Review: "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit"

There is much I can (and have already) said about America's post 9/11 attitude towards global politics. Despite term limits and all, Dick Cheney's empirical plan for perpetual war appears to still be in effect, and worst of all, wholeheartedly believed in and endorsed by a populace frightened over another attack. Through all of the preemptive bravado and violent rhetoric (and bombs), there was a sliver of time when fighting felt, gasp, like the right thing to do.

In Hollywood's latest prequel/continuation/reboot/re imagining, this gung ho spirit is infectiously presented and executed.

Hit & Miss Review: "Pacific Rim" and "R.I.P.D."

This past month has seen some high profile movies do very poorly at the box office. Lack of interest from the audience, poor marketing and horrible word of mouth aside, I feel the urge to discuss two of them - one that deserved to be shunned and one that didn't. If either or both are still playing at a theater near you, hopefully my quick words will sway you in the right direction:

Review: "The Purge"

One night of unrestrained, perfectly legal violence. For this future version of America, this Purge is a Holiday in the vein of the 4th of July. We faced the collapse of our country, and our leaders "solved" it all - by allowing us to bludgeon each other during a 12 hour period once a year. Low unemployment, low crime, no government debt. Clearly, this works.

The Purge is not about how this night came to be, who implemented it or how it should be taken down, but instead what could potentially happen during it. A well off white family attempts to go through the night, guarded with what has been billed as a tight security system, in peace. Unfortunately, the young son lets a poor black man, who is being chased by psychopathic hunters, in. The hunters threaten the family, causing them to confront the morality of the nights events directly.

Review: "Now You See Me"

The belief in magic is, I imagine, looked down upon by many. If you're a child, the tricks performed by illusionists are puzzling, intriguing and entertaining. To be completely fooled as a kid is ok. Once you reach a certain age, it's assumed that you've matured a bit. You understand the truth about Santa, accept that Pro Wrestling is a show, and hopefully, appreciate magic on the showmanship level only.

In Now You See Me, a magician actually points out the foolishness of charging him with a particular crime. To do so would be admitting that magic is "real". Another character accepts that what she sees are just tricks, but enjoys the feeling she gets from them. She speaks of having a little faith in the unbelievable, and being a more tolerable person because of it. A professional trickster that calls you stupid for thinking what he does is real and an adult woman who just goes along with the tricks despite knowing that they're just tricks. What was it that Obi Wan Kenobi said about fools?

Review: "After Earth"

Green Lantern left such a sour taste in my mouth. Ever since reading the comic issue where Hal Jordan goes nuts and destroys the Corps, I've wanted to see a live action version of the superhero. Based on the trailers, I was expecting something along the lines of The Last Starfighter. Instead, I got a studio controlled product of mediocrity. So sad.

Many things were wrong, but the one that stands out is the reason for Hal's fear. It vaguely has to do with his father's death, but after a very quick flashback, this is never brought up again. All he says is "I'm afraid." Then suddenly, he's no longer afraid. Why? Because the script said so.

Why couldn't Hollywood deliver a heroes journey where fear is confronted and lessons are learned? It's so simple, even M. Night Shyamalan could do it. And he did. Rather well, I think.

Review: "Fast & Furious 6"

Over on the official MovieBoozer Facebook page, a question was posed to readers: When does a film cross the line from stupid-fun to just plain stupid? This being the season for big and loud Hollywood blockbusters, it's a perfect time to provide an answer. So many sequels, so much potential money to be made, so much money to burn - and so many fine examples.

What is a "plain stupid" movie? There are many components that are considered; plot, logic, character behavior, etc. But, for me, none of those necessarily equal "plain stupid" by themselves or even together. Movies like The Room and Birdemic may be incompetent technically, and laughter usually ensues from this, but they remain fun to watch. Why? Aside from laughing at the incorrect skills and unusual moments of the film, there is sometimes a genuine effort going on that shines through the screen. Sure, the cast and crew were over their heads, but they at least tried. That's admirable.

"Plain stupid", for me, is when there is no joy or redeemable quality to be had from a film. No effort to attempt to elevate the material from stupid to fun, just a paycheck and a job to do.

The Fast and the Furious franchise didn't start on the right side of the line, but it eventually crossed over.

Review: "The Hangover Part III"

Have you ever just given up on a movie? I know you have. One time, I popped a DVD of Anchorman into my player for family night, and turned it off about 20 minutes in. It was a chore to watch what we watched. Now, that particular movie aged well, as I gave it a second shot some years later and loved it. Typically, however, once I've made the decision to turn off or walk out, that's it. The movie has lost me forever.

I can stick through just about anything. Heck, Orson Welles' The Trial - unwatchable for some of my friends - is a personal favorite of mine. But it was only a few months ago that I first walked out of a theater midway through a screening, completely bored. It was Taken 2. What could've been a fun Liam Neeson-sploitation flick was just a joyless affair, churned out with the sole purpose of making money based on the success of the previous film. I went to the bathroom after the first half hour, and never returned.

It's sad, because even money hungry sequels are capable of delivering something entertaining. Take Ghostbusters 2: not needed whatsoever, but did a fine job of continuing the story and gave audiences something to come back for. The cast/crew weren't phoning it in and the filmmaker wasn't filled with contempt for his fans. It was a fun movie that I would pay to see, even now.

I wouldn't even scoff at a discounted DVD of The Hangover Part III. It really isn't worth any attention whatsoever.

Review: "Star Trek Into Darkness"

I like to think that, when compared to other critics, I'm pretty easy to please. Silly plot holes, odd dialogue, unfinished effects, etc. can be forgiven, as long as I leave the theater thinking and excited. I'm not asking for much; treat me like a mature human being, and I'll treat your movie with respect. A simple request that can be easily met, I believe.

Sometimes one moment - just one - can nearly ruin an experience for me. The movie as a whole might be superb, but this one sequence can stick in my mind and tarnish the good feeling I was having. It's like having a pounding headache with no pain reliever in sight. It. Just. Hurts.

Can such a headache be excused in time?

Review: "The Great Gatsby"

There are many great scenes in Django Unchained, but one in particular stands out for me. After ordering his dogs to tear apart a runaway slave, Calvin Candie stares up at Django, who is on his horse. The two men look into each others eyes, all the while a man is being viciously killed out of frame. They discuss Django’s friend Schultz for a moment, then head on their way to the plantation.

That moment was a cinematic equivalent of a two man poker game. For not even a minute, we learn more about the danger our protagonists face, just how dastardly our antagonist is and more importantly the presence of a power struggle, all without saying much. I love it when what’s unsaid speaks louder than what’s being said.

Imagine that sequence with voice over narration, perhaps from an older Django; does it make you angry?

@NOFS Review: "Upstream Color"

It feels a little awkward to compare a one of a kind film to anything else. Somehow, by putting it side by side with a similar movie - maybe one that is highly regarded - you are putting your knowledge of cinema and ability to express that knowledge on the line. An argument can be made about almost anything, but can you be convincing? Basically, you’ll either be thought of in a scholarly manner, or looked at as a weirdo from Room 237.

With that, I will now make the following case: Upstream Color is the successor to Inland Empire.

Review: "Iron Man 3"

The idea of an extraterrestrial life visiting Earth and making contact with humans has been expressed many times over. I remember spending a lot of energy on the subject, to the point where it caused me anxiety. It got so bad, my parents decided NOT to take me to see Independence Day, until I calmed down. Of course, I’m a bit more collected now, but I still wonder; how would we respond to the knowledge of intelligent life beyond our planet?

In Independence Day, we fought against an attack. In District 9, we impoverished an entire species. And in Marvel’s The Avengers, we assembled our best to protect us and send a warning. The options appear to be either A) Fight them or B) Control them, at least in the examples provided. In the case of Avengers, we get a series (the Marvel Cinematic Universe) that shows our world prior to, during and now after alien life has been exposed to all. How does the world move on in the follow up film Iron Man 3?

Better than you’d expect, actually.

Review: "Room 237"

On my DVD shelf sit two movies that I consider among the best I’ve ever seen: Pi and JFK. Both movies deal with lead characters obsessed with their current problems and slowly (but surely) becoming paranoid, seeing conspiracy in everything. Both are less about “the truth” or “the answer” and more about how one can lose oneself in the pursuit of their obsessions. Growing up with OCD, I certainly understand.

Room 237 joins in on the action, except it switches dramatized people and fictional characters for real ones - making what is shown more interesting and (believe it or not) more frustrating to watch. Not really a documentary and not really a “movie”, Room 237 is more like an essay in a style similar to F for Fake. Made up of a series of interviews from film buffs and scholars, we get a frame by frame deconstruction of the messages and meanings behind Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining.

He Didn't Care for "Superman Returns"

Just the other day, Roger Ebert announced the formation of Ebert Digital, a new venture “devoted to the creation of new digital products that build on the lifelong work of the world’s preeminent film critic.” This was planned to include a newly formatted RogerEbert.com, where the man himself would serve as editor, nurturing a handpicked slew of reviewers.

Since that announcement, the contact information for this project has been displayed in a tab on my browser. It’s there, waiting for me to use it.

I’m in a constant state of hesitation; would I get a response? If so, from who? And what will they say? I’d like to think that my writing is good enough... A couple of deep breaths are needed here. It’s just an email. Sure, it’s a big deal, asking to take part in a website run by the king of your craft, but it’s not the end of the world if nothing comes of it.

After all, this is the guy that didn’t like Superman Returns.

No Classified Ads for Critics

What outlet do you write for?

And you work at...?

I've been asked the above questions often when meeting with other NOLA area reviewers. Of course, I'm proud to plug MovieBoozer and my own blog, but when they drop the names of their home outlets, I admit a little jealousy on my part.

Why? Because they are local outlets.

With a family deeply rooted in the area, and an industry that I want to help flourish, working at a local publication would fill me with great pride. Now, don't misunderstand me - I love MovieBoozer and will be contributing for them well into the future (such an awesome format and concept), but I really want to make what I do into a career that I can live off of without having to move out of state.

Unfortunately, classified ads for film critics are hard to find. Previously, on this blog, I wrote two pieces that helped me in advancing towards my goal a bit. So, maybe third time's a charm?

Here are some ideas for how my movie blogging can be incorporated into the content of two local outlets:

Off Beat Magazine

This publication is mostly known for providing news and reviews about the music industry, from Louisiana and beyond. They also cover culture, which the booming Hollywood South is part of. However, there is zip to none film coverage to be found on their site.

I'd like to help change that.

I understand that print space might be limited, so how about a blog to kick things off? OffBeat.com is a pretty user friendly domain that's easy to navigate and read. They also use social networking pretty well, so I get that writing for the digital audience is something they're cool with.

Here's what I propose:

• We set up a film blog on the site, perhaps called Off Beat Film, along with a facebook page and twitter account. 
• The blog will cover reviews of independent/obscure (or "off beat") movies, as well as the ones opening theatrically in the area. It can also feature editorial pieces on the NOLA moviegoing scene, as well as special screening recaps (Timecode:NOLA and NOFS events, or backyard/community showings).
• If interested, a youtube account can be created, where video conversations on movies would be hosted. This would provide more content and engage the audience beyond the webpage, should they choose to participate.
• Live tweet-a-thons (where I watch a movie or awards show, and use a hashtag to link all of the tweets together) can be posted on the blog, using Storify.

WWNO.org

Last year, the New Orleans Reporter initiative - a digital news coalition between WWNO, NOLAvie and The Lens - was announced. It has since morphed from a website to a content partnership. Changes are still being implemented, but what about film criticism?

WWNO is the only one of the three that I know has hosted reviews. While written very well, they were not done by NOLA critics, and some were about movies not coming to the area. Even an interview with Quvenzhané Wallis was not conducted by an area writer.

Here's what I propose:

• Reviews of movies coming to the local area, by a local critic. Specialty pieces (interviews, event recaps) can also be provided.
• WWNO.org is chock full of excellent audio podcasts. Currently, I take part in a podcast called #TeamNOLAFilm, where I and other industry members discuss the current Hollywood South happenings. It's mostly been an independent production, but we'd be more than happy to have an official home for the show, and be able to reach more listeners. 

More than likely, I'll be moving closer to the city soon. Also soon will be the official launch of the New Orleans Film Critics Association. Could I soon be sitting in a press screening as an official local critic?