Secret in Their Eyes

Posted on November 19, 2015 at 5:28 pm

A girl is murdered. That girl, that crime and the man who did it are seen very differently by different people, all of whom are in law enforcement and all who have sworn to devote their professional lives to justice in this dark thriller based on an Oscar-winning Argentinian film (“The Secret in Their Eyes“). Just as that film used a long-unsolved murder to explore the shifts of politics and culture over the decades, this version, from writer-director Billy Ray, sets the murder in the frantic realigning of priorities following the terrorist attacks of 9/11. For those who loved her, justice for the death of the girl is all that matters. For those working on anti-terrorism, though, the suspect may be of more use out in the world as an informant than in prison as a murderer.

The story takes us back and forth between the present day and the time of the murder, in 2001. Claire (Nicole Kidman) is a District Attorney and Ray (Chiwetel Ejiofor) is an investigator newly assigned to the FBI’s anti-terrorism division. There is an immediate charged connection between them, though Claire is more reserved. Ray works with Jess (Julia Roberts), who teases him about his evident interest in Claire.

Then there is the report of a death, a body in a dumpster. Ray and Jess arrive, alert, professional, but detached, snapping on their blue latex gloves and talking about a possible connection to their work because the body was found near the mosque they are investigating.

And then Ray sees the girl and has to tell Jess that everything she cared about in the world has been destroyed. The shot of Roberts’ face as she has to go from thinking she has been called to see a body to understanding that it, that she is the one particular individual who means the most to her, “the thing,” she says, “that made me me,” is shattering to see. For the rest of the film, the radiant presence we know so well is haggard, numb, broken.

In the present day, the murder has not been solved. Because the suspect was an informant from a mosque that could have been harboring terrorists, the case against him was not pursued, and he has disappeared. But Ray has never stopped looking for him. He went through 1906 photos a night, searching every white male in the FBI’s system, for 13 years. He thinks he has found him.

More successful in mood than plot, Ray uses this story to meditate on loss, hopelessness, and the gulf between law and justice. Each of the characters wants something different from this investigation. Jess wants what she thinks of as justice but what looks more like revenge. “Death penalty would be too good for him,” she says. Ray feels somehow responsible, because he could have been with Jess’ daughter the morning she was killed. Claire wants the law to be enforced. And she still feels a connection to Ray. As for the suspect — in his own way, he is as controlled by his obsessions as the others.

Parents should know that this film includes a brutal rape and murder (off-screen) and some violence, with some peril and some injuries and abuse. There is some strong language.

Family discussion: Do you agree with Morales’ decision on how to treat Marzin? Should Ray have told Claire how he felt?

If you like this, try: the original film, “The Secret in Their Eyes” and Ray’s earlier films, “Shattered Glass” and “Breach”

Related Tags:

Tales of Halloween

Posted on October 16, 2015 at 5:25 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Mature High Schooler
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for strong bloody horror violence throughout, language and brief drug use
Profanity:	Very strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking, brief drug use
Violence/ Scariness:	Extensive and grisly violence, characters injured and killed, many disturbing images
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	October 16, 2015

True to its name, “Tales of Halloween” is a collection of ten short horror stories of the type that Boy Scouts might tell around a campfire late at night. That’s both its strength and weakness.

The movie begins on Halloween night in a small town, where a radio announcer (Adrienne Barbeau, legendary horror star making a meta point) introduces us to a series of spooky goings-on about town. What follows are ten short films by ten different directors about monsters, murderers, devils and demons. Most of the directors are veterans of the horror genre with a genuine affection for the medium. Neil Marshall (writer and director of the 2005 horror film, “The Descent”), Paul Solet (writer and director of the 2009 horror film “Grace”) and Lucky McKee (writer and director of the 2002 horror film “May”) all do their best with limited budgets. Director Darren Lynn Bousman creates an enjoyable story of a trick-or-treater who inadvertently plays a trick on the devil.

These stories are short on depth, plot and dialogue. They are long on the kind of revenge fantasies that appeal to adolescent boys. Parents who steal their kids’ Halloween candy late at night, mean baby sitters and neighborhood bullies all meet terrible fates (usually involving buckets of blood). Many of the tales are more “icky” or “gross” than serious horror stories. Some moments turn out to be more laughable than frightening. But there is a kind of cheerful innocence and simplicity to these stories that will endear them to their target audience. It will not help the film’s marketers that most of that audience will be to young to see a film that is rated R for “strong bloody horror violence throughout, language and brief drug use.”

In a 92 minute movie, there is not much time to develop each individual story. This film is not destined to become a Halloween classic but the eclectic combination of directors, actors and costume designers manages to produce some interesting moments. Some segments stand out for their low budget creativity or for unusual twists and turns. The attitude of the film is displayed in the closing credit, “No animals were harmed in the making of this film, but we sure did kill a lot of pumpkins.”

Parents should know that this is a very scary film with many disturbing images and a lot of violence, as well as drinking, drugs, and very strong language.

Family discussion: Which episode do you think was the scariest? Which villain was the most convincing? Is it important in horror to believe the victims deserved their fates?

If you like this, try: “Dead of Night”

NOTE: I am proud to disclose my conflict of interest — my daughter, Rachel Apatoff, designed the costumes for one of the segments, “The Weak and the Wicked,” clearly the highlight of the film!

Related Tags:

Horror Movies -- format Thriller

Terminator Genisys

Posted on June 30, 2015 at 5:15 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and gunplay throughout, partial nudity and brief strong language
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Intense and often graphic peril and violence, characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	July 1, 2015

Copyright Universal 2015 — Copyright Paramount 2015

“I’ll be back,” Arnold Schwarzenegger said in the first “Terminator” movie. He had the title role but only 16 lines, with about a total of 80 words. But those three words have become a legend. It now appears he meant it more than we thought, as he appears four decades later in a fifth “Terminator” movie, with two more in the pipeline.

The storyline is about how a network of computers called Skynet took over and all but destroyed life on earth, except for a small group of rebels led by John Connor. Given the time travel that occurs in the films, they in effect act as their own prequels and sequels. This is more of a side-quel, presenting some of the same characters and events in a sort of alternate, butterfly effect universe. Some changes are explained, including why a robot that looks like Arnold Schwarzenegger now looks so much older than he did in the first one. (I didn’t say it was explained persuasively, just that they recognize someone has to say something about it.) Many changes are not explained, and I am not just talking about the fact that the characters are, other than Schwarzenegger, played by different actors. Some of those changes are good. Some are not. And some are just dumb.

Here’s a good one. In the first film, we learn that John Connor has sent Kyle, his top rebel colleague back in time to protect Sarah Connor because the Terminator (Schwarzenegger) has been sent back to kill her before she can even become pregnant with Connor, to eliminate him so that he can never be born and lead the rebellion against the machines. In this film, we see it happen. John (Jason Clarke) explains that, as we already know but Kyle does not, Sarah is not yet the tough, resilient woman she will become by the end of #1 and really show us in #2. She is “scared and weak.” She is also, John tells Kyle, a waitress, though since Kyle was very young when Skynet took over and declared humanity a pestilence that had to be eradicated before it contaminated the earth beyond repair, he has no idea what that is.

But then we see Sarah (now played by “Game of Thrones'” Emilia Clarke, no relation to Jason), and she is not the frightened, inexperienced girl Kyle expected. Plus, she has Terminator of her own (Schwarzenegger) who is protecting her, not killing her.

Even by the very low standards of blockbuster sci-fi, the mumbo-jumbo here is pretty over the top, with plot holes bigger than the school bus that hangs over the side of a bridge in one of the film’s showiest action sequences. We have not quite reached nuke the fridge status yet, but we’re teetering on the brink with unanswered questions and outright subversion of some of the series’ core precepts. And it is one thing to make reference to the earlier films; it is another to wink at them and at us. Make a character we trust untrustworthy. Okay. Age the Terminator. Well…okay. Call him “Pops.” Sort of okay. Have him fake smile. Okay. Have him keep a cache of sentimental tokens. Not okay. This is not Pinocchio, and he is not going to become a Real Boy.

But hey, this is summer, and we don’t need think-y movies, right? So let’s drive right through those plot holes, enjoy seeing Arnold now fight a CGI Arnold circa 1984, hang that school bus off the bridge, and keep going, without looking back.

NOTE: Stay past the credits for a scene that will not surprise you about what’s in store for #6.

Parents should know that there is extensive and intense peril and violence throughout the film, just under the R level, with characters injured and killed and some disturbing images. There is also some discreet nudity, and brief strong language, with a couple of mildly crude sexual references.

Family discussion: If you could go back in time to make a change, what would it be? What is the best way to prevent a Skynet-type machine takeover?

If you like this, try: the first two “Terminator” movies

Jurassic World

Posted on June 10, 2015 at 5:54 pm

One problem is that we really do not know very much about dinosaurs, especially live ones, and especially genetically tweaked live ones. A bigger problem is that we keep ignoring what we do know about humans. Over and over again we see that humans are petty, greedy for both money and power, and very unclear about the line between optimism and hubris. Maybe someday we will figure out a genetic tweak to adjust that problem, but for the time being we are stuck with it, which is bad for us, but pretty good for movies. It gives us just enough of a framework for the storyline without interfering with the real purpose of the movie, which is, let’s face it, seeing people get chased by dinosaurs. And that is what happens, all right. A lot of people get chased by a lot of dinosaurs, and it is exciting and cool and a lot of fun.

Remember what Jeff Goldblum said in the first “Jurassic Park” movie? The man behind the idea of taking dino DNA from amber and re-creating creatures who died out 70 million years ago compared the delays to the opening of Disneyland. Yes, Goldblum’s expert in chaos theory replied, but “if The Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don’t eat the tourists.” Despite the devastation inflicted on the planet in the first three movies (remember that optimism/hubris problem), things have moved on, and Jurassic World is now a flourishing theme park with 20,000 visitors at a time. Indeed, it is all a little been there-done that, the dinosaurs so tame there is actually a petting zoo portion of the park, where children can ride on triceratops. Investors want better returns and Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), the director of the park, is under a lot of pressure to create more “wow factor.” The dinosaurs are no more exotic than the elephant at the zoo. “We want to be thrilled.”

She and the eighth richest man on the planet, the CEO of the company who owns Jurassic World, have decided the best way to do that is to spend $28 million to create a bigger, smarter, angrier dinosaur made up of all the scariest parts of all the other dinos. You know, Frankensaurus. What could possibly go wrong?

Making up the rest of the human cast are some disposable red shirt types whose primary job is to be clawed and/or eaten, as well as Claire’s two nephews (Nick Robinson and Ty Simpkins) and a couple of Navy vets who have been working on an experimental program to see whether raptors can be trained, Owen (Chris Pratt) and Barry (Omar Sy). There’s also a computer guy (Jake Johnson), a scientist (B.D. Wong), and the grand prize winner of the really bad idea competition, a military type (Vincent D’Onofrio) who wants to weaponize the dinosaurs and use them in combat.

There’s a terrific opening, as powerful talons crack through egg shells, terrifying literally from the very first second. Then there’s a clever twist to remind us that we are here to have PG-13-style fun. We have about an hour to familiarize us with the characters, the layout, and the vulnerabilities, oh, yes, and the characters. And the rest is people getting chased by dinosaurs in a variety of extremely intense and exciting and creative ways, and in many different locations. The 3D effects are jump-out-at-you scary. Howard makes the best of a thankless part. Claire starts out as a caricature of a control freak, dressed all in Olivia Pope white, with perfectly groomed, razor-styled red hair. We know how inhuman she is because she barely remembers the names of her nephews and refers to the dinosaurs briskly as “assets.” And she once went on a date with a print-out of the schedule. It is fun to see her become more messy and human, though ridiculous that she never takes off her high heels and gets the vapors over seeing a Real Man do Manly things.

The real wow factor in the film is Pratt, who exhibits a natural Indiana Jones-style, all-American heroism. Not many actors can hold their own against a genetically modified T-Rex the size of Godzilla, but Pratt, whether dinosaur whispering or racing his motorcycle, is an old-school hero. Even if we don’t believe there is any chemistry between his character and Howard’s, his quiet confidence and skill are as much fun as all the CGI-asauruses.

Parents should know that this film includes very intense peril and violence involving big, scary creatures with lots of teeth, many characters (human and animal) injured and killed, some graphic and disturbing images, brief strong language, brief sexual reference, discussion of parental divorce.

Family discussion: Why did things go so wrong? Whose fault was it? How did the relationship of the brothers change and why?

If you like this, try: the earlier “Jurassic Park” movies and “Walking With Dinosaurs”

Trailer: Eva — Yet Another AI Robot Movie

Posted on May 28, 2015 at 8:00 am

This is certainly turning out to be the year of the AI robot. This one stars Daniel Brühl and this time the robot is a child named EVA.