A Murder Most 'Meh'... "A Kind Of Murder"

A Kind of Murder (2016)

Rated R

Starring Patrick Wilson, Jessica Biel, Hayley Bennett, Eddie Marsan, Vincent Kartheiser

Directed by Andy Goddard

The Story:

Walter (Wilson) is a successful architect by day and budding detective novelist by night. His wife Clara (Biel) is unsupportive at best, and things just aren't right between them. Walter longs to be with Ellie (Bennett) instead. However Walter's obsession with a seemingly perfect unsolved murder may prove to be his very undoing.

Welcome to a throwback noir thriller set in 1960s New York.

The production values are stellar as it looks and feels as if the film and everything in it is straight from a bygone era.

The problem comes about from the story itself.

The perfect murder in question is pretty much just that, perfect.

You have the weaselly suspect (Marsan) and the overeager detective (Kartheiser) and these characters will go about making Walter's life unbearable.

But that's just it, it almost is unbearable.

His fascination with what could have happened makes him the suspect when his own wife is murdered, and naturally he lies and then lies some more.

The book upon which this is based is titled The Blunderer.

You'll feel like that is a very apt title the longer you watch the film.

Watchable, but in the end, rather unsatisfying.

Final Grade: C-

Even Affordable Health Care Cannot Fix "Accidental Love"

Accidental Love (2015)

Rated PG-13

Starring Jessica Biel, James Marsden, Jake Gyllenhaal, Tracy Morgan, Kurt Fuller,

Directed by David O. Russell

The Story:

Alice (Biel) is about to be proposed to by her boyfriend Scott (Marsden). That's when tragedy strikes and she winds up with a nail in her head. Naturally, Scott isn't so sure he wants to risk a wedding to someone who could suffer mood swings or die because of the nail, and healthcare is too expensive to pull the nail out. So Alice heads to Washington D.C. to get freshman Congressman Birdwell (Gyllenhaal) to propose a healthcare bill that would allow for the removal of nails to the skull.

This was an odd one.

Reading up on it, apparently it was David O. Russell's attempt at a comedy/political satire that was plagued with numerous problems so he walked away and disowned it.

Ouch.

It's not that bad, and the cast he assembles gives it their all, especially a manic Marsden and a game for just about anything Gyllenhaal who brings a lot of life to a spineless politician who wants to do good things, but can't quite figure out how to do it correctly.

Much of it will seem really dated by the time you get around to watching it because it started filming in 2008, so all the zingers about affordable healthcare have the wind taken out of their sales at this point as it was finally released in a world that has healthcare mandates.

Affordable healthcare, that's a whole different ball game however.

It takes a bit for the movie to get going, but it seems everyone involved is game, and that was like the film's saving grace.

Final Grade: C

Today's Review Is Designed To Fly Under The Radar... "Stealth"

Stealth (2005)
Rated PG 13 for Language

Starring Josh Lucas, Jessica Biel, Jamie Foxx, Sam Shepard

Directed by Rob L. Cohen

The Story:

The Navy has developed a fighter jet with an artificial intelligence running the show.  Teaching it the ropes are three of the Navy's best, Lt's Gannon (Lucas), Wade (Biel) and Purcell (Foxx).  But when lightning strikes the jet, the A.I. malfunctions and decides it must take out all hostiles.  Can the 3 humans talk some sense into their computerized counterpart before World War III starts?


Remember War Games and Short Circuit?  Mash the two together, and there you go.

:)

Okay, not quite, but that might have been more interesting than what we got.

And really, this film isn't really that bad...

It just wasn't as good as it should have been.

Josh Lucas does fine as the leading man, and perhaps of the 3, is the most believable as a great Navy pilot.

Does This Flight Suit Make Me Look Fat?

Biel suffers a similar fate to Denise Richards in a Bond movie, and she just doesn't seem that believable as a fighter pilot.

Then there's Jamie Foxx who rebounded from this one to snag an Oscar for Ray.

Does This Flight Suit Make Me Look Like An Oscar Winner ?

Shepard plays the human villain role, but his is more from a misguided duty than pure evil.

Most disappointing were the cheesy special effects.

No offense, but when a jet smacks into a mountain, don't go slow motion, it just really destroys the credibility of your movie.  Better to just hit it with an explosion than show a really poor model crumbling into a ball.

This is the 2nd time I've seen it since it was released.

I think I liked it better the first time I saw it and thought I would purchase it in the future.

Now?

Final Grade: C-

Rewatchability/Purchase Factor: Nah, future me has talked myself out of it. ;)

What Are You, Some Kind of Psycho? "Hitchcock"

Good Evening...

The Story:

It's 1959, and Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins) is riding high on the success of North by Northwest.  When he's questioned by reporters if he shouldn't just quit now while he's on top, he takes that as a personal challenge and prepares for his next project with his wife, Alma (Helen Mirren).  Hitch wants to do something personal and daring, and when the studio has no desire to indulge his latest project, he decides to bankroll it himself.  A lot is riding on his gamble... what are the odds that a disturbing film based on a true story would be a hit?  And so begins... Psycho.

Sorta nifty.

Much like I claimed that Lincoln was totally misnamed, Hitchcock fares a little better.

While it is an entertaining look at what went on, or at least allegedly went on, as Hitchcock created his now cinematic masterpiece, there's more to this story than that.

No, the real heart and soul of this movie belongs to Alma Reville, Hitchcock's wife and partner for just about his entire career.  Mirren is phenomenal as always, and she brings more to the table, for me, than anyone else in the cast by miles. 

Hopkins is rendered almost invisible under the makeup, but the pursey pronunciations to try and mimic Hitch's voice and speech patterns can snap you out of the trance of what you're watching.  That's never a good thing.

What Hitchcock had to do to make Psycho a hit is great cinema.  It appears that we owe much of Hitchcock's brilliance to his wife, and if nothing else...

That's the real takeaway from this movie.

Final Grade: B-

Rewatchability/Purchase Factor: It was alright, but I think once was enough.  The more you love Hitch though, the more apt this movie is to replayed in your home.

He Shoots...He Misses! "Playing for Keeps"

Gooooo...away.

The Story:

George(Gerard Butler), a former soccer star becomes the little league coach for his son's team.  This gives him more time seeing his son since his marriage to Stacie (Jessica Biel) fell apart. Things get complicated as George wants to become a sports anchor for ESPN, and all the Soccer mom's want to get in George's pants.

Another contender for Turkey of the Year.

Which is a shame, because I love Gerard Butler.  Or at least his accent. : )

Even his romantic comedies which are blasted by critics, I've actually enjoyed because he seems to be having a good time, and generates at least some chemistry with his leading ladies.

And here, Gerard Butler is really the only star who attempts to rise above the atrocities being committed in the movie.

He's a good guy, sucked into bad situations, each one more absurd and foolish than the last one.


As for the rest of the cast... well if they decide to make a Desperate Housewives spinoff, here's the cast to start with:

Jessica Biel plays the annoying ex-wife.
Catherine Zeta-Jones comes off slightly less annoying than the last movie I saw her in (Lay the Favorites) but cannot rise above the script.
Uma Thurman is downright pathetic in her role.
Judy Greer always annoys me in any role she ever plays. : )

Dennis Quaid chomps the scenery overacting to his heart's content as a soccer dad with a wandering eye...

The movie made it past the 20 minute mark, I think, only because nobody was paying attention to it.

It just continues to go downhill from there, I looked around and nobody was paying attention to the film, and those that were, were not too happy with it, so out it comes.

Pretty sure Butler will rebound with Olympus Has Fallen. Or at least, How to Train Your Dragon 2.


Final Grade: D-

Would I Own It: Hahahahaha...

Mediocrity Week Continues: "The Tall Man"

It's a horror of a movie!


The Story:

In the former mining town of Cold Rock Washington, kids are going missing.  Local legend of "The Tall Man" abounds, as he is apparently the specter responsible for their disappearance.  When the local nurse (Jessica Biel) discovers her child is missing, she goes on a mission to get him back, and the revelations will rock this town to their very core!

Zzzzz.

It wasn't bad enough to click off at or before the 20 minute mark, but I could have cut my losses just as well...

It's a horror movie, without any horror!
It's a suspense movie with little suspense!
It's a preachy drama wrapped in false pretenses!

No, instead it's smoke and mirrors! An "everything you thought you knew about the movie is a lie" kind of tale.

And that's fine, to a point.

But you have to give us something substantial to believe in at first so that when the carpet is pulled out from under our feet, it is shocking and sends chills down our spine.

Instead it plays more like a "hey, we were so clever, you didn't see this twist coming, did you!?!"

Well no, not exactly when you give no hint that we should ever take what you are saying at anything less than face value.

Instead we are served a clumsy, plodding narrative that doesn't seem to know what it wants to tell as a story.



Basically, the villain of the story:

Liberals!


: )

Disappointed, but not surprised.

There is an underlying tone to the story that children would be better off with a parent that is better off financially, than left under the care of their own flesh and blood who aren't exactly rolling in the dough.

Hmm...

Maybe the villains are Conservative?

There is a potentially interesting story buried in here, but they failed on all parts to bring it out on screen.

Available to Stream on Netflix as of this writing.


Final Grade: D+
Would I Own It: Nope.

I Wish I Could Un-Remember This Remake..."Total Recall"

The remake that YOU demanded!

You didn't?

Well, someone did, and this is what we have to show for it.


The Story:

A troubled worker (Colin Farrell) has been having some bad dreams.  He tells his wife (Kate Beckinsale) about them, then goes about his dreary routine with his best friend.  But he wants something more.  So he decides to go to a place and have some memories implanted into him about being a secret agent.  Only it turns out...he already is one!

Dun Dun Dun!

To their credit, the makers of this version abandoned Mars and said "hey, the concept behind Total Recall is kinda cool, what can we do to make a similar story, but still be different."

And with that, they succeeded, and actually succeeded quite well.  The story they wanted to tell is actually kind of interesting.

In execution however...

There is something that just isn't there.

Could it be Quaid/Hauser's insistence on "I need something more...my life sucks...if only I were a secret agent..." ? Talk about laying the exposition on thick.

Maybe it's Beckinsale's turn as an unstoppable killing machine...except she's not a machine, and not really very good at killing her intended target.

Perhaps it's Jessica Biel who seems too soft of a character to be a higher up in the resistance.

Maybe it's just the lack of Ah-Nuhld?

Hard to say, but while the original Total Recall is not a cinematic masterpiece, it's pretty decent cheese that actually has aged well and still is as compelling as ever.

Again, the storyline is good and solid.

But everytime the remake takes a step forward, it takes two steps back.

Why the insistence on the same names?  I found myself trying to remember who played that character in the original film instead of investing in these new characters.

Why did they insist on keeping some things from the original and jettisoning others?

Really, was the lady with the 3 boobs (makes sense on Mars...less so on Earth) really necessary?  Of course, with today's generation, I remember when the film came out and either the studio or the actress had to go on social media and say "no, that's not real, it's special effects".

Duh.

We're getting stupider by the generation, and remakes like this aren't helping.

Any goodwill I tried to maintain with this film went out the window at the end when the line "Consider that a divorce" was NOT used.


I can't, in good faith, recommend seeing it.  Just watch the original again and have a blast.