Coherence

Posted on June 19, 2014 at 5:47 pm

A-

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Not rated
Profanity:	Strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking, drugs
Violence/ Scariness:	Pervasive psychological horror and some violence
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	June 20, 2014

Seriously, don’t read this review until after you’ve seen the movie. The less you know, the more you will enjoy this nifty thriller, which craftily makes the most of its micro-budget to maximize a deliciously mind-bending story. As in all great thrillers, the scary stuff is not what’s on the outside, but what the stuff on the outside does to the stuff in the inside, meaning not just the inside of the characters but the inside of the audience.

James Ward Byrkit, who wrote “Rango” and created the visual design for the “Pirates of the Caribbean” movies (all with Gore Verbinski), wanted to take some time away from seven-figure-budget blockbusters and create something small and intimate. He literally shot it in his living room, with a cast of vaguely familiar looking but under the radar actors. As the movie begins, eight friends are getting together for a dinner party. We get some sense of the relationships and some tensions as they gather. They engage in routine dinner party chat, mentioning in passing some news about a comet due to pass overhead along with the usual updates and gossip. And then the phones stop working. And then the lights stop working. And then someone says he’d better go outside to find out what is happening. And we’ve all seen enough movies to know that this is probably not a great idea.

What happens next is not a plot twist but a plot Rubik’s Cube, an ingeniously plotted infinite regression of meta-realities. To say any more would be to spoil the movie’s best surprises.

Parents should know that this is a psychological thriller with a pervasive sense of dread and some violence. Characters drink and use drugs and there is strong language.

Family discussion: What decision do you wish you could go back and do over?

If you like this, try: “Identity”

22 Jump Street

Posted on June 12, 2014 at 5:55 pm

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Mature High Schooler
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for language throughout, sexual content, drug material, brief nudity and some violence
Profanity:	Constant very strong and crude language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking, drunkenness, drugs and drug dealing
Violence/ Scariness:	Comic action-style law enforcement violence, characters injured and killed
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	June 13, 2014
Date Released to DVD:	November 18, 2014
Amazon.com ASIN:	B00KPYT9PS

It can be treacherous to go meta in a sequel, especially in the sequel to movie based on a television series that was already pretty meta, with a climax that included appearances by Johnny Depp and some of the other stars of the 1980’s show about young-looking undercover cops. Meta can be smart and funny (see the movie based on another cheesy television series, “Charlie’s Angels”) but it can also be easy and self-absorbed. This sequel is in some ways about sequels, and one of its best moments comes at the very end, with a piling-on of increasingly sillier ideas for future chapters. There are a couple of nice digs at the bigger budget/lower quality/repetitiveness tradition of movie sequels at the beginning, in a scene with the hilariously deadpan Nick Offerman. But if you’re going to make that joke, you’d better be able to clear that hurdle (as Channing Tatum does in a running joke about his parkour-esque athleticism) and not face-plant (as Jonah Hill does in a recurring joke about his lack of athleticism). There are also recurring jokes about how the stars look too old to be in college, the dynamics of the two guys as a couple, and, again, about the bigger budget and repeated storylines, most of which are not as funny as the filmmakers hope.

The 21 Jump Street group has moved from the former Korean church they used as headquarters to a former Vietnamese church across the street. Hence the new address. And they have spent their bigger budget on a high-tech set-up that their commanding officer, Captain Dickson (Ice Cube), describes as suitable for Iron Man. This time, as we heard at the end of the last film, our undercover cops Schmidt (Hill) and Jenko (Tatum) are going undercover in a college. And once again they are looking for the people behind the distribution of a powerful drug. This one is known as whyfhy (pronounced Wi-Fi), and it produces four hours of intense focus (for studying) followed by four hours of wild hallucinogenics (for partying). They stop by the prison to consult with a couple of characters from the last film, and then it’s time for school.

The first film had some real insights about high school, but this one feels based on movies about college rather than the dynamics of a real college environment. There is football, fraternity hazing, and spring break, but not a lot of energy or insight. The chemistry between Hill and Tatum is still terrific, and one scene where Jenko loses it following an awkward revelation in the captain’s office works very well. Peter Stormare has an underwritten role as a generic bad guy and Wyatt Russell (son of Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell) has an underwritten role as a frat guy. The one who comes close to stealing the show here is Jillian Bell as the former roommate of the student whose death led to the undercover operation. If (heaven forbid) there is another sequel, it should not be the budget that is bigger; it should be her role.

Parents should know that this film includes extremely strong and vulgar language, sexual references and non-explicit situations, brief nudity, drinking and drunkenness, fraternity hazing, drugs and drug dealing, law enforcement violence with guns and explosions, and characters who are injured and killed.

Family discussion: Which one of the sequel ideas glimpsed at the end looks funniest? Do you prefer relationships with some friction?

If you like this, try: “21 Jump Street” and “Lethal Weapon”

DVD Extras: Commentary, deleted scenes

The Grand Seduction

Posted on June 12, 2014 at 5:55 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for some suggestive material and drug references
Profanity:	Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking and drunkenness, brief references to cocaine
Violence/ Scariness:	Tense confrontations, some medical images
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	June 13, 2014

This utterly beguiling, comfort-food remake of the French-Canadian film La Grande Seduction is about adorable residents of an impoverished fishing harbor in Canada who come up with a plan to bring a recycling factory and all of its jobs to their town. The men in the community lost more than their jobs when the fishing industry collapsed. They lost their self-respect and their sense of purpose. Also, apparently, their sense of their manhood.

But the factory will not come to town unless they have a local doctor, some cash for a side payment, and enough locals to staff the new facility. They can finesse the cash and scare up a few extra bodies. But the doctor is a challenge. Murray (the always-superb Brendan Gleeson) comes up with a preposterous plan. When a handsome young doctor named Paul (Taylor Kitsch), giddy over an athletic triumph, celebrates a little too much and a small bit of cocaine is found in his luggage at the airport, a combination of a some light blackmail gets him to the harbor and a massive “Truman Show”-style fantasy is set up to persuade him that he has found paradise. They discover that he likes cricket, so soon all of the women are dying clothes white to create cricket uniforms and the men are pretending to play a game they know nothing about and to love watching it on television at the pub, cheering whenever something may possibly have happened. They listen to his favorite music. They cook his favorite meals. And when they discover he lost his father, Murray takes him fishing and tells him about his (fictional) late son. Of course there is someone from the town under the water making sure that there’s a fish on Paul’s hook, just as Murray is skillfully baiting his metaphorical hook to reel in the doctor himself.

Director Don McKellar knows how to keep the movie sweet without becoming cloying, partly by being frank about the devastating impact of the town’s economic collapse. The specificity of the sense of place also lends weight to the storyline, its exquisite, pristine beauty and its precariousness. And then there is the superbly chosen cast, anchored by Gleeson, who keeps a twinkle in his eye but shows us the real pain and longing of the men who have been deprived of the essence of their sense of themselves. He knows that sometimes crazy times require crazy solutions. And while it may not be true that he lost a son, it is true that he has lost a great deal and that the chance to be something of a father figure to a young man heals something inside him. The wonderful Canadian actor Gordon Pinsent (“Away From Her”) and Liane Balaban (TV’s “Supernatural”) create warm, witty characters as well. It is especially nice to see Kitsch get a chance to play a nice, regular guy. Paul believes what is going on not because he is gullible but because he would really like to believe there is a place as perfect for him as this one. And we go along because we would, too.

Parents should know that this film includes sexual references, some strong language, a brief incident involving cocaine, and pub drinking and tipsiness.

Family discussion: Why was having jobs so important to the way the people of this community felt about themselves? What was the worst lie they told?

If you like this, try: “Waking Ned Devine” and “The Full Monty,” along with the original French language version of this film.

Related Tags:

Comedy Movies -- format

How to Train Your Dragon 2

Posted on June 12, 2014 at 5:55 pm

A-

Lowest Recommended Age:	Kindergarten - 3rd Grade
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG for adventure action and some mild rude humor
Profanity:	None
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Action-style violence including battles, humans and animals in peril, very sad parental death
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	June 13, 2014
Date Released to DVD:	November 10, 2014
Amazon.com ASIN:	B00LG6XHDY

“How to Train Your Dragon 2” is all fans of the original were hoping and has a good shot at being not just the best animated film of the year but one of the best in any category and for any age. The visuals are stunning, with thrillingly vertiginous 3D swoops and soars as the human characters fly on their dragons. And sorry about this #tfios fans, but this film has the tenderest love scene in theaters right now, and an exquisitely beautiful song called “The Dancing and the Dreaming,” with lyrics by Shane MacGowan and music by Jon Thor Birgisson and John Powell.

It gets off to a joyous, roller coaster-y start, with our old friends Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) and his best friend/sidekick, Toothless the dragon, who may be the last of his breed. Five years have passed since Hiccup taught the proud Vikings of his cold and stony town of Berk that dragons are to be cherished, not hunted. Hiccup’s burly father Stoick (Gerard Butler) is now very proud of his son, but does not always listen to him. Stoick wants Hiccup to follow him as leader of the community. But Hiccup is something of a loner, and would rather explore with Toothless and work on his maps than speak to the crowd or make decisions about what they should do. Hiccup’s girlfriend, Astrid (America Ferrara) is sympathetic. And she is pursuing her own dream, as we see in a rolicking, thrilling, and hilarious dragon race as the movie opens, part Quidditch, part mayhem. The Berkians may have a new appreciation and respect for dragons, but sheep, not so much.

Things get complicated quickly as two new characters appear. Drago (Djimon Hounsou) is a fierce and cruel villain, “a madman without conscience or mercy,” who is assembling a dragon army to attack Berk. And Hiccup’s travels lead to the discovery of Valka (Cate Blanchett) who is something of a dragon whisperer, a Jane Goodall of flying reptiles, who lives in a dragon sanctuary. Both have a history with Berk and with Stoick.

Advances in technology have made it possible to have more characters and more interactivity. Hundreds of figures appear on screen at a time including a fabulously imaginative flock of dragon babies and an ominous invading army. There are new striking effects like light on ice that give the images a gorgeous luminosity. One of the best developments comes from the animators’ having some fun with scale. To say more would be to spoil the surprise.

The story is endearingly true-hearted despite a few bumps. Ruffnut (Kristin Wiig) is unnecessarily mean to the two guys who have crushes on her (and to pretty much everyone else), and it is disappointing to see her take one look at Eret’s muscular arms and collapse into a exaggerated goo-goo-eyed crush. It was so painfully retro I kept expecting some sort of twist. The theory behind the source of the greatest threat is a bit wobbly, making the resolution less satisfying than it should be.

But these are minor compared to the sumptuousness of the story and power of the connection between the appealing Hiccup and Toothless and between Hiccup and the audience. What gives this story its power is not how beautiful it is, but how real it feels.

Parents should know that this film has action-style violence with battles, human and animal characters in peril, a very sad parental death, and brief potty humor. A strength of the film is the portrayal of strong, brave, and capable female and disabled characters and a very brief, subtle suggestion that one of them is gay.

Family discussion: What did Hiccup discover about himself? How is Hiccup like his father and his mother? What does Drago want?

If you like this, try: the first movie and the television series “Dragons: Riders of Berk”

Lullaby

Posted on June 10, 2014 at 8:00 am

B-

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for language and brief drug use
Profanity:	Very strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Alcohol abuse, smoking, brief drug use
Violence/ Scariness:	Very sad themes of illness and loss
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	June 13, 2014

An outstanding cast, a weighty subject, and the sincerest of intentions are almost enough to make up for an undercooked, stuntish, and stagey script in this story about a man who decides to die and the family he leaves behind.

The always-brilliant Richard Jenkins plays Robert, who has been fighting cancer for twelve years, eleven and a half longer than his doctors expected. We get a glimpse of him in a flashback, superbly confident and capable as he crisply guides a boardroom through the details of a complicated transaction and then leaves them behind to take his adored and adoring 14-year-old son Jonathan to lunch.

Garrett Hedlund plays Jonathan at 26 and we first see him getting in trouble on an airplane for smoking in the lavatory, and then persuading a flight attendant not to have him arrested with charm — and a request for sympathy because he is on his way to be with his dying father. He is on his way to be with his dying father, but we get the idea that he has been using that as an excuse for a long time.

This visit is different, though. While Jonathan and his mother Rachel (the lovely Anne Archer) and lawyer sister (“Downton Abbey’s” Jessica Brown-Findlay) tell Robert that he can get through this as he has so many times before. But he says, “I fought for 12 years. I’ve got nothing.” He wants to be taken off the drugs so he can see his family clearly. And then he wants them to let him go.

He has a surprise for them. He has given away his money. “I love you both and I raised a couple of spoiled brats,” he tells them.

It takes about a day to sort this all out, and a lot happens. Some of it is touching, as when Hedlund explains why he has stayed away: “It’s hard to love someone with an expiration date stamped on his forehead.” And he did not want to come home until he could be proud of what he had accomplished. Jonathan has to admit that he is the one who is not ready. Rachel is devoted but shows some asperity when no one acknowledges the challenges she faces as the caretaker.

But too much seems artificial. Jessica Barden, like many of the other actors, does far more than it is fair to expect with an underwritten role. In her case it is the plucky dying teenager who just wants to know what one of the normal pleasures of adolescence might feel like, which gives Jonathan an opportunity to duck out on his family as a personal Make-A-Wish, with a chorus of cute sick kids cheering him on. There is a sort of seder in the hospital chapel and an impassioned oral argument. Amy Adams shows up as Jonathan’s ex and Terrence Howard and Jennifer Hudson are the doctor and nurse. All three are sensitive performances in underwritten parts. Issues and hostilities between family members appear and disappear without the underlying emotional heft necessary to provide a reason for the changes. When Robert says he is proud of Jonathan, it is hard to understand why. And yet Jenkins and Hedlund find something in the moment that makes it matter. Writer/director Andrew Levitas shows promise, but he needs to trust his audience a little more.

Parents should know that this film deals with issues of death and dying, including assisted suicide, and it includes smoking, drinking, drugs, sexual references, and strong language.

Family discussion: Who should decide when someone should be allowed to die? Have you discussed your wishes with your family?

If you like this, try: Two Weeks with Sally Field