Premonition

You know, I had this feeling before I viewed premonition. I don’t know what to call it…I guess you could say it was an anticipation of an event without conscious reason…only I had conscious reasoning. It was not hard to have a premonition that Premonition was going to be bad, but it was worse than I had feared. If this review were part of the movie, here is where the over-dramatic music would be cued.

We all know the story: Sandra Bullock wakes a day after her husband has died to find he’s still alive, but then wakes up the next day to find he has died. She continues to live this tragic week out of order. Hey, I got a quick fix for ya…don’t go to sleep! End of movie, roll credits. Now I know that some of my favorite movies could have quick fixes, but they’re easier to find in bad movies such as this. So many plot-disputing questions arise such as- if she has already lived the days leading up to Wednesday, the day of her husbands death and where the film begins, than how come she doesn’t remember those days when she relives them? And how come she continues to do things that she knows she has done and lead to the outcome she doesn’t want? The answer to these questions is simple: cheap Hollywood tricks designed to entertain without adding any intellectual stimuli to the movie, and basically, to sell tickets.

I cannot count the number of times I almost busted out into laughter because of some nonsensical, over dramatic music chimed in to try and give the predictable, sappy story some thrill, or the number of times the overzealous camera tried to jazz up the lagging content. In a scene perfectly displaying these tactics, Bullock wants to see inside her husbands casket to make sure he is dead, because she believes he is not. The camera is rocky-handheld…she approaches the casket and demands to see inside...the music gets dramatic…the undertaker subtle mentions there was disfigurement…we get even more shaky…she struggles with the undertaker and casket bearers…the music becomes more dramatic…finally the casket tips over and her husbands remains spill out all over the asphalt as the camera shakes out of control and the music comes to a sweltering climax! My biggest nightmare is that I will wake tomorrow to find I haven’t seen Premonition yet.

Breach

It’s hard to believe that a movie that comes off as bland as Breach was directed by the same man that made journalism and Hayden Christensen so thrilling in his 2003 directorial debut, Shattered Glass. Now, I don’t wish to compare two movies, but there is a reason why Shattered Glass was successful where Breach was not. The movie really suffers from a lack of Hollywood tricks. And I have no problem with realistic filmmaking, but this is not a film derived from realism.

Breach begins with Eric O'Neill, a young FBI recruit-wanna-be Agent played by Ryan Phillippe, whose expertise is in computers. O’Neill gets a chance to impress the agency when he is assigned the duty of spying on his new boss, Robert Hanson (played by Chris Cooper) who is well respected, yet a sexual deviant within the Bureau. After a little surveillance of Hanson, O’Neil is convinced the man is innocent, seeing how he prays constantly, doesn’t do anything sinful, and his grandchildren love him! O’Neil is then told that Hanson has been selling secrets to the Soviets for years, and is the biggest trader in US History. Throw in a lot of religious undertone, some "how could he believe that" lies from Phillippe, and some unrequired sex visuals, and you have the blandness of Breach.

The biggest problem with Breach is with its plot. Rather than unfold like a story should, it just appears with no entertainment value. We’re told at the beginning of the film by real footage of John Ashcroft that Robert Hanson is guilty, which gives us nothing to look forward to, thrill wise. And I am aware that the filmmakers may not have intended this to be a thriller, more of an account of a true story. Well, we will leave the accounts to the evening news, the first job of a movie is to entertain, something this film does seldom. In Shattered Glass, a far superior film, director Billy Ray used his filmmaking tricks and storytelling to lead the audience in different directions, not letting them know what came next, or how the story will turn out in the end. The problem with Breach, lies within its screenplay (penned by William Rotko, Adam Mazer and Ray), which howled to let Hitchcock after it to give it some thrills, even if they are refrigerator moments (A phrase coined by Hitchcock as moments in films that make no sense, yet everyone is so intrigued by the film they do not notice until they are at their refrigerator later that night).

But then there is that ethical issue of whether or not one should try to stylize films based on true stories. Well, I’ll give you one good answer: yes you should, because this is a movie and unless we’re dealing with a credible documentary, we the audience should just take it as an entertaining story. If the filmmakers of Breach just wanted to present actual events in an unstylized way, they should have made a documentary. Which may have been more exciting.

Other Films by Billy Ray:
Shattered Glass(2003)

Officail Site

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

I knew two things going in to see The Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest: That Johnny Depp would give another great performance as captain Jack Sparrow and that this would be a trademark movie sequel, packed with more stunts and special effects than the original. I was right about both. Depp is the meal ticket to this (soon to be) trilogy. He took what could have been a stereotypical pirate roll and made it into one for the ages. As for the visual effects, I’m no fan, but the film does a good balancing act of trading between live-action stunts and computer animated effects. The result is a very thrilling, but let’s face it, stereotypical sequel/B-movie (With an A performance from its star).

The story continues on what is suppose to be the wedding day for Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) and Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley), but the two are apprehended by the new Brit-villain Cutler Beckett (Tom Hollander) for helping Jack Sparrow escape from the clutches of the old Brit-villain Commodore Norrington (Jack Davenport who also returns for this film) in the first installment. So Turner strikes a deal to find Jack Sparrow and steal his compass for Beckett, who wants it for unknown reasons. Turner sets out and meets up with Sparrow (after a few thrills of course) and is actually double-crossed by Jack and tricked into servitude aboard the ship Captained by Davy Jones (Bill Nighy), whom Jack owes a debt too and can’t repay it without his compass. Meanwhile, Swann escapes from jail and boards a ship to search for her love and Sparrow (Or is her love Sparrow? I’ll get to that in a bit.)

As summer movies go, this plot is actually very complicated, with several sub-plots. Unfortunately the way the story is told isn’t always as clever (I’m reminded of the time when young Will Turner is having a talk with his father Bootstrap Bill (Stellan Skarsgard) and the two need answers to the mystery of the dead man’s chest so a face just conveniently pops out of the wall to tell them the story.). On the other hand, the sub-plots to the film are somewhat intriguing, and also help to develop the characters a little better than most sequels/summer movies bother to. One of these plots is whether or not Sparrow is actually a decent man, or a pirate at heart; the results of which end in a bit of corniness. Another sub-plot, and a bit more confusing one, is whether or not Swann is actually in love with Sparrow. As interesting as these might be I can’t help but think that they’re just cheap parlor tricks created just to get us back in the theaters for the third movie (I’ll kill someone if Sparrow and Swann end up brother and sister ala Luke and Leah in Star Wars!).

All in all, the film was a thrill ride, and quiet funny as well. As much as I don’t want to admit it, watching the movie, I couldn’t help but think of the thrills I got from watching Raiders of the Lost Ark and Star Wars as a kid, although this film is not in the same league as those two, unless we’re talking box-office. Pirates will make a ton of money and so will the third film. With all its thrills, laughs, twists and turns, and surprises though, this is nothing more than a B-movie. But a fun one at that.

Other Films from Gore Verbinski:
Mousehunt(1997), The Mexican(2001), The Ring(2002), Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl(2003), The Weather Man(2005)

Reign Over Me

B+

I don't want to detracted from recap that my esteemed colleague Jake wrote about the premise, acting, and characters in Reign Over Me, so I will try to focus more on the visual elements of the film. The film shows a part of New York that is rarely seen, the normal everyday part. Yes we do see the random shots of the Crysler Building, but most of the film takes place in Chinese restaurants, basement record stores, small music clubs, and office buildings. He lets us see New York the way most locals would regard their home, everyday and ordinary. The use of hand held digital cameras (i.e. Collateral or Miami Vice) was very skillfully used, throughout the film, usually at night. The said shots tend to mirror Sandler's character's emotions, greif, angst, and fear.

Reign Over Me

Who knew Adam Sandler could act? Everyone, but depending on who you ask you get a different kind of answer. For the Happy-Madison, anti-mature, anti-prestigious film crowd, the answer is: “Of course! I love Adam Sandler! He is the funniest person alive,” they say as they bang on their PlayStation controller. For ultimate film buffs, the answer is: “He’s good in Punch-Drunk Love, but the rest of his work is crap.” Whichever category you fall under, it’s hard not to recognize the quality of work that the actor puts into his latest film, Reign Over Me, which also stars Don Cheadle in yet another fabulous turn.

Cheadle stars as Alan Johnson, a New York dentist who has the gilded life, seemingly perfect, yet Johnson feels suffocated by the everyday restraints of a family life. By chance one day, Alan runs into Charlie Fineman (Sandler), an old college roommate who has lost his entire family in the attacks of 9/11 and has blocked out the past to deal with his loss. But this is not a 9/11 film; this is a film about two men learning to communicate. Alan and Charlie rekindle their friendship, even though Charlie doesn’t remember Alan. Each man helps the other to cope with his communication problem, with two strong performances from the actors.

But the real star of this film is writer/director Mike Binder, who penciled a touching and witty script. This time it’s the amusing dialogue that is getting Sandler laughs, not his angry outbursts. Not to say that he doesn’t have any outbursts in this film, he has several that are quit unsettling to watch, which is part of the great performance he gives. The movie avoids being too over-dramatic with the sparks of humor Binder spreads amongst the story. The film steers near being too touching and emotional, but not unbearably. Binder said he listened to The Who’s Love Reign O’er Me while writing, and the song appears frequently in the film as well as a cover by Pearl Jam, which appears near the end as a great aesthetic choice.

With Sandler aboard the film will most likely be a box-office success, and with the quality, it should be a critical one as well. With just a few “serious roles” with Reign and Punch-Drunk, Sandler has me wishing for more of them. Cheadle gives another brilliant performance and continues to prove he’s one of the best actors on the scene today.

Other films from Mike Binder:
The Upside of Anger(2005), Man About Town(2006)

Blood Diamond

Political films have never interested me. They spend little time developing the characters because they are trying to develop their agenda. Blood Diamond is an exceptional action/adventure story that gets caught up in an average political film.

The film takes place in Africa in the year 1999, when there was a global debate over the diamond trades there. Diamonds were traded for weapons to fuel the civil war. Many people lost there lives, and limbs. Djimon Hounsou plays Solomon Vandy, a man who’s enslaved by African rebels to harvest diamonds after being torn from his family. Solomon finds a huge diamond while digging and buries it right before the rebel base is raided by soldiers, who apprehend him. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Danny Archer, a diamond smuggler with no heart. Archer is taken in for smuggling diamonds and meets Solomon in prison, where Archer hears of Solomon’s enormous rock and begins to lick his lips. The two men form a union when Archer promises to reunite Solomon with his family, but is only thinking of how he will lift the rock from him. Maddy Bowen, an American journalist played by Jennifer Connelly joins up with the duo. She uses her pass as a journalist to get the group through hard to reach territories. Connelly’s performance is less than par, or maybe it just seemed that way because she was wedge between two great performances from the leading men. Both Hounsou and DiCaprio earned Oscar nods for their roles, and both were deserved, although DiCaprio may have been more deserving for The Departed, a far superior film and performance.

Edward Zwick directs some suburb action sequences that are very thrilling and edge of your seat. And the film is better than the typical thrill-a-minute action film, at least it has some substance, but it focuses on the wrong things. It would have worked better if it had focused on the characters first and the diamond trade second, and not vice-versa. The plot is very stop-and-go, and the compassionate, dramatic dialogue doesn’t always mix well with the bloody action. This is a movie that needed just to focus on its characters more and on too many things less.

Other films from Edward Zwick:
Glory(1989), Legends of the Fall(1994), The Siege(1998), The Last Samurai(2003)

Official Site