Inferno

Posted on October 27, 2016 at 5:10 pm

Dashing, globe-trotting symbology professor Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) doesn’t work any harder at trying to prevent a global pandemic than Hanks and director Ron Howard work at trying to make the Dan Brown book into a movie. You can guess how Langdon’s effort works out. I’m here to tell you that the movie does not. Not even close.

Langdon wakes up, disoriented and with a gash on his head. As far as he remembers, he is still at Harvard but somehow he sees Florence out the window. He has no recollection of the past few days and the doctor (Felicity Jones) explains that he has temporary retrograde amnesia. Her name is Sienna. Conveniently, she speaks English — she is English — and several other languages, and even more conveniently she is a fan of his work because she “likes puzzles.” She attended one of his lectures when she was nine years old and has read all of his books with such devotion that she even mentions there is one she didn’t like much.

When an assassin dressed as a police officer starts shooting at them, Sienna grabs Robert and brings him, still in his hospital gown, to her apartment. Pretty soon, they are both on the trail of a puzzle that leads to an impending release of a virus that while wipe out 80 percent of humanity, put in place by a crazed zillionaire who had some very strong feelings about the problems of over-population, and who fell to his death in the prologue, but not before warning darkly that “Humanity is the disease; Inferno is the cure.”

Robert, still groggy, has to figure out how to stop release of the virus. But the clues are simply that that puzzling or interesting. Unlike The Da Vinci Code, where Brown put together a clever and intricate series of clues based on authentic history and art, this one is little more than chase scenes in iconic locations, alternating with yawn-inducing scenes people barking kill orders into headsets and staring intently into monitors.

We also get drearily Delphic pronouncements like “the truth can be glimpsed only through the eyes of death” and somber almost-adages like “the greatest sins in human history have been committed in the name of love,” squinting at Renaissance frescos, a mysterious group with the PAC-like name The Command Risk Consortium (“We are not the government; we get things done”), a stolen death mask of “Inferno” poet Dante Alighieri, and an absurd pause for a chat about missed chances and regret. Irrfan Khan provides an all-too-brief bright spot, and I would happily see an entire movie about his crisp and unflappable character. As for the rest, one action scene is underwater, but the rest of it drags so much it feels like it might be, too.

Parents should know that this film includes fantasy/action style violence with grotesque and disturbing images, theme of global pandemic, chases and extended peril with characters injured and killed, suicide, betrayal, some strong and crude language, and a sexual situation.

Family discussion: Who is doing the most to address the problems of over-population? Why is Dante especially appropriate for this story?

If you like this, try: “The Da Vinci Code”

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back

Posted on October 20, 2016 at 5:12 pm

Tom Cruise is back in a second “Jack Reacher” movie, based on the hard-boiled series by Lee Child. Jack Reacher is a quintessential and perfectly named fantasy action hero — former military but resistant to authority, capable of instant assessment of threats and options, crackerjack fighting skills, and no strings of any kind. He has no home, no family, no ID other than an expired military card, no car, no bank account, no possessions, just a passion for justice and a knack for getting into and out of trouble. And the equally perfectly named Cruise, capable of challenging himself as an actor but apparently not at the moment very interested in it, except maybe physically, is just right for Reacher, a bit world-weary but ever-righteous. He still runs very fast and looks good with his shirt off.

We first see Reacher in a diner with his hands cuffed behind his back, a bit scuffed up but characteristically steely. A sheriff informs him he is about to be arrested and charged with felony assault of the men lying injured on the ground. He coolly informs the officers that the pay phone is about to ring and that it is the sheriff who will soon be wearing the cuffs. The officer’s derisive snort is barely over before the phone rings, and sure enough, Reacher is right again.

He has solved a problem for the military (we won’t worry about the various laws — and bones — he broke on the way), and thanking him is his successor as overseer of an investigative unit, Major Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders of “How I Met Your Mother” and “Avengers”). They do a little phone flirting, and he decides to go see her in DC, only to find she has just been arrested for espionage. So, now Reacher has what he loves best, an injustice that only he can make right, of such an order of magnitude that it is certain to provide many opportunities for mayhem. But there is one problem that is, for a change, entirely outside of his ability to shoot, punch, or evade. Turner’s military attorney conveniently agrees to meet with Reacher (in an officer’s club, surrounded by pretty much everyone who might be interested), and he conveniently happens to have Reacher’s file with him as well, and helpfully shows Reacher the paperwork showing that a woman had filed a child support request with the military because she said the father of her teenage daughter was Jack Reacher. The same bad guys who are after Maj. Turner are after the girl, so Reacher ends up on the run with both Turner and his possible daughter Sam (Danika Yarosh).

Pairing up again with Edward Zwick (“The Last Samurai”) and with a script by Zwick and his “thirtysomething” partner Marshall Herskovitz (with Richard Wenk), Cruise stays right in his “Mission Impossible” action hero sweet spot. The interplay with Sam gives a little balance and emotional weight to the various fight scenes and shoot-outs, without diminishing the appeal of the ever-able hero with no strings.

Parents should know that the violence in this film is borderline R with very intense action and fight scenes, chases, fights, shoot-outs and explosions, torture, hired killers, corruption, many characters injured and killed, threat of rape, some strong language.

Family discussion: How was military training and experience reflected in the choices made by both the good and bad guys in this movie? What did Jack want the answer to be about Sam?

If you like this, try: the earlier “Jack Reacher” film and the “Bourne” series

Deepwater Horizon

Posted on September 29, 2016 at 5:54 pm

I’m a fan of director Peter Berg. His excellent “Friday Night Lights” film has been eclipsed by the popular television series it inspired. And I like the much-derided “Battleship,” which I thought was a great example of well-executed action movie, taking its entertainment value seriously without taking itself too seriously. His new “Deepwater Horizon,” based on the 2010 explosion and sinking of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, shows his skill in cinematic storytelling and his gift for pacing and action. But it is curiously constructed, as though for a fictional story more along the lines of Bruce Willis fighting a meteor than a real-life environmental catastrophe that killed 11 people and spread an estimated 3.19 million barrels of oil into the Gulf. It should be an action-movie version of “The Big Short.” Instead, it’s an updating of “The Towering Inferno,” meaning — spoiler alert — the bad guy is the one who tries to cut costs.

Berg and screenwriters Matthew Michael Carnahan and Matthew Sand follow the established formula for action films. The first ten minutes make us fall in love with the hero, his adoring wife, and adorable child. That’s not hard to do. The hero is Mike Williams, Mark Wahlberg, his wife is Felicia (Kate Hudson), and their daughter happens to be working on a report for school about Daddy’s job, which gives us a chance to find out about some very technical stuff in very simple terms. Daddy works on an oil rig out in the middle of the Gulf that pumps up oil from under the ocean. “That oil is a monster like the dinosaurs it used to be. My daddy tames the dinosaurs.” And Mommy will miss him very much when he goes. They are adorable. Got it.

The next scene introduces us to hero number 2, the weary veteran who is all about competence and integrity, Captain Jimmy Harrell, superbly played by Hudson’s real-life dad, Kurt Russell. And then there are the guys in suits, who are all about making their numbers and therefore cutting the corners that the veterans knows are not there for show but are actually necessary. There’s a lot of jargon, but basically all you need to know is that the good guys understand that there may be a problem and the bad guys do not want to take the steps necessary to find or prevent it. And the good guys are really endearing, and therefore it all matters a lot.

And then it all starts to blow up, and we get to the real reason for the movie, which is the “who will get out of this and how will they do it?” part. This is where Berg’s strengths really show, as each of the set-pieces are thrillingly staged. He has an exceptional clarity in conveying a three-dimensional space on screen — actually, several of them in different locations — and balancing the urgency of the action with genuine emotion. We see how the people on board think through the problems, from the logistics and the mechanics to the choices based in morality and courage. Wahlberg is, as ever, just right to play the guy you’d like to have next door, a decent, hard-working, family-loving man with enormous capability and integrity. Here, as in their previous collaboration, “Lone Survivor,” Berg keeps the focus on the challenges faced by individuals who have little control over the monumental, life-or-death tasks they are assigned by people far away with little understanding of the consequences of their orders. That worked better in the earlier film, as the story of the soldier far from command has existential implications that are inherent and instantly recognized. Here, the action is disconnected from the consequences that a brief text coda before the credits cannot make up for.

Parents should know that the movie includes extensive peril and violence, with some disturbing images and characters injured and killed, some strong language, and sexual references and a situation.

Family discussion: Why do the people on the rig use the term “Mr.”? Who could have prevented the explosion?

If you like this, try: “The 33” and the documentary about Deepwater Horizon, “The Great Invisible”

Related Tags:

Action/Adventure Based on a true story

The Wild Life

Posted on September 8, 2016 at 5:23 pm

The animation is quite good in “The Wild Life,” with exceptional use of space designed to make the best use of 3D and cleverly constructed mechanics. But the voice talent is poor, the characters are dull, and the story and script start out badly and go downhill from there.

It is inspired by but bears little relation to the classic shipwreck story Robinson Crusoe, by Daniel Defoe, memorably illustrated by the great N.C. Wyeth (father of Andrew). But in this version there is no Man Friday. Instead it is, for no particular reason, told as a flashback from the perspective of the animals on the island, including a pangolin, a hedgehog, a tapir, and a parrot named Mak, later dubbed “Tuesday” by Crusoe.

The movie begins with pirates seeing what they think is a signal flame on a remote island. The captain sends his men to check it out and bring back anything of value. They capture Crusoe, and Tuesday settles in with some friendly mice on the ship to tell them the story from the beginning.

We meet Crusoe and his dog Ainsley onboard La Luna. They are novices at sea travel and looked down upon by the seasoned sailors. Crusoe does a lot of looking down, too, at the ocean, as he barfs into it. Also on board are two scraggly cats with Cockney accents, the scheming May and henchman Mal (Debi Tinsley and Jeff Doucette). A storm destroys the ship and Crusoe and Ainsley are trapped when the sailors depart in the lifeboat. The ship crashes on the shore of a tiny uninhabited island. Well, uninhabited by humans. The animals live in a predator-free paradise, with daily luaus, and they are all very happy except for Mak the parrot, who dreams of finding something exciting and different.

Crusoe, Ainsley, and the splintered remains of the ship are thrilling for Mak but terrifying for the other animals. Eventually Crusoe gains Mak/Tuesday’s trust and the animals begin to make friends with him, helping him to build a treehouse complete with running freshwater. But May and Mal, briefly stuck on an adjacent rock and soon accompanied by a litter, are determined to return to the island and pretty much eat and/or destroy everything and everyone.

Illuminata had the same mix of exceptional animation technique and underwritten story in “Fly Me to the Moon.” I wrote in my review, “Unfortunately, the dull characters and weak story keep getting in the way of the gorgeously produced backgrounds.” My strong recommendation for their next film is that they try to find writers and performers as capable as their visual artists.

Parents should know that this film includes a scary shipwreck, mean cats, pirates, guns, and fire, characters drink alcohol and there is a sad offscreen death of a character.

Family discussion: Why is Mak the only one on the island who is curious about the rest of the world? Why did Mal do what May said? How can you tell the difference between a coincidence and a bad omen?

If you like this, try: “The Pirates! Band of Misfits” and “Shipwrecked”

Ben-Hur

Posted on August 18, 2016 at 5:25 pm

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence and disturbing images
Profanity:	None
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Some social drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Intense and sometimes graphic peril and violence including battle scenes, crucifixions, abuse, and accidents, characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie
Date Released to Theaters:	August 19, 2016

Lew Wallace’s 1880 book, Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ, had a revolutionary idea in a spiritual setting. The story of a minor, fictional character at the time of the crucifixion was the first to try to illuminate epic themes through the depiction of a character who was not a participant. Indeed, the title character was hardly aware of the monumental events going on around him. He was too busy dealing with his own personal crises like being enslaved and having his mother and sister contract leprosy. Wallace’s book became the top seller of the century. And then it became a play, two silent films, a Best Picture Oscar winner tied for first place for the most Academy Awards, plus two animated versions and a television miniseries.

Now Roma Downey and Mark Burnett, following the enormous success of their “Bible,” “A.D” and “Son of God” know the genre well and have remade the grand but dated three hour and thirty-seven minute epic. Their version is brisker, not just in the overall running time of just over two hours but in the more contemporary quick cuts and trimmed storyline. It is also more explicitly religious. While earlier versions suggested the presence of Jesus but did not include his face or voice, he is more explicitly involved in the storyline here, portrayed by Brazilian actor Rodrigo Santoro.

As in all of the earlier versions, it is the story of Judah Ben-Hur (Jack Huston), a Jewish prince who is wrongly accused of a hostile act against the Roman invaders and sold into slavery. In this version the Roman Messala (Toby Kebbell) is more than a close friend; he is Judah’s adopted brother. They are devoted to one another but also deeply competitive.

Messala, in love with Judah’s sister, joins the Roman army in hopes of achieving enough wealth and status to be considered worthy of her. When he returns to Jerusalem, Judah is married to Esther (Nazanin Boniadi). Messala and Judah agree to find a way for the local population to live peacefully under Roman occupation. But a rebel hiding in Judah’s house kills one of the Roman officers and Judah is blamed. Messala refuses to protect him or his family. Judah becomes a galley slave, spending five years chained to an oar on a Roman naval ship.

When the ship is sunk, he escapes. An African named Ilderim (Morgan Freeman) gives him a chance to win back his freedom by competing in a chariot race. And that, after all, is what everyone remembers about “Ben-Hur.” Director Timur Bekmambetov is known for action scenes with tremendous vitality and he more than delivers with the chariot race, which is thrillingly dynamic. The naval battle scenes are also exciting. The screenplay has some clunky dialog and awkward transitions, but Huston is always engaged and engaging and balances the intensity of the action scenes with an inspiring message of forgiveness. The movie is true to the story that has endured in its various versions for more than a century.

Parents should know that this film includes intense and sometimes graphic peril and violence with many characters injured and killed, battle scenes, whipping, abuse, crucifixions, some disturbing images, brief non-explicit sexual situation and mild sexual references.

Family discussion: What changed Ben-Hur’s mind about Messala? Was Ben-Hur right to try to make peace with the Romans? What did Pilate mean when he said, “They’re Romans now?”

If you like this, try; “Risen” and the 1959 version of “Ben-Hur”