Thor: The Dark World

Posted on November 7, 2013 at 6:00 pm

I always say that superhero movies are defined by their villains, and “Thor: The Dark World” has a lulu in Tom Hiddleston‘s Loki, who was not as vanquished at the end of “The Avengers” as we thought. Thank goodness. Loki, the eternal trickster of Norse myth, is imprisoned by his father, Odin (Anthony Hopkins) at the beginning of the story. But a once-in-5000-years celestial line-up brings on an attack by the Dark Elves, let by ninth Dr. Who Christopher Eccleston and “Oz’s” Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, and soon Loki is freed. Chris Hemsworth continues to bring all the requisite charisma and some welcome wit to the heroic Thor and Hopkins is nicely magisterial as the one-eyed Odin, but it is Hiddleston who is clearly having a blast as a god who lives for chaos and brings a jolt of pure devilish pleasure to every scene he is in.

That is particularly welcome because all those scenes in Asgard can get rather ponderous. And the movie begins inauspiciously with some Tolkein-ian mumbo-jumbo about the battle with the Dark Elves and some icky black smokey-stuff that has some important power and a bunch of parallel universes. Who cares — let’s get to the good stuff already.

Meanwhile, back on earth, the world’s most beautiful astrophysicist, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), is wondering whether her super-boyfriend is ever going to call. Her colleague, Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård) is running around with his pants off, and sometimes with the rest of his clothes off, too, and her intern (Kat Dennings) and her intern’s intern are helping her investigate some very strange gravitational anomalies. All of this, except for the boyfriend part, relates to this once in a quinti-millennium astrological line-up that opens up portals or melts the boundaries or some crazy thing that lets the parallel universes seep into each other. Jane gets slimed by the black smokey stuff and Thor whisks her away to Asgard. I wish I could say it was a side effect of the smoke that has her more concerned about the significance of meeting her boyfriend’s parents than a scientific inquiry into the nature of the home of the Norse gods, or understanding the life-threatening nature of the Dark Elves’ smoke. But no.

Pantlessness aside, there are some genuinely funny moments, including a surprise appearance by one of the other Avengers and a mid-battle trip on the subway. The fight scenes are strong, well staged by “Game of Thrones” director Alan Taylor, and there are some predictably cool special effects. Rene Russo is fine as Frieda and there are not one but two extra scenes in the credits. But the reason to see the movie is Loki — he should get his own movie next time around.

Parents should know that the movie includes extended comic-book-style action violence with some graphic images, characters injured and killed, a hand chopped off, fatal stabbing, some strong language, and comic nudity (nothing shown).

Family discussion: How does Thor compare to other superheroes? Did you like the touches of comedy or find them distracting?

If you like this, try: “The Avengers” and the first Thor movie.

Ender’s Game

Posted on November 1, 2013 at 6:35 pm

Director Gavin Hood (“Tsotsi”) has skillfully adapted the Nebula and Hugo award-winning novel about a boy who leads an interplanetary battle against insect-like aliens, doing justice both to the fun of the sci-fi action and to the seriousness of the book’s themes. The story has been adapted for film — Ender is several years older in the film than in the book and an extended and astonishingly prescient subplot about his siblings writing something resembling blogs and becoming highly influential political commentators has been dropped. But it is very true to the spirit of the book and its characters and with special effects technology vastly beyond what was possible when the book was written, spectacularly realizes some of the book’s most thrillingly imaginative passages.

A memorable scene in Kevin Smith’s “Clerks” has its two slacker heroes arguing about one of the most rousing moments in the history of film, the destruction of the planet-destroying Death Star in the original “Star Wars.” Randall points out that while the Jedi and the audience are cheering the explosion, they are overlooking the fact that the Death Star, still under construction, was not staffed with military but with independent contractors, who are at least arguably innocent bystanders in the conflict and unarmed. In the middle of a raunchy comedy there is suddenly a more nuanced moral sensibility than is exhibited in the the usual big-budget sci-fi extravaganzas.

That is what makes the Ender’s Game series by Orson Scott Card so compelling. The original book has been a worldwide best-seller for more than 20 years. Like “Star Wars,” “The Matrix,” and other YA favorites, it is the story of a “chosen one” of extraordinary skill who takes on the oppressive and vastly powerful but corrupt enemy, and it is filled with exciting action. But it also engages directly, thoughtfully, and sometimes provocatively with profound questions that are even more apt today than they were in the 1980’s: Should we sacrifice the interests of one person to benefit the rest of the world? Should we stage a pre-emptive attack by an enemy that is not currently demonstrating aggressive behavior? What is more important, the ability to win a battle or the ability to feel compassion or empathy?

The setting is at a time in the future when earth has successfully defended itself against an attack by an insect-like race of aliens called Formics and disparagingly referred to by humans as Buggers. The effects of the war against the Formic were devastating, and the entire resources of the world have been turned to just one goal — seeing out the Formics and destroying them to make sure that they can never return to attack the humans. They have determined that only a child has the reflexes, flexibility, and singleness of purpose to lead that attack.

All children are fitted to monitoring devices so that the military can see how they behave and find the likeliest candidates for military training. Couples are strictly limited to no more than two children. The Wiggins family is permitted a rare third because their son and daughter, while not suitable for training, show extraordinary ability. The third is Ender Wiggins (“Hugo’s” Asa Butterfield in a considered performance of great dignity and focus), whose deliberate but savage attack on a school bully brings him to the attention of the commander in charge of training, Colonel Hyrum Graff (Harrison Ford, returning to space for the first time since the “Star Wars” trilogy). Ender is brought to a space station for a series of training exercises called “games.”

A disagreement between Graff and Major Gwen Anderson (Viola Davis, once again speaking on behalf of humanity) is one of the film’s clearest statements of the moral conflict it lays out. Anderson wants the training to do what is best for Ender. Graff wants it to do what is best for humanity, and if that means inflicting the kind of trauma and encouraging the kind of brutality that will make Ender a better commander, he is willing to make that trade-off. Of course it is out of the question to consult Ender or his parents. Card wisely makes it clear that there are two questions here. One is whether the ends ever justify the means. The other is who should decide what ends or means to consider.

The games are fascinatingly constructed and the battles in the weightless chamber with freeze-ray weapons are absorbing and immersive. It gets more exciting when a new teacher with a fabled history and an impressive Maori face tattoo (Ben Kingsley) takes over. The climactic battle is as dramatic as we hope, but it is a remarkable twist and a surprising coda that bring depth and meaning to the story.

NOTE: In real life, author Card has demonstrated hateful homophobic bigotry that has led some people to call for a boycott of the film. Here is my view: I believe that the principles of courage, integrity, compassion, empathy, and service to others that “Ender’s Game” promotes are essential values. While I regret that the author’s ugly and bigoted statements show that he himself is still struggling to learn the lessons of his book, I agree with the poet Don Marquis that “an idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it.” The best of his vision should be shared with young people in the hopes that the next generation will transcend some of the biases of the previous ones.

Parents should know that this film includes extended sci-fi violence and peril with characters injured and killed, themes of interplanetary genocide, brief mild language, theme of child soldiers and moral conflicts, and bullies.

Family discussion: What does it mean to win “the right way”? Was Graff or Anderson right about the best way to treat Ender?

If you like this try: The book and its sequels by Orson Scott Card and the “Star Wars” movies starring Harrison Ford.

Gravity

Posted on October 3, 2013 at 6:00 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for intense perilous sequences, some disturbing images, and brief strong language
Profanity:	Many s-words, one f-word
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol
Violence/ Scariness:	Intense and prolonged peril, characters killed, disturbing images of dead bodies
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	October 4, 2013
Date Released to DVD:	February 24, 2014
Amazon.com ASIN:	B00H83EUL2

In space, there is no oxygen and no sound. There is no up or down. Everything is weightless. When you cry, the tears float away instead of running down your cheeks.

“Gravity” is one of the once-to-a-generation films that transform our sense of the immensity of space and the potential of film. Like “2001: A Space Odyssey” and “Avatar,” it makes use of technology to create unprecedented visual splendor that recalibrates our notions — literal and metaphorical — of our place in the universe. I have two recommendations: see it on Imax 3D to get the full effect. And see it soon, before you are exposed to spoilers that give away too much of the story.

I’ll do my best to omit comments that give too much away but you may wish to skip the rest of the review until you’ve had a chance to experience the movie’s suprises fully.

Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) is a doctor who is up in space to get data, “a new set of eyes to scan the edge of the universe.” It is her first time in space and she has had just six months of training. She is nervous and, if the word applies where there is no air — airsick, or, if the word applies where there is no gravity — motionsick. “Keeping your lunch down in zero gravity is harder than it looks,” she says a little grimly. And it is a challenge to use tools that float away while wearing a spacesuit with thick gloves. “I’m used to a basement lab in a hospital where things fall to the floor.” But she is intent on completing her work. And she likes one thing about space: “The silence. I could get used to it.” In charge of the mission is Matt Kowalsky (George Clooney), a genial, experienced astronaut who enjoys annoying mission control in Houston (Ed Harris) with corny jokes, shaggy dog stories, and Hank Williams, Jr.

And then Houston warns them that debris is headed their way and that it may knock out communications and destroy the spacecraft. And then it arrives. The damage is devastating. Stone and Kowalsky are stranded somewhere between earth and the moon. “I am off structure and I am drifting. Do you copy? Anyone?”

Bullock gives an extraordinary performance in a role that calls on her to spend most of the movie by herself, with only her voice and eyes to convey the shifting emotions: terror, resolve, submission, transcendence. While her visceral first response is an adrenaline-fueled elevated heart-beat and rapid breathing, Kowalsky reminds her that she has to slow down to conserve her limited oxygen. He chats with her to help her calm down and we learn that nothing that can happen to her in space can make her feel as lost, isolated, and devastated as what she has already experienced on earth. She has walled off every part of herself outside of the narrow scope of her mission. Her biggest challenge in space will not be technical or physical but finding in herself the courage and the spiritual bandwidth to take in what is happening to her. “You’re going to have to learn to let go,” Kowalski tells her.

There is something both reassuring and chilling in the understated vocabulary the astronauts learn to use to describe catastrophic failure in place of the more obvious”OMG! We’re going to die!” “It’s not rocket science,”Kowalski says reassuringly, if inaccurately.

Alfonso Cuarón, who directed and c0-wrote “Gravity” with his son, Jonás, is a master of storytelling through camera movement and striking images. There are brilliantly choreographed near-misses and almost-failures. Watch how the literally breathtaking continuous shot that begins the film breaks only when Stone’s connection to the spacecraft is severed. Watch again as our understanding of the crucial importance of the lifeline that is attached to something or someone is upended and turned inside out when Stone is tangled in strings that hold her back when she needs release. In another scene, Stone gets some literal breathing room when she is able to remove her spacesuit and float in her underwear as though she is protected by amniotic fluid, a moment of profoundly tactile, ecstatic, sensuality. Every reflection in every shiny surface helps to set the scene and tell the story of her spiritual rebirth and reconnection. A weightless Marvin Martian doll, a family photo, the earth, seen from almost 700 km above — each image is telling, moving, meaningful. The script, especially the last half hour, is not up to the level of the visuals, but the setting (I hereby predict Oscars for visual effects and sound editing) for the of inner and outer exploration implied by the title is exquisitely conveyed.

Parents should know that this film has very intense and scary peril and some disturbing images of injuries and dead bodies. There are some mild sexual references, and characters use some strong language and drink alcohol.

Family discussion: What makes Ryan change her mind? Which was the most difficult moment for her and why?

If you like this, try: other outer space classics like “2001: A Space Odyssey,” “Silent Running,” and “Apollo 13” and the television miniseries “From the Earth to the Moon”

World War Z

Posted on September 16, 2013 at 6:00 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	Mature High Schooler
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for intense frightening zombie sequences, violence and disturbing images
Profanity:	Mild language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Constant peril and violence with many characters injured and killed, children in peril, scary zombies, many disturbing images including graphic wounds and attacks, dead bodies, tension and scary surprises
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	June 21, 2013
Date Released to DVD:	September 17, 2013
Amazon.com ASIN:	B005LAIIMG

There are going to be a lot of superheroes on screen this summer, but none of them are as super as Gerry Lane a former investigator for the UN called back into action to fight the zombie apocalypse. No superhero outfit or origin story — he doesn’t need one. He’s just an ordinary good guy who happens to be super-smart, super-kind, super-honorable, and super-able to withstand all kinds of physical challenges, perform emergency surgery, and be an awwww-inspiring dad and husband. To put it another way, he’s played by Brad Pitt. Based on the book by Max Brooks (son of Oscar-winners Anne Bancroft and Mel Brooks), the story takes Lane all over the world to find “patient zero,” the original source of the plague that has turned millions of people into zombies, so they can figure out how to fight them.

A brief opening scene shows us Lane interacting endearingly with his adorable family: wife Karin (Jessica Chastian-ish Mirielle Enos), and two daughters, one with a stuffed animal and one with asthma. We have just enough time to fall in love with them on what seems like an ordinary day, until all hell breaks loose while they are driving to work and school. At first, all is confusion and chaos, and then the zombies arrive. They are fast and aggressive and it takes just 12 seconds after a person is attacked for them to become fast and aggressive zombies themselves. Zombies are, as we have come to know from many other movies, extremely focused and therefore extremely effective. They have just one purpose: to create more zombies. They will do whatever it takes to whomever it takes. And the humans who must try to survive will be faced with terrible choices.

After a harrowing escape, the Lanes and a young boy who helped them are rescued by a helicopter and taken to Gerry’s former boss at the UN, working from an aircraft carrier. At first, Gerry refuses to leave his family to investigate the source of the zombies. But the Naval Commander (David Andrews) makes it clear that they only have room for “essential personel” on their ship — and that Gerry’s family will only be considered essential as long as Gerry takes on the mission of escorting a young professor and expert in virology to Korea to track down the first reported case. They set off with some Navy Seals for protection, but soon Gerry is on his own, globe-trotting from Korea to Israel to Wales in search of answers.

Director Marc Forster, not known for thrillers, keeps things taut and involving, holding back information to keep us just a little strung out and then allowing us some release at just the right moment. The zombies are fast and relentless. Even at a PG-13 level, with muted gore, they are very disturbing. One just clicks his teeth with what could hardly be described as a knowing look — maybe just focused — and it is really creepy. From the heartbeat sound behind the opening logo to the seemingly innocent moments that turn ominous, the pacing is tight and absorbing and the the characters and the puzzle weighty. But it is Pitt who makes it all work. He is so good at everything that we almost wonder why he needs a plane — surely he can just fly to the next city on his own — but his un-angsty goodness and sheer star power is itself the most powerful reminder of why it is that we want the humans to win.

Parents should know that this film has graphic and disturbing images, extended very intense sequences of peril with many characters injured and killed, scary and disgusting zombies, emergency amputation, guns, explosions, and chases.

Family discussion: Do you agree with the “tenth man” rule? How did Gerry use what he learned from the doctor? From his observations?

If you like this, try: “28 Days Later,” “I Am Legend,” and “The Andromeda Strain” and the book by Max Brooks

The Family

Posted on September 12, 2013 at 6:00 pm

“Anybody who doesn’t contradict me can expect nothing but good things,” “Fred Blake” (Robert De Niro) explains in item 10 of his David Letterman-style countdown of what he considers his best qualities. Fred is his current nom de witness protection. Formerly, he was Giovanni Manzoni, a made man in the mob, now being hidden in the Normandy region of France with his wife and teenage children under the bleary but watchful eyes of the long-suffering federal marshal, Robert Stansfield (Tommy Lee Jones). “Try to fit in,” he tells them. “I’m tired of finding you a new place every 90 days.” But those who do contradict Fred, we are shown, can end up sleeping with the fishes or just being buried in the back yard.

Co-writer/director Luc Besson enjoys genre mash-ups that can be outrageous to the point of being deranged. Sometimes that mixture of mayhem, comedy, and sentiment works better than others. Here, it works pretty well, if the idea of a combination of “The Sopranos” and “The Addams Family” seems appealing.

Fred (as we will call him) and his family are not cruel or insensitive. Fred and “Maggie” (Michelle Pfeiffer) love each other and their children, Belle (“Glee’s” Dianna Agron) and Warren (John D’Leo). You might think of them as your friendly neighborhood sociopaths with impulse control issues. Maggie is a bit of a firebug, but like her husband, she directs her antisocial behavior at those who have violated her moral code in some way, usually by being rude to her. Warren has a remarkably precocious, even preternatural, ability to size up the culture, cliques, and power of the high school in one day and master it the next, with a piece of every action in the school and a hefty squad of enforcers. Belle has her mother’s temper and her father’s wicked way with weapons — also a crush on a student teacher. And of course the guys who once dubbed Fred a made man now want to make him a dead man, with a dirty death, meaning it will be very painful for him and his family.

At the moment, though, what is occupying Fred’s attention is the barbecue the family is planning for the neighbors, the memoir he is banging out on the manual typewriter, and the brown water that comes out of the faucet. Also on his Letterman list is his pride in seeing things through to the finish and his satisfaction in knowing that his sadistic urges are exclusively applied when he causes pain for a good reason. And then, as a representative from America, he is invited to discuss an American film, Frank Sinatra’s “Some Came Running.” But there is a mix-up and the film he ends up responding to is none other than “Goodfellas.” Starring, of course, De Niro.

Yes, the plot is over the top and silly. But it isn’t really about the Blakes or about the mob. It is about the movies, and Luc Besson’s stylish fun in playing with them. What works is the performances by De Niro and Pfeiffer who have showed in “Analyze This” and “Married to the Mob” that they know how to tweak the kind of crime drama portrayals they deliver in “The Godfather, Part II,” “Scarface,” and, well, “Goodfellas” for comic purpose without making them silly or over the top. There is something giddily liberating about watching characters respond to the indignities of everyday life with such extreme measures, and something satisfying about knowing they will be able to respond to the extreme measures that are headed their way.

Parents should know that this film includes extensive and graphic crime-related violence with many shoot-outs and explosions, some chases, dead bodies, bullies, disturbing images, very strong language used by teenagers and adults, drinking, smoking, sexual references and a brief explicit situation. There is an attempted suicide and a threatened rape.

Family discussion: What qualities did Belle and Warren inherit from their parents? Why did Fred want to write his story? How do you see the influence of American films on Luc Besson’s directing style?

If you like this, try: “Analyze This,” “Married to the Mob,” “Goodfellas,” and “Some Came Running”

Related Tags:

Action/Adventure Comedy Crime