Wreck-It Ralph

Posted on November 1, 2012 at 6:00 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	Kindergarten - 3rd Grade
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG for some rude humor and mild action/violence
Profanity:	Some schoolyard language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Cartoon-style action violence and peril, guns, explosions
Diversity Issues:	Strong female and disabled character
Date Released to Theaters:	November 2, 2012
Date Released to DVD:	March 4, 2013
Amazon.com ASIN:	B00A7OIXW6

No one wants to be the bad guy anymore. In “Despicable Me,” Gru’s delightfully dastardly plans were no match for the overpowering adorableness of three little girls. “Megamind” found that being the bad guy was no fun after he vanquished the hero. Even the sharks in “Finding Nemo” became vegetarians, with support group meetings to chant, “Fish are friends, not food.”

And now there’s Ralph (John C. Reilly), having something of an existential crisis. Back in the 80’s era of arcade video games, before people had home computers and game stations and televisions that were part computer and part game station to play on, if you wanted to play a game you had to go to an arcade and get a roll of quarters. The primitive 8-bit games had a charm of their own, in part from the novelty of games on a screen instead of being based on mechanical balls and levers, and in part because their very simplicity left a lot of room for the player to fill in the details from his or her own imagination. The brilliant documentary The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters explains that in some ways these older games still provide more of a challenge — they continue to fascinate competitive players.

This is a marvelous environment for a story, whether you grew up with these games and recognize the in-jokes or haven’t played a game since Pong and Tetris, even those who do not know a Wii from a Playstation. Wreck-It Ralph is so persuasively authentic it seems to be entirely at home with what has been referred to as “the Roger Rabbit of video games.” Ralph keeps knocking down the building inhabited by the Webelo-like residents of Niceville, and the relentlessly cheerful Fixit Felix, Jr. (“30 Rock’s” Jack McBrayer), with the help of the quarter-loading player, rebuilds so fast that Ralph gets thrown off the roof of the building and everyone in Niceville has a party. Ralph doesn’t break things to be mean. It’s just his job. It’s in his code. He feels that he is as much a part of the game as Frank and the building inhabitants. Ralph shares his conflicts with an adorable villain support group (love the zombie with axes attached to his hands). But he wants more.

Ralph is just lonely. He wants to go to the party. He wants to make friends. He wants people to like him. But just as he is coded to break things, the Niceville residents are coded to be scared of him. Just to get rid of him, one of them tells him that if he can win a hero’s medal, he can be their friend. So Ralph leaves his game to find a place where he can be a hero.

Ralph visits an intense and violent military game called Hero’s Duty with a tough female commanding officer named Calhoun (Jane Lynch). She is “programmed with the most tragic backstory ever” and probably inspired by video game voice star Jennifer Hale, the combination Meryl Streep and Angelina Jolie of the video game world. Everything seems to go according to plan until he somehow ends up in Sugar Rush, a game for children that looks like NASCAR if it was designed by Katy Perry. Adorable little children race cars made out of candy and cookies.

Maybe not so adorable. Just as Ralph is not so bad, the cute little kids of Sugar Rush are not so sweet. He is annoyed by Vanellope (Sara Silverman), a bratty little girl, but then joins forces with her to help her build a race car. And then he meets the “heroes” of Sugar Rush and finds that the line between good guy and bad guy is not what he thought it was.

The witty and vibrant worlds are gorgeously imagined (and of course now available in game form themselves), with a satisfying balance of heart and humor. The story nimbly mixes existential questions of identity, purpose, and destiny with a sweet friendship and knowing humor about the world of games and gamers and even some Joseph Schumpeter-style creative destruction. I loved the Mentos jokes and the detour to the car-building site. And I loved the constant playing with almost Pirandello-esque notions of the way we create our worlds and the assumptions that underly them.

Parents should know that this movie includes video game violence with guns and explosions, some mildly disturbing images, characters in peril, and some potty humor.

Family discussion: How do you know what is “in your code” and what you can change? Can a bad guy become a hero? What did Ralph learn from Vanellope? Why did Vanellope love her car?

If you like this, try: Two more movies with bad guy-good guys, “Despicable Me” and “Megamind,” as well as “King of Kong,” the brilliant documentary about a video game competition.

Flight

Posted on November 1, 2012 at 5:59 pm

Denzel Washington is at his best playing a man who is at his worst. “Whip” Whitaker is a brilliant airline pilot who flies commercial jets. He is also in deep denial about a substance abuse and addiction problem that is out of control. We see him waking up in a daze next to a naked girl, taking an angry phone call from his ex-wife, and medicating his hangover with some alcohol and cocaine.

And then he climbs into the cockpit and takes off into a heavy, gusting rainstorm. And then something goes very, very wrong. The plane takes a nosedive. No one has time to figure out what is wrong and almost no one would have enough time to figure out how to land the plane safely. But danger hits Whip like another snort of cocaine. He is suddenly fully present, awake, and in command. He issues quiet but commanding directions to the co-pilot and senior flight attendant and he comes up with a daring series of maneuvers from jettisoning the fuel to rotating the plane that allow him to land in an open field, with a minimum of injuries and fatalities.

Director Robert Zemeckis (“Forrest Gump,” “Back to the Future,” makes a welcome return to live action after a 12-year detour to work on motion capture animation (“Beowulf,” “A Christmas Carol,” “Mars Needs Moms”). He does a masterful job staging a thrilling but almost unbearably intense plane crash, which ends with a striking image as white-gowned Baptists from the church in the field race toward the plane to help rescue the passengers.

After the crash, two things become clear. Whip saved the lives of all but six of the people on the plane, something no other pilot could have done. And Whip was severely impaired at the time because he has an enormous substance abuse problem and an even bigger denial problem. A sympathetic union rep (the always-reliable Bruce Greenwood) and savvy lawyer (the always-excellent Don Cheadle) try to protect Whip — and, not incidentally, the union, the airline, and its insurer. They challenge the toxicology report which shows the levels of alcohol and drugs in Whip’s blood at the time of the accident, so that it cannot be reviewed as evidence by the NTSB. And they warn him that he had better straighten out before the hearing. But before he leaves the hospital, he is visited by his closest friend and drug dealer (a brilliantly funny John Goodman).

In the hospital, recovering from the injuries he suffered in the crash, Whip meets Nicole, a recovering drug abuser (Kelly Reilly of “Pride and Prejudice” and “Sherlock Holmes”). They have an eerie encounter in the stairwell with an outspoken cancer patient (a terrific James Badge Dale) who chills them with his gallows humor. After they get out, Whip invites Nicole to live with him, in part because he feels sorry for her and in part because he is no good at being alone. He must learn that it is his behavior that isolates him, no matter how much he tries to hide from it. And he senses that the same qualities that make him so good as a pilot may make him vulnerable to addiction.

The script wobbles and many people will find the ending unsatisfactory. It is not clear how we are supposed to feel about the religious themes that are raised by some of the characters and Whip’s ultimate choice may seem insufficiently supported. We know not to expect an easy answer about how his problems started or what he thinks of himself, but we are entitled to a clearer understanding of what matters to Whip than we get. Still, Washington may win a third Oscar for the depth, understanding, courage, and humanity of his performance. He is always mesmerizing on screen and the power of his charisma and the subtlety of his performances makes it easy to overlook just how specific he is as an actor. But he has always been a little reserved, a little held back. He is smart and dedicated enough to use that quality to good effect in creating his characters. But here he opens up more than he ever has, allowing us to be disturbed by Whip’s carelessness and irresponsibility and the way he hurts others but holding on to our attention and loyalty. Washington is the finest actor in Hollywood and it is genuinely thrilling to watch him.

Parents should know that this is a frank portrayal of substance abuse and addiction with drinking, drunkenness, drug use and drug dealing. Characters use very strong language and the movie includes explicit sexual references and non-explicit sexual situations and pornography. There is also an extremely graphic plane crash with characters injured and killed.

Family discussion: Which characters help Whip lie? Which ones don’t? Why? How do the qualities that make Whip a good pilot make him vulnerable to addiction? What will his answer be to the question he is asked at the end of the movie? Why do the people in this movie refer to the passengers and crew as “souls?”

If you like this, try: Substance abuse classics like “The Days of Wine and Roses” and “The Lost Weekend”

Related Tags:

Not specified

Cloud Atlas

Posted on October 25, 2012 at 6:00 pm

Six nested stories set in the past, present, and future entwine grand themes of the conflicts between those who would oppress and those who demand freedom, those who must create and those who want to repeat what is already there, those who love and those who are afraid to love or be loved. Some in the audience will be enchanted by the grand scope of the story-telling and the intricate details of the mosaic that make up each of the story’s parts. Others will be impatient with the gimmicks and distracted by the prosthetics, wigs, and make-up. Many will grapple with the frustration of experiencing both reactions.

When they made the “Matrix” films, they were known as the Wachowski brothers, Andy and Larry. But since then, Larry has become Lana while resisting terms like “transition” as “complicity in a binary gender narrative.” That clearly fueled the commitment to age, race, and gender fluidity throughout the film. Even the most sharp-eyed cataloger of prosthetic noses and teeth will be surprised as the credits reveal the multiple roles taken by Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugo Weaving (Mr. Smith in the “Matrix” films), Hugh Grant, Jim Sturgess, James Broadbent, Ben Wishaw, Keith David, Doona Bae, and others.

The oldest story, set in the early 19th century and told in the traditional style of ahistorical drama, has Sturgess as a man disturbed by the abuse of slaves in the Pacific who is being poisoned by a doctor (Hanks) he thinks is curing him. His journals become a book on a shelf in the next story, set in the 1930’s, with a musician (Wishaw) writing to the man he loves about assisting a venerated composer and working on his own composition, called “Cloud Atlas.” In the 1970’s, styled to remind us of that era’s “paranoid cinema” films like “The Parallax View” and “The China Syndrome,” an investigative reporter (Berry) gets stuck in an elevator with an elderly scientist who gives her some important information about a nuclear facility. She discovers his 40-years-old correspondence with the musician in his papers. In the present day, we see something of a shaggy dog story as a British publisher (Broadbent) goes on the run from hooligans and ends up having to escape from a “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”-style facility.

Two stories are set in the future. The first, in what is now Korea, has a “Blade Runner-“ish society made up of consumers and “fabricants.” One of them sees a movie based on the story of the publisher’s escape (starring Hanks), which helps her understand that she must rebel against the abuses of her society. Her story becomes part of the origin myths of a post-apocalyptic society hundreds of years even farther into the future, where much of humanity has returned to an almost bronze-age level of technology and everyone speaks in a Jar-Jar Binks form of pidgin English that may have worked better on the printed page but on screen is intrusive and overdone.

As the the “Matrix” films, the more specific and concrete it gets, the less resonance it has. Its greatest message about human aspiration and inspiration and connection is in the message as medium. The scope and audacity of this undertaking, the biggest budget independent film in history, with the Wachowskis putting up their own homes to make the final budget numbers, outshines the details that never quite reach the clouds.

Parents should know that this film includes some graphic violence including murders, rape, shoot-outs, knives, arrows, suicide, brutal whipping, poison, car crashes, and a character being thrown off a balcony. Characters are in peril, injured and killed. There are dead bodies with disturbing images, some strong words including f-word and n-word, gay and heterosexual sexual references and explicit situations as well as nudity, crude sexual humor, portrayal of slavery and totalitarianism, smoking, and drug use.

Family discussion: Which of the stories was the most compelling and why? Who was the bravest character? Who learned the most?

If you like this, try: the book by David Mitchell and the “Matrix” movies

Alex Cross

Posted on October 18, 2012 at 6:00 pm

In “Alex Cross,” Tyler Perry is called upon to: show devastating grief, show incendiary fury, make threats, throw punches, and take over a part played twice on screen by Morgan Freeman. He is not up to any of those things. Perry is a powerhouse as a writer/director/impressario and I am a fan of his unique blend of high melodrama, low humor, and true-hearted faith in God and family. But here, in a prequel to the gritty detective films “Along Came a Spider” and “Kiss the Girls,” based on the best-selling thriller series by James Patterson, Tyler is not a good fit. It opens with Tyler as Cross in run-with-a-gun mode, chasing after a bad guy, and then we see him bantering with his long-time best friend and partner (Edward Burns) and with his gorgeous wife (Carmen Ejogo). There isn’t a persuasively authentic moment in any of that. Indeed, the 6’5″ Perry’s most believable performance is when his character has to reach something from a high shelf. That feels real.

Cross is supposed to be a Sherlock Holmes-style hyper-observant detective with a degree in psychology who is also a devoted family man with a cute-cranky mother (Cecily Tyson) who is also gangbusters in chasing, shooting, and beating up bad guys, not to mention some vigilante-style rough justice. He is always right. How do we know? His best friend/partner says, “Just once I would like it if you got something wrong because this is really getting annoying.”

And the bad guy here (an unrecognizably strung-out Matthew Fox) is also something of a super-villain who has mastered every kind of weapon and technology and has an evil genius command center with marked-up maps and mechanicals pinned to the wall (how retro) and a champion mixed martial arts combatant and specialist in torture and charcoal drawings, who leaves meticulously detailed clues that are only revealed by an Al Jaffee-style Mad fold-in.

The story begins with the murder of a gorgeous and very wealthy woman with a kinky side. She explains a statue of the god of war in her bedroom: “War is a passionate undertaking of strategy and skill just like sex. So it belongs beside the bed.” She is butchered and her three bodyguards are shot and burned. That leads to a botched attempt on one of her colleagues, an arrogant German guy who does something with money that is so important he has the kind of super-security they usually reserve for places where there is actual money and not just computers people use to move it around, except in movies where we have to show how smart the villain is by having him surmount all of the obstacles. And then it all gets very personal and very, very ugly. The body count rises, including a lot of collateral damage as well as some that hit close to home. The exposition-heavy dialog is clunky (“But this building is impenetrable!” someone says as the building is being penetrated). The banter is clunkier: “I’d rather take advice from a ham sandwich.” “Love you too, it goes without saying.” And yet, he says it.

I was not a fan of the last Alex Cross film, Along Came a Spider, because of its plot holes and factual clangers. (No, the Secret Service does not protect the children of Senators and the Russian President does not live in America.) Once again, the plot becomes increasingly more preposterous when super-detective figures out that super-villain is targeting someone who is about to make a presentation to the city council. Now, in that situation I might suggest moving the meeting to a different time or place, but no, these braniacs decide to send every cop in the city to the location to lock it down. For a presentation. That must be some power-point. It goes without saying that someone claims it’s the equivalent of impenetrable and it goes without saying that our Energizer bunny of a bad guy is way ahead of them. But they say it anyway.

Parents should know that this is an R-level movie. It has very intense and graphic violence for a PG-13 with torture including severed fingers as well as brutal fighting, guns, and bombs, very sad deaths of characters including a pregnant woman, explicit sexual situations for a PG-13 including bondage and partial nudity, some language, and references to drug use and drug dealing.

Family discussion: Who was right, Dr. Cross or his mother? What makes him so aware of the revealing details all around him?

If you like this, try: Morgan Freeman’s performances as Alex Cross in “Kiss the Girls” and “Along Came a Spider”

Here Comes the Boom

Posted on October 11, 2012 at 6:00 pm

Kevin James is so gosh-darned likable that he can make up for a lot of sub-par material, but not even he can make this tiresome effort work. James co-wrote the story, an attempted feel-good saga of a lost-mojo high school science teacher who finds his passion when the school’s music budget is cut and he decides to raise the money to save it by losing a series of mixed martial arts fights, inspiring everyone around him and winning the love of the school nurse. But the movie itself comes nowhere near mojo. It taps out right from the start and the promised Boom never arrives.

James plays Scott, who is as unenthusiastic about his students as the texting teacher in the recent “Won’t Back Down.” He does not do much other than hit on School Nurse Flores (Selma Hayek), who has as little interest in him as he as in his job, his self-respect, or his future. But he takes pity on the sweet-natured music teacher Marty Streb (Henry Winkler), who loves teaching, because budget cuts eliminate the music program just as Marty’s wife, defying the odds, becomes pregnant in her late 40’s. Scott promises to help. He takes on another job, teaching immigrants how to pass their citizenship tests, which leads to a painful scene of condescending ethnic humor. People from other countries don’t speak good English! Alert the media!

One of those students is Niko (real-life MMA star Bas Rutten, a James regular), an exercise instructor and MMA coach. Scott finds out how much money can be made by losing MMA matches and decides that since he was a college wrestler, he is “good enough to lose.” Cue the training montage and the beat-down montage. And a limply staged and random food fight. And the mojo montage, as everyone is inspired by this very uninspiring underdog story. They could have included a montage of me looking at my watch. It would last as long and be almost as exciting.

I did enjoy the use of Neil Diamond as Scott’s entrance music and Ruten has some rough charm. But Scott’s attempts to make a connection between stagnant cells and the dispiriting state of schools where teachers “can’t speed up the good ones or slow down for the other ones” falls flat because the film’s own lack of energy feels pretty stagnant itself. Boom, you say? More like a sigh.

Parents should know that this film has extended and sometimes intense “action-style” mixed martial arts violence, with no blood or graphic injuries except a dislocated shoulder but a lot of beating up and getting beaten up. It also has some language, some crude humor (barfing, crotch hit, jokes about fertility of an older woman and about cross-dressing), an AA meeting, and some ethnic humor.

Family discussion: What does “good enough to lose” mean? How did Scott’s experiences as a fighter change the way he thought about teaching? How can someone be jealous of someone else’s passion?

If you like this, try: Kevin James’ “Paul Blart: Mall Cop” or a more dramatic film about MMA fighters, “Warrior”

Related Tags:

Comedy High School Romance Sports