Snatched

Posted on May 11, 2017 at 5:30 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Mature High Schooler
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for crude sexual content, brief nudity, and language throughout
Profanity:	Very strong and crude language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking and drunkenness, drug references
Violence/ Scariness:	Extended action-style comic peril and violence with some disturbing and grisly images, characters injured and killed, graphic medical procedure
Diversity Issues:	Stereotyped portrayal of South Americans
Date Released to Theaters:	May 12, 2017

Emily Middleton (Amy Schumer), pulls an old scrapbook out of the closet in her childhood home and leafs through old photos of her mother, Linda (Goldie Hawn). Like Emily, those images bring back memories of happier times and remind her how much she misses her once-adventuresome mom. Unfortunately, they also bring back our memories of better movies and how much we have missed Hawn’s irresistible effervescence in the 15 years since her last film. Schumer has been everywhere talking about how much she adores Hawn and how thrilled she was to get a chance to co-star with her in “Snatched,” directed by Jonathan Levine (“50-50,” “The Wackness,” “The Night Before”), and written by Katie Dippold (“The Heat,” “Ghostbusters”). It is too bad she relegated her to the dreary role of the risk-averse mother. And it is too bad that Schumer continues to relegate herself to the almost-as-dreary role of the immature, millennial.

Emily gets both fired and dumped (both for good reason) just as she is about to take a vacation in Ecuador, so she retreats to her childhood home, where her agoraphobic brother (Ike Barinholtz) still lives with her divorcee mother, whose character traits come straight out of the cliche drawer: she sips white wine, loves her cats, has four locks on her front door, does not know the difference between a private message and posting on a Facebook wall and needs help unlocking the CAPS key. And Schumer’s Linda is the same self-centered and childish but raunchy character we’ve seen Schumer play too many times already. Emily is too careless. Linda is too careful. Got it? The opening crawl warns us that the movie will feature “violence, mayhem, and a reckless disregard for human life…the kidnappers did bad stuff, too.” So, another “Hangover” variation in the jungles of South America (but filmed in Hawaii).

How does Emily persuade the hyper-cautious Linda to go to Ecuador with her? Wheedling and guilt don’t work, but the magic word is “nonrefundable ticket.” (“Put the ‘fun’ in ‘nonrefundable!'”) So the next thing they know, they are at an elegant resort, where, just to make sure we did not miss the point, Emily lounges by the pool in a bikini and Linda comes out dressed, as Emily points out, like the sun-sensitive character in “Powder” — or a beekeeper. And she slathers sun block on Emily like she’s a toddler.

Emily and Linda get kidnapped for ransom, bicker, escape, get captured again, bicker, escape, etc. Pretty much every South American is a servant or a criminal. The State Department is useless. There are pratfalls and shoot-outs and one very disgusting medical procedure. Various encounters along the way are funny in the usual raunchy comedy mode, especially Christopher Meloni as a khaki-wearing guide who is up for adventure but maybe not up to it, and the invaluable Wanda Sykes and Joan Cusack as American tourists with some special ops skills. The movie would have been better if it was about them.

Parents should know that this film includes very explicit sexual references and crude humor, very strong language, brief nudity, graphic medical treatment, extended peril and violence, some humor about mental illness and disability, characters injured and killed (played for comedy), and some graphic and disturbing images.

Family discussion: Who changes more on the trip, Linda or Emily? Why is it hard for Emily to be nice to her mother?

If you like this, try: “Trainwreck” and “Inside Amy Schumer”

Related Tags:

Comedy Movies -- format

Interview: Rama Burshtein on “The Wedding Plan”

Posted on May 10, 2017 at 8:00 am

Rama Burshtein (“Fill the Void”) is an observant Orthodox Jew who lives in Israel, but she reminds me in our interview that for more than half of her life, she was a secular Jew living in America. “I’m 50 years old. I became religious when I was 27 years old and still have lived more years secular than religious, still am. All my memories, all of who I am, this was not in a religious world.” That is an important part of what makes it possible for her to work with actors and crew who have different levels of religious observance and to relate to the audience for her films as well. While her new film, “The Wedding Plan,” like her first one concerns a young woman’s decision about who she will marry. But “Fill the Void” was set in a deeply religious ultra-Orthodox community, while “The Wedding Plan” characters, like Burshtein herself, are those who have chosen a more observant life as adults. So we see more variation in their practice, some uncertainty and inconsistency but more of a sense of intentionality.

The central character is Michel, played by Noa Koler in an award-winning performance of stunning intelligence and sensitivity in her first lead role. “This character is very, very complicated because she is supposed to make you laugh and cry at the same time, and it’s very complicated for any actress and… So it’s like you can’t discover anyone at that age so good but it’s not true, because Noa, she’s an actress in Israel, she played in the theatre. Everyone knows that she is talented. Nobody gave her a leading role. Ever. At the age of 35. And she’s like a genius. She is extremely talented, It’s like, I’m telling you there is no way to compare anything that she does in an audition than to other very professional actresses–good actresses. She has something that few people have in the world.” Burshtein said one of her most important roles as a director was to show Koler that she had confidence in her. “When I believed a hundred in her then she believed a hundred. But if I believed eighty, she would believe zero. Everyone around me didn’t think I’m doing right. Everyone was trying to convince me not to take her. Everyone knows that she is talented. People didn’t think that she could handle a role where all those nice guys want her. She is like the neighbour’s daughter, she’s not not Julia Roberts in ‘Notting Hill.’ You have to believe that Oz Zehavi, the guy that plays Yos, who is like a big star in Israel, that he would go for her. But I know that at the end when someone is so sincere and like the model of truth, this is what you fall in love with at the end. Even a rock star, that what you fall in love with, you don’t fall in love with a pretty face. We don’t fall in love with a pretty face, that was part of me saying that because today nobody is even asking that question. Nobody thinks that it’s unreal that he wants her.” Making that believable is very important because it helps Michal truly understand that she is lovable. “It’s like ‘La La Land,’ says Burshtein. “She brings this thing out and it suddenly all the actions are opened. She believes that the sky is the limit. It’s an energy shows in her and that brings a lot in.”

In Israel and Europe, the film was called “Through the Wall.” Burshtein says, “It’s not ‘Behind the Wall,’ it’s not ‘Breaking the Wall,’ it’s not ‘Climbing the Wall,’ it’s ‘Through the Wall,’ which is something that you cannot actually do you know. A wall is a wall. You can’t go through it unless you have a door. But that’s what she is doing. She’s going through a wall.

Burshtein wants to deliver a message with this endearing romantic comedy premise of a young woman who hires a hall for the date of her wedding even though she does not have a groom. “There is a thing that I call ‘the imaginary option,’ It’s like you always think that there is someone a little bit better than what you will have sitting in front of you. You do not see what is in front of you because you have a picture of something else. From my research, the women that can fall in love with everyone are married.” She points out that when asked why she wants to be married, Michel gives almost every possible answer except for the most important one: to love. “I would sit with a girl and ask ‘What are you looking for?’ and she’s going to give me that list. And the whole list, which is very interesting, would be what he could give her. I never had girls writing down ‘I feel like I want I want to give. I want someone that I want to do for.'”

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

Posted on May 9, 2017 at 3:13 pm

Director Guy Ritchie pretty much makes the same movie every time. Even when it is set in Victorian England (“Sherlock Holmes” with Robert Downey, Jr.) or Cold War-era Europe (“The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“), or based on a classic book (“Sherlock” again) or a remake of an Italian comedy (“Swept Away”), it’s really pretty much about corkscrew story-telling with tricked-up juxtapositions of quick cuts and slow motion, and flashbacks and side-cuts for emphasis and illumination. The characters are a motley crew of cheeky lower-class rapscallions taking on the rich and powerful. They range from wildly proficient to borderline incompetent, often damaged but usually pretty good with a quip, assuming you can understand the argot, and with their own kind of honor.

So, why not take that formula and set it in the Middle Ages, featuring some of the most enduring characters in the Western canon? What’s that, you say? Because it’s already been done by Monty Python? But they were using coconuts for horse clop clop, and we have all this lovely lolly for computers and explosions and fight scenes, that’s why! This begins with a riderless horse running from an exploding building and goes on to include a sort of three-headed mermaid octopus, a gigantic snake, and a therapeutic iowaska-style trip. Plus, of course, that sword gets pulled from the stone.

And that is how we come to have the ponderously, if generically, titled “King Arthur: The Legend of the Sword,” pretty far from the essential elements of the Arthurian legend, literally two pie slices short of a round table and no Guinevere or Galahad in sight, but per the title we do get a lot of Excalibur the sword and a bit of Arthur’s dad Uther Pendragon (Eric Bana), plus, as noted, a lot of magic and fights and explosions, plus a very cool monster, all of which are a good bit of fun.

As the story begins, the longtime pact between men and mage (magicians) is coming to an end. Uther is King, but his brother Vortigern (Jude Law, lounging menacingly in what looks like disappated British rock star garb) is so jealous that he will destroy what he loves most to get the throne, unleashing the power of the mage, which in this case includes rampaging giant elephants.

Soon Uther and the queen are dead and young Arthur is sent off in a boat, ending up in a brothel, where we see him grow up in a kaleidoscopic flurry of images that show us that he is (1) very buff (ultimately ending up as Charlie Hunnam), (2) very canny at collecting coins, (3) learning how to fight, and (4) very loyal to his friends, including the prostitutes who raised him.

Arthur’s uncle has become king. He rules with fear, which he considers not a necessary evil but the primary benefit of his position. He says it is intoxicating, that it “takes you completely.” In video game fashion, he can only assume total power if he is able to prevent Uther’s true heir from touching Excalibur to some sort of altar and completes the building of a tower. To find and kill Uther’s son, he requires every man of the right age to try to pull the sword. Thus, Arthur is revealed, though he says and possibly means that he never wanted power.

With the help of his rag tag friends from his days on the street and a mysterious mage (Astrid Bergès-Frisbey), Arthur takes on the king and his army of Blackleg soldiers. But this is exactly the problem; the one thing the audience must have in a fight is a good sense of the stakes and challenges. With magic on Arthur’s side, we never know what is really possible. And psychobabble about his not being able to access the full power of the sword until he is willing to confront his painful memories just sounds silly, in part because Hunnam, a true Ritchie not-so-anti-hero, never seems vulnerable enough to need any additional soul-searching.

It is kinetic, fast, and fun to watch, though the rumored prospect of five more in a projected series has me wishing for a mage to make it stop.

Parents should know that this film includes extended fantasy/action peril and violence, with explosions, swords, fights, arrows, torture, and monsters. Characters are injured and killed, including beloved parents, children, and spouses. There are scenes in a brothel, sexual references, and characters use some strong language, alcohol, and drugs.

Family discussion: Why does Arthur say he never had any desire for power? How do we know when is it time to face painful memories?

If you like this, try: “Excalibur” and “Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels”

Two “Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol 2” Stars Were in Another Film Together

Posted on May 5, 2017 at 3:31 pm

They don’t share any scenes in “Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2,” but they shared an entire movie together in 1989: Sylvester Stallone and Kurt Russell were “Tango & Cash,” one of the quintessential buddy cop movies of the 80’s. Remember this?

Just Jesse the Jack is Back! An Exclusive Trailer — “A Doggone Hollywood”

Posted on May 4, 2017 at 11:45 am

“A Doggone Hollywood,” starring Just Jesse the Jack, will be available on VOD and DVD June 6, 2017.

He’s got the number one show on television (starring Cynthia Rothrock, An Eye For An Eye; and Paul Logan (Sniper: Special Ops) and millions of adoring fans think he doesn’t have a care in the world. But the truth is, poor Murphy (YouTube’s “Just Jesse the Jack”) doesn’t have a friend in the world! True, he gets top billing on his weekly TV series ‘Doggie 911,’ but the old Hollywood adage – ‘It’s lonely at the top’ – certainly applies to this canine super-star. Then one day, fate steps in and some young fans (Sydney Thackray, Walker Mintz) accidentally let the little guy loose. The grateful pooch follows the kids home and they agree to hide him.

Meanwhile, the studio boss (Shadoe Stevens, The Late Late Show) has offered a big reward for his safe return, so the local sheriff (Michael Paré, (The Infiltrator) and some unscrupulous ‘agency men’ (Jaret Sacrey, Freddy James) are determined to track the dog down at all costs. So now, with dark forces closing in from all sides, can the kids save the dog, and can a lesson be taught the studio to be good to the hand that feeds them? Wagging his little tail with confidence, Murphy firmly believes he’s up to the task.