow the star map and seek out these aliens, now dubbed the “Engineers.”  It is the year 2093 and the science vessel “Prometheus” has arrived at a distant moon  from Earth to find some “Engineers.”

   On board are the archaeologist couple, Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapaci) and Charlie Holloway, (Logan Marshall-Green) who discovered the star maps. The crew finds a structure on the planet and start exploring. They find an Engineer’s corpse and discover the Engineer DNA perfectly matches human DNA. Hmm.

   Of course, they go a little too far in their explorations and all kinds of nasty things, from tinny- tiny creatures in black goo, to a couple of snakes emerge, wreaking all kinds of unimaginable mayhem on the crew. How do these nasty things fit in with the Engineers? And what exactly is up with the Prometheus’ on-board android, David, (Michael Fassbender) who seems polite enough but does some fairly sinister things?  And maybe most importantly, where does Elizabeth Shaw get all of her stamina moments after performing major surgery on herself?

   It’s a couple of hours later, audience time, and we’re still not sure.
 
   Like so many films these days, the filmmakers overreached, then ran out of steam, money, or time.  There are multiple story teasers that take the film-goer down too many unanswered paths. Yea, I know, it’s a setup for the sequel, but confused audiences mean frustrated audiences, which can mean no audience.

   Shortcuts suddenly emerge that had me scratching my head, saying to myself, “now how did they jump to that conclusion so easily?”It’s as if someone said at one point, “OK, let’s wrap it up.”

   The film’s screenplay was penned by Jon Spaihts and  Damon Lindelof, executive producer of the TV series, “Lost,”  which would explain the confusing multiple storylines.

   Sadly, the original screenwriter for “Alien,” Dan O’Bannon, died in 2009. He did not envision the 1979  “Alien” as an epic film. It was a horror movie in space, O’Bannon’s scary follow up to the quirky space comedy “Dark Star.” It worked because the storyline was simple, using the same formula Steven Spielberg used in “Jaws”: Don’t show them the shark until you absolutely have to.”
The anticipation of a gross-out alien attack made “Alien” fun and scary. Throw in a great cast and some interesting characters (Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley holds up well as the never-say-die heroine), give us good sci-fi window dressing along with a sinister android and you’ve got yourself a movie.

   Aside from the sinister android and a lot of sci-fi, “Prometheus” doesn’t have too much in the way of interesting characters.  There’s plenty of gross-out alien scenes, but not enough scary foreshadowing to take you there.

   “Prometheus” tries to bring an epic feel to the “Alien” universe. It gets part of the way there. But audiences would have been better served if it had either gone all the way, or gone back to its simpler horror film roots.

   I give “Prometheus” seven-and-a-half slimy morphing aliens out of 10.

‘Dark Shadows’ lacks the bite of old soap opera

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

By DAVID BJORKGREN
Managing Editor

Apparently, you can go home again, but don’t expect things to be the way they were.

That’s the lesson learned by Barnabas Collins, the central character in the Tim Burton, Johnny Depp film version of the popular 1960s supernatural gothic soap opera, “Dark Shadows.”

Sadly, it is also the lesson learned by fans of the original series.

Depp plays the role of the reluctant and infinitely well-mannered 18th century vampire, Barnabas Collins. Depp doesn’t disappoint, diving into the role with abandon, bringing energy and good intentions to this latest version of the “Dark Shadows” tale. Depp, who is also listed as one of the film’s producers, apparently was a big fan of the original series and was keenly interested in playing the role of Barnabas. His acting carries most of the film.

Both Depp and Burton seem to be interested in creating a soap opera feel to the film, part homage to the original series, part tongue in cheek. They almost pull it off.

The early part of the film, artistically shot with great gothic atmosphere, shows us how young Barnabas Collins and his parents came from England in 1750 and built up a successful fishing industry in a coastal Maine town that comes to be known as Collinsport. The family uses its wealth to build Collinwood Manor, a sprawling estate home that overlooks the town. Now a young man, Barnabas falls in love with Josette DuPres (Bella Heathcote), simultaneously breaking the heart of the resident witch, Angelique Bouchard (Eva Green), who plays it in this version more like a seductress than a creature of evil. In her rage, Angelique charms Josette into jumping to her death, turns Barnabas into a vampire and buries him alive, where he remains entombed until 1972, when workers dig him up.

At this point, not too many laughs, but no violent blood spurting scenes, either. The audience is now treated to both, as Barnabas reluctantly quenches his thirst for blood while acclimating to a 1970s world. He joins up with his dysfunctional descendants, still living at a much-deteriorated Collinwood Manor, impoverished and beaten down. Barnabas is determined to restore the family’s reputation and wealth in the town, even as he discovers that it is his old nemesis, Angelique, still alive 200 years later that led to the family’s downfall.

The film at first finds its humor naturally, as the archaic Barnabas tries to cope with his relatives and this strange world of the future. At times, Burton and Depp let those of us who experienced the 1970s in on the joke as we look back at that era through Barnabas’ eyes.

But Depp and Burton trip over their own feet by including superficial comedy bits in the storyline, which derails the soap opera plot. The characters and the situations become muddled. The end result is that some of the film’s more interesting relationships and characters lose their focus while we’re treated to a more hackneyed rivalry between Barnabas and Angelique. The film, of course, features an obligatory battle scene near its end with explosions and other climatic special effects.

I never watched the original “Dark Shadows” series when it aired, but I’ve known many of its fans. I had hoped this film would introduce me to the quirky world of that cult series. I’m guessing the filmmakers had the same idea. They almost made it. Too bad they got lost along the way. I give “Dark Shadows” six-and-a-half cursed vampires out of 10.



By ART RYAN
CORRESPONDENT


When I was a kid growing up in the mid-to-late 1970s, I used to run home after school to see reruns of the now classic cult soap opera, “Dark Shadows” which originally aired from 1966 to 1971 on ABC.

I had been a big fan of the Universal monster movies of the 1930s, especially Bela Lugosi’s Dracula, so being able to watch a TV show about a vampire everyday after school was a real treat. Nowadays, the cult hit “Dark Shadows” is often looked back upon as a campy afternoon melodrama with a gothic storyline that appealed only to a fringe crowd of vampire fans. But, I have often found that those who miscategorize the original TV show that way, were either never fans to begin with or hadn’t actually seen a single episode.

Sure, the production values were at times less than spectacular, and the actors sometimes forgot their lines, but they played their roles with conviction and in return created a spooky and at times terrifying atmosphere. Especially to an 11-year-old at the time like myself.

So you can imagine my excitement over a year ago when word got out that Johnny Depp and director, Tim Burton were teaming up again to produce a big screen version of the classic soap opera. The duo had worked together many times before and produced a collection of films good and bad, including the masterful “Ed Wood” (1994) and the popular fantasy “Edward Scissorhands” (1990). And following their collaboration on “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street” (2007), which artfully blended an homage to the Hammer Horror films of the 1960s with the classic Steven Sondheim musical, my expectations were very high.

But when a trailer was released a few months back it was disappointingly clear that this new “Dark Shadows” film was not to be the gothic horror story on which it was based, but a campy comedy in the style of “The Brady Bunch Movie” (1995).

So I was pleasantly surprised this past weekend as I began to watch the new “Dark Shadows” movie when at first it seemed my original impressions based on the trailers were wrong, and this was not to be an all out comedy. But sadly, by the film’s end my first impressions would prove true.

“Dark Shadows” gets off to a great start as a stylish prologue introduces us to a young Barnabas Collins sailing from Liverpool, England in the mid-18th Century to the port of Maine in the new world where he and his family build a thriving seafood business. As Barnabas becomes a man (portrayed by Depp), he is outdone by a conniving love-spurned witch named Angelique (Eva Green), who kills his beloved Josette (Bella Heathcote) and curses Barnabas turning him into a vampire. She then locks Barnabas away in a tomb for almost 200 years until he emerges again in the year 1972. Regrettably, this engaging opening sequence builds expectations that the film never quite delivers.

When Barnabas is unearthed and set free in the 20th century, the “fish-out-of-water” gags start to appear, playing on the obvious joke of an eighteenth century man adjusting to 1972 American culture. At first it all blends nicely with the weirdness of Barnabas’ 20th Century descendents now occupying the Collins mansion in Maine and still running the struggling family seafood business. Michelle Pfeiffer heads up the supporting cast as Collins family matriarch, Elizabeth Stoddard Collins. Pfeiffer tries her best to recreate the role made famous by Joan Bennett in the original soap opera, but the movie belongs to Depp’s quirky performance as the reluctant vampire.

Depp’s Barnabas is more obvious as a vampire than the late Jonathan Frid’s original portrayal. Depp, as he appeared in “Sweeney Todd,” and “Alice in Wonderland” (2010) dawns a porcelain white complexion with sullen eyes and speaks with a faux British accent. The only resemblance to Frid’s Barnabas is the trademark black razor-like bangs across his forehead. Frid and a handful of his former cast mates appear in an all too brief cameo during a party scene mid-way through the film.

Some of the humor seems appropriate at times and doesn’t distract from the gothic aspects at first, but as the film progresses the jokes increase and any real sense of horror or terror disappears. Green’s Angelique is supposed to be a threat and root of all evil for Barnabas and the Collins family, but following a ridiculous, over-the-top acrobatic love making scene between Barnabas and the witch, it’s hard to take any of it serious.

There were a few touches that made the film at times enjoyable for fans of the classic series. Danny Elfman’s score uses similar techniques reminiscent of Bob Cobert’s original spooky music for the soap opera. The film’s art direction and costume departments also try to stay true to the original look of the series. But director Burton made the mistake of trying to incorporate too many of the secondary characters from the original series into his movie. The original series creator, Dan Curtis had five days a week over six years to tell his story, but in this two-hour film characters come and go with very little explanation.

I don’t doubt that such talented filmmakers as Depp and Burton had nothing but the best intentions in wanting to update a 45-year-old soap opera that by their own admission inspired them as well. But as often seems the case these days in Hollywood, even the best intentions can give way to an excess that undermines any original inspiration. Such is the case with this version of “Dark Shadows” that perhaps tries a little too hard to please.

But in the end for this critic and fan of the original source material, it’s the filmmakers’ penchant for the absurd and often sophomoric humor that drained all the life out of this vampire movie’s bite.

Movie Review Dark Shadows

Edgier characters still leave Snow White retelling flat

By David Bjorkgren 

Once upon a time there was the story of Snow White.  One day, a film production company, recognizing the marketing and profit margin potential of the popular Brothers Grimm  tale, took it upon themselves to rewrite the story with some hip dialogue and gags, populating  it with well-known faces like Julia Roberts, Nathan Lane and Armie Hammer.  They threw in some obligatory CGI and foisted it upon the unsuspecting children and parents that make up the core audience of “Mirror, Mirror.”

It will no doubt be a happy ending for the filmmakers as the movie profitably works its way from big screen to computer screen.  That happy ending may be more elusive for the audience, however, which will suffer through some badly written dialogue and an often flat retelling of the story.

Those looking for the innocent charm of the Disney “Snow White” will be disappointed.  Those wanting their Snow White and dwarfs to have more of an edge will definitely be appeased. The film drips with a cynicism that by the end of the movie infects even the innocent Snow White.In this version of the classic tale, the king vanishes mysteriously in the woods and the queen (Julia Roberts) takes over, bleeding the kingdom dry as she maintains her opulent life style.  Jealous of Snow White’s (Lily Collins)  beauty, she keeps her 18-year-old daughter  hidden in the palace. But after she sneaks out one night, Snow White comes across a prince (Armie Hammer) visiting the kingdom. The Queen, seeing the attention the prince gives Snow White, banishes the girl to the forest, where she meets up with a group of  (do I have to tell you?) dwarfs.  But these are not cuddly dwarfs. These guys have issues and attitude. 

They’ve set up shop stealing from the gentry that travel through the forest and they’re  bitter because the townspeople failed to act when the Queen had them banished for their “ugliness.”  Naturally, Snow White’s beauty and gentle ways start to have an impact on the group of highwaymen, who, in turn, offer Snow White a kind of ninja warrior training so she can face and defeat the evil Queen, reclaiming her birthright and returning the kingdom to its former glory days.

Julia Roberts does OK camping it up as the evil Queen but it’s a one-note performance. We may be witnessing a fairy tale world here but I’d still like my characters to have a little depth.  Evil on screen should be fun, not boring, but I found my mind wandering away throughout the film.

Not that I’m blaming the performers exclusively. They had very little to work with from a script that could use a bit of magic itself.  The quirkiest and most interesting  scenes (aside from the visual distractions of the Queen’s  magical world) revolve around the seven dwarves, whose unique personalities and interactions with Snow White make for some fun distractions.

But it’s not enough to save the film from its cynical banality and forced humor.  The movie’s producer, Bernie Goldman,  says he’s confident the film will resonate with audiences of all ages and would like to see it take its place beside other big screen adaptations of classic tales.

“Hopefully, this is a movie that will play for years as a perennial family favorite and redefine the story of Snow White.” Goldman says in a press release on the film.

Maybe. But I’ll stick with Disney’s “Snow White,” thank  you very much.   I give “Mirror, Mirror”  three dwarves out of seven.

Mirror, Mirror lacks charm and originality

By Arthur C. Ryan

Every once in a while I see a movie that leaves me perplexed afterwards as to what kind of review I will write. Such is the case with this past weekend’s release of “Mirror, Mirror,” starring Julia Roberts. A completely harmless film, that I’m sure will entertain most young and old kids alike. But for me, “Mirror, Mirror” was 95 minutes of routine movie making void of any real charm and only a few moments of originality.

“Mirror, Mirror” begins with an appealing computer animated sequence showing a beloved King’s disappearance, as his ruthless wife seizes control of the kingdom and keeps her beautiful 18-year-old stepdaughter, Snow White, hidden away in the palace. But as we all know from previous tellings, when the princess attracts the attention of a charming prince, the jealous Queen forces Snow to a nearby forest. Found by a band of rebellious but kindhearted dwarfs, Snow White becomes a brave young lady determined to save her country from the Queen.

“Mirror, Mirror’s” new twist on the fabled tale of old, is to tell the Snow White story from the perspective of the Evil Queen. And in this live-action version, the evil queen is played by Julia Roberts whose on-again-off-again faux British accent does nothing to disguise the fact that we are watching…Julia Roberts. Roberts does her best delivering dozens of witty asides that often seem misplaced in a kids film.

Snow White is portrayed here by Lily Collins along with Armie Hammer as her charming Prince. The duo first meet after Hammer’s Prince Alcott is robbed by a group of stilt-walking dwarfs who leave him hanging upside down in the forest. White, having run away from the Evil Queen, is often saving her prince from harms way in this post-feminist era’s retelling of the classic fairy tale.

Nathan Lane is on hand as the Queen’s bumbling servant, offering the sarcastic and cynical observations we’ve come to expect from him in these sorts of roles. But by far the most appealing and original aspect of this Snow White go around, are the seven dwarfs. Dopey, Sleepy, Bashful and the rest are nowhere to be seen in this version, but a new band of short stature men are on hand in the form of seven thieves with a soft spot for Snow White’s cooking. The relationship between the young princess and the dwarfs is by far the most compelling aspect to “Mirror, Mirror.” Each dwarf is a well drawn character with a unique take on his own relationship with Snow.

The humor and pathos that surround the dwarfs and Snow are reminiscent of the relationship between Princess Buttercup and the colorful cast of characters in 1987’s “The Princess Bride,” a film “Mirror, Mirror” tries to emulate but fails to in its attempt. What “Princess Bride” had in charm, “Mirror, Mirror” lacks most. And the magic that so envelopes the now classic Rob Reiner film, is nowhere to be found in this all too modern Julia Roberts vehicle. All of the CGI wizardry we’ve come to expect from modern big screen fairy tales coupled with a much too cynical take on the genre, can’t compare with the wholesome charm and brilliantly witty script that made “Princess Bride” the modern classic it’s become.

 I was perfectly willing by the film’s end to accept this take on Snow White as just another harmless Hollywood offering that at best passes the time pleasantly. But then just before the credits began to role, Snow White utters a line so out-of-character and so vindictive for even the most jaded of modern fairy tales, that it left me cold with a feeling of having been cheated.

“Mirror, Mirror” is a product of its time. More cynical and at times even violent, in an attempt to appeal to a generation of movie-goers thought to be too hip to go for an old fashioned fairy tale.

But ironically what the producers of this film failed to achieve is what the character of the Queen’s Mirror warns repeatedly throughout, that there is a cost to using magic, “a dangerous cost.” Well, the producers of “Mirror, Mirror” should have ignored that risky warning and tried to find a little magic to help this all too pat film along.