[Review] Cesar Chavez
[To commemorate the limited theatrical release of Cesar Chavez, we are re-posting this review of the film from this year's South by Southwest.]
[youtube id="Zra1pBOOOJc"]
Cesar Chavez
Director: Diego Luna
Rating: N/A
Release Date: March 10, 2014 (SXSW)
Cesar Chavez was not only one of the largest and most influential icons in Latino culture, he was also one of the premier faces of the civil rights movement during the 1960s. Yet, director Diego Luna's portrayal of the labor leader's life is the first time Chavez's story has been put on the big screen. Why is that? I'm not entirely sure, but because of the gravity behind the film and how important Chavez was to many people, Cesar Chavez, the film, carries an added layer of spectacle. Because of this, it's a bit difficult to view Cesar Chavez from an objective perspective, yet its the subjectivity behind his story that will ultimately drive the film's success... or failure.
Much like all other biopics, Cesar Chavez is a fictional take on Cesar Chavez's (Michael Peña) life, spotlighting some of the major events Chavez went through, such as the formation of the United Farm Workers union, the Delano grape strike, the Modesto March, and one of Chavez's many fasts. By his side are his wife, Helen (America Ferrera), and Dolores Huerta (Rosario Dawson), another pivotal figure in the formation of the UFW. Within the context of the film, the main source of conflict for Chavez comes in the form of one grape farm owner (John Malkovich) who unites other farm owners to resist Chavez's demands for proper treatment of their contract workers. Another subplot involves the alienation between Chavez and his oldest son, creating a dichotomy between the love he received from the public, but the backlash he was receiving privately.
As I mentioned in my introduction, Cesar Chavez was one of the most important Latinos in American history... nay, one of the most influential cultural icons in history. Because of this, expectations will be high for audiences watching Cesar Chavez that may affect how the film is received. On the one hand, it's about time Chavez's life was immortalized on the silver screen. At the same time, I feel like the film will be more positively received because of who Chavez was rather than by the merits of the film itself. Cesar Chavez isn't a bad film. In fact, I think it highlights Michael Peña's true talents as an actor. However, a part of that could come from the very fact that he's portraying Cesar Chavez, yet it takes a certain ability to portray such an iconic figure. Do you sense the catch-22 I've been struggling with here?
Cesar Chavez isn't a bad film, but it doesn't necessarily stick out. Luna's depiction of Chavez's plight is great, fitting perfectly within the framework of a film, but like all biopics, reception is mostly based on the audience's familiarity with the figure. The conflict is resounding enough for audiences to be drawn to, and there are certainly going to be audiences cheering on with "Se se puede!" chants, but those will mostly come from the independent theaters. Cesar Chavez is one of the most important luminaries of the civil rights movement and Latino community, and while Cesar Chavez is a solid film that encapsulates a part of this amazing man's life, it'll unfortunately be overshadowed by the spectacle of the fact.
[Review] The Raid 2: Berandal
[To commemorate the limited theatrical release of The Raid 2: Berandal, we are re-posting this review of the film from this year's Sundance Film Festival]
[iframe id="http://movies.yahoo.com/video/39-raid-2-39-trailer-174145921.html?format=embed&player_autoplay=false"]
The Raid 2: Berandal
Director: Gareth Evans
Rating: N/A
Release Date: January 21, 2014 (Sundance)
The Raid: Redemption practically came out of nowhere and introduced me to a new form of action films. From the completely visceral cinematography capturing every bone break and ounce of gushing blood to the introduction to pencak silat, a form of Indonesian martial art that is as brutal as it is beautiful to watch. Where The Raid: Redemption lacked in story and narrative, it more than made up for in immensely entertaining and awe-inspiring fight sequences. What made the film so successful is not the aforementioned fight scenes, but because of writer/director Gareth Evans' tight focus, with the film taking place almost exclusively inside one apartment building complex.
Following on the heels of Redemption, The Raid 2: Berandal expands on the narrative, introducing audiences to the world outside of the Jakartan slums. Redemption's protagonist, Rama (Iko Uwais), turns to a senior officer to report on the events of Redemption and to take down the city's corruption once and for awhile. In order to do that, he's ordered to go undercover and infiltrate the ranks of one of the largest mob syndicates run by Bangun (Tio Pakusadewo) by befriending Bangun's son, Uco (Arifin Putra), in jail. Before long, tensions escalate into a gang war in which nobody is safe.
The plot of Berandal can be a bit confusing and overwhelming, especially for those who haven't seen Redemption yet. Where Redemption thrived in its small scale, Berandal grows the universe and storyline exponentially, introducing a myriad cast of characters. Once past the early confusion, however, the film finds its narrative stride as Rama navigates the criminal underworld. The themes are endless in Berandal, with father/son dynamics, revenge, and redemption being the most noticeable themes purveying the film. Evans' writing in Berandal is sound; whereas I had my concerns that such a large expansion would muddle the overall film, those thoughts were quickly erased in the film's first act. While Rama is the center of the action, Uco is the center of the drama, and Putra's performance is enough to sustain the plot in between fights. Most action films leave audiences just wishing for the story-driven scenes to hurry up; Berandal never lets the tension go, whether it's in the form of a fight or a plot-driven sequence; needless to say, the pacing is spot-on and near perfection. However, in saying that, the film's true bread and butter is in the action scenes.
Simply put: WOW. I don't know how Evans and his team of choreographers did it, but literally every action sequence has at least one moment where you can't help but drop your jaw in awe, surprise, excitement, entertainment, disbelief, fright, happiness, etc. I don't want to spoil anything too specific, but Berandal features one of the greatest car sequences you'll ever see in a film. If you thought you saw it all in Redemption, wait until you see Berandal; much like how the plot is expanded upon in the sequel, so too are the fight sequences. They're visceral, desperate, entertaining, and above all else, as brutal as you can imagine. With a shaky cam, each attack is accentuated with a camera shift, each throw is met with a tumble, etc., proving just how well the cinematography complemented the fights. It can be dizzying at first, but it just adds to the entire experience. The fight sequences become more nuanced and elaborate as the film goes on; there's also an evocation of classic video games (Mega Man comes to mind) where Rama will rush through grunts, meet somebody with a sense of a challenge, then finally ends with a pseudo-boss fight.
If you loved The Raid: Redemption, you're going to find yourself enamored with The Raid 2: Berandal. It's bigger, better, and more badass in every way possible, just like every successful sequel should be. Words simply won't do this film justice. Watch Berandal the first chance you get - you can thank me later. While it may be too early to tell, the The Raid franchise just might be the next greatest action film franchise... so long as Evans and his team stay on board.
[Review] Bad Words
Jason Bateman isn’t exactly an actor on the up-and-coming. With successful television series Arrested Development and other films like Horrible Bosses and Up In the Air, he’s definitely already made a name for himself that has a pretty strong following. Bad Words, however, is his first step into directing a feature length film, and I must say that this comedy full of quick wit and, well, bad words was an enjoyable movie worth seeing if in need of a few laughs.
[youtube id="yXoZCAVTzEQ"]
Bad Words
Director: Jason Bateman
Rating: R
Release Date: March 14, 2014 (limited)
Guy Trilby (Jason Bateman) is introduced as a 40-year-old man in the crowd at The Golden Quill National Spelling Bee competition. As an adult in an environment that is intended for the thriving of kids, it is believed that he’s a parent of one of the competitors until he steps up onto the stage. While his enrollment in the tournament doesn’t go uncontested, he proves his right to be up there competing by finding a few loopholes in the rule book. Without giving much of a reason as to why he’s doing this, parents are becoming enraged for the sake that their children won’t have a fair chance in the competition. He isn’t alone in this though. Jenny Widgeon (Kathryn Hahn) is a journalist following Trilby from competition to competition in the hope that she will catch the moment in which the estranged man reveals his real reasons for competition as he escalates higher and higher in the tournament. Along with her is young Chaitanya Chopra (Rohand Chand), a young boy that is completely unfazed by Guy’s choice to be a loner in life and forms a bond with the man after much persistence to be friends.
I went to this film without knowing too much about it other than a faint memory of seeing the trailer just a few months earlier, but what little expectations I had were not let down whatsoever. It’s full of quick wit and great comebacks from Bateman’s asshole of a character, and there was rarely a scene in which I wasn’t laughing. Trilby doesn’t have any intent on befriending anyone as an adult at this grade school competition, but the non-stop efforts of young, fellow competitor Chaitanya Chopra to be friends with Guy has a great impact on the humor displayed in the film. Most of the jokes are from the things that Bateman says to this naïve kid and the situations he puts them both into. In fact, the overall inappropriateness of the whole film is the driving force of this comedy, and I enjoy the seemingly mature level of immaturity that this movie took on.
I truthfully don’t have too many complaints about what I was privileged to watch. This wasn’t a comedy that changed my life forever, and I don’t see it doing any better in theaters than any other average comedy that has been put onto the market. Regardless, it was a genuinely easy viewing that kept me laughing throughout it’s entire duration, and I feel like it accomplished its goals.
Everyone in the cast put in some of their best effort for this production. Bateman is excellent at playing this person who is seemingly one of the worst human beings in existence, and his minimal evolution of a character was executed perfectly. Kathryn Hahn also brings some hilarity through her determination and underlying loneliness in the film. Allison Janney is great in comedic roles, but her character, Dr. Bernice Deagan, is the director of the spelling bee and remains serious while she’s featured.
2014 seems to be stacked with a bunch of comedies to look forward to seeing, with a lot of them coming out in late spring. Bad Words is no exception to my anticipation of a string of good laughs to come. The plot line, while predictable, was simple and easy to follow. It wasn't created to change the world of comedy, and it was an equal balance of hilarity that works that made the film just right for pure enjoyment. I don't have a dying urge to see it in theaters once again, but I probably wouldn't contest it if someone were to pop it into the DVD player on another night. If you're in need of a good laugh and have nothing better to do, I would definitely confirm that seeing this movie is worth getting into theaters to see.
[SXSW Review] Space Station 76
[Ruby Hornet will be covering SXSW from March 7th to March 16th. Follow along as we bring you exclusive film reviews, photos, daily features, and interviews with filmmakers, actors, and musicians!]
Space Station 76
Director: Jack Plotnick
Rating: N/A
Release Date: March 9, 2014 (SXSW)
In Space Station 76's alternate universe, space travel was already established and a common thing by the 1970s. Of course, despite advancements in technology, the same problems that plague us still exist: frosty interactions with others, identity crises, and just general human drama. Space Station 76 uses the framework of an alternate '70s space station to craft a story that is universal (pun intended), albeit with its own quirks. However, does it benefit from its setting, or is that nothing more than a gimmick that ultimately doesn't pan out to much? Read on and find out.
When assistant captain Jessica (Liv Tyler) joins the crew of Space Station 76, all of the simmering emotions the pre-existing crew felt comes to a head. Captain Glenn (Patrick Wilson) struggles with both his secret homosexual affair with an ex-crew member and sharing duties with Jessica, Misty (Marisa Coughlan) is in a loveless marriage with Ted (Matt Bomer) while ignoring their young daughter, Sunshine (Kylie Rogers). Donna (Kali Rocha) dreams of joining a more upscale space station with her newborn and husband, Steve (Jerry O'Connell), who is conveniently enough having an affair with Misty. Space age drama? Check.
Space Station 76 uses the space station setting to put all of these fractured people into a closed setting to drive the conflict, but it doesn't actually employ much from the space setting. In a way, I love that it doesn't lean heavily on this admittedly one-off joke, but at the same time, I would have loved to see more of the space station elements to play into the plot. A few jokes do play off of some of the space station tech, but more would have definitely helped. The time setting, however, is apparent from not only some of the aforementioned tech (such as a R.O.B.-esque robot psychiatrist) to the crew's lingo and clothes. It's a bit cheesy, but writer/director Jack Plotnick plays up the cheese effectively.
The issue with Space Station 76 is that it isn't very compelling. The film plays as a space opera, which in and of itself allows the film to be over-the-top and extravagant, yet Space Station 76 doesn't take advantage of it. It's as if Plotnick attempted to keep the film light and grounded within the confines of its setting instead of letting it float freely. Because of this, the film suffers from a lot of missed opportunities at the cost of dramatic and comedic progression. If played off as a straight satire on the '70s space setting, Space Station 76 could have been better. Instead, the film feels like an elongated sketch that never found itself.
[SXSW Review] Premature
[Ruby Hornet will be covering SXSW from March 7th to March 16th. Follow along as we bring you exclusive film reviews, photos, daily features, and interviews with filmmakers, actors, and musicians!]
[youtube id="zkyc97vmSlI"]
Premature
Director: Dan Beers
Rating: R
Release Date: March 7, 2014 (SXSW)
High school comedies have always followed the same basic formula: everyman protagonist, a group of friends, parties, sex, and shenanigans to bring everything together. Looking at the successes and failures of other high school comedies over the years, it takes more than just an outlandish premise and a talented cast - there needs to be that extra element that can help a film separate itself from its brethren. Does Premature possess that special touch that helps it be more than just "another high school comedy"? Read on and find out.
On the most important day of his young life, Rob (John Karna) has to ace an interview with a Georgetown recruiter, lose his virginity to one of the hottest girls in the school, Angela Yearwood (Carlson Young), and cap it all off with a night spent with his best friend, Gabrielle (Katie Findlay). However, the interview goes terribly, he cancels his plans with Gabrielle, and he prematurely ejaculates during his hook up with Angela. When he wakes up, he finds himself in a wet spot... at the beginning of the day. Before long, Rob realizes that he's stuck in a loop of the day's events until he can make them all right... or be forced to trigger the Groundhog Day events with his own hands. Pun intended.
Premature follows in a long line of high school comedies. However, the added time travel/Groundhog Day element adds a wrinkle to the film that not only becomes an essential plot device, but one that's inherently funny. Every time Rob ejaculates, the day resets. It's a blessing and a curse, this gift Rob has been granted from the gods. Of course, with a trigger such as this, it's hard not to let writer/director Dan Beers go full-on with it, allowing Premature to have fun while also steering the film from going too far off from the path. Unfortunately, I don't think Premature went as far as it could have with the ability to turn back time so easily. In saying that, for it to veer off into more outlandish situations would have alienated the tone of the film, so it's a mixed bag of sorts.
Premature is a fitting ode to Groundhog Day and John Hughes films (including a Glenbrook High School reference to Hughes' own alma mater, Glenbrook North), right down to the film's tone that leans more towards youthful naivety instead of raunchy sex shenanigans. However, I think this both helped and hurt Premature; I would have liked more risks to benefit more from the trigger plot device. While the jokes won't always hit, what will is the heart and character-focused priority over easy sex jokes typical of the high school comedy genre. If you're expecting Premature to be the next Superbad, your expectations aren't going to be met. Go into Premature expecting more John Hughes and less Judd Apatow, and I think you'll have a better reaction to the film.
[Review] Phantogram: Voices
Due to the overwhelming amount of electro-pop rock outfits saturating the indie scene over the past couple years, I have had difficulty latching on to any one artist or album that I enjoyed thoroughly, not just that had a couple of catchy tracks. That being said, I have been constantly listening to Phantogram's latest album Voices on repeat, discovering deliciously desperate lyrics, alluring vocals, and knock-out beats with each go around. The more I listen, the more I like.
Josh Carter (guitar, vocals) and Sarah Barthel (keyboards, vocals) made their debut in 2009 with their album Eyelid Movies, sparking attention but somewhat living in the shadows of other electronic rock groups like Sleigh Bells. They gained more glances their way collaborating with heavy hitters like Big Boi and The Flaming Lips, but lacked a strong presence musically, almost like they were stuck in electro-pop limbo. Voices is the next step in the absolute right direction.
"Fall In Love," (the first single off of the record) is enchanting, dooming, and dance-y all in one. I literally can't stop singing the hook, which is perfectly simple in comparison to the melodic verses. And I must praise the vocal melodies on this album, so often with pop music we are presented with one or two note repetitive mutterings that march on to the chorus. But Phantogram achieves excellent song structure with compelling musical lines accompanied by tragically lovely lyrics. "The lines on my face ate away at my smile, could it be that I fell apart?"
Having two lead vocalists on a project can sometimes derail the flow or energy of an album, but when Carter popped up on "Never Going Home," I was delighted at the change of direction the album took. Stripped down and organic, the track possesses a Bon Iver/David Bazaan quality that pulls you out of the electronic heavy haze.
The album seems to teeter between reality and dreams/nightmares, with tracks like "Howling At The Moon," which gives off a very aggressive, sacrificial vibe. Barthel hollers and swoons over busy beats singing "And if I ever fall asleep I'll turn around and face the sea. And if I crucified my dreams to be on your side, to see you alive." Followed immediately by "Bad Dreams" which is less violent and more lyrical as Barthel confesses "Bad dreams never effect me I'm not afraid of the concrete... bad thoughts never arrest me, I'm just a flash in the memory." reality kicks in on the bass heavy "Celebrating Nothing," one of my favorites off the album. Barthel sings about failures and empty living, pleading for a reason to go on if there's nothing to look forward to or no one to celebrate with. "How many times will I blow it all? How many times will I burn it down? Give me a reason to stay alive."
The album pulls you through various emotions and sounds, breaking your heart and burning a fire in your brain. Voices is the complete package, each track executed flawlessly, proving the album to be the boost that Phantogram needed to land themselves at the top of the electro-pop chain. Get Voices here and be sure to listen from beginning to end.
[Review] Cheap Thrills
How far would you go to take care of your family, for a quick buck that could provide financial stability? Desperate times call for desperate measures, and Cheap Thrills is a film about desperation in two men. Framed as a "comedy thriller," E.L. Katz's film debut is a pulpy, late-night thriller that will attain a cult following. However, will that sense of appeal attract the average moviegoer? Read on and find out.
[iframe id="movies.yahoo.com/video/cheap-thrills-red-band-trailer-231043378.html?format=embed&player_autoplay=false"]
Cheap Thrills
Director: E.L. Katz
Rating: N/A
Release Date: February 21, 2014 (Movies on Demand), March 21, 2014 (Limited)
Craig (Pat Healy) is an aspiring writer facing financial troubles with his wife and young son. After finding an eviction notice and being laid off from his auto shop job, he decides to drown his sorrows at a local bar. There, he is reunited with an estranged old friend, Vince (Ethan Embry). As they catch up, they attract the attention of a married couple, Colin (David Koechner) and Violet (Sara Paxton). The couple offer low-risk dares to Craig and Vince for a few hundreds of dollars, but as the night goes on, the dares become riskier... and the money greater. Exactly how far would the two old friends go for the promise of a new life?
The four characters play specific archetypes that help move the film along. Craig is the desperate lead audiences hope to empathize with; Vince is the down on his luck, selfish ne'er do well; Colin is the abundantly rich instigator; Violet is the mysterious, silent fourth party. However, unlike other thrillers that lack any real empathy or humanity, each character displays some level of decency. For example, while Colin is the main proprietor pushing Craig and Vince to embarrass and demoralize themselves (and each other), he still has a set moral line that he won't cross. At the same time, as the bets become larger, Craig and Vince's levels of morality are slowly stripped away. The real question, then, is the money enough to lose yourself and your humanity?
Unfortunately, Cheap Thrills doesn't answer this question. While there are shallow hints at the cost of Craig and Vince's sacrifices, it's never fully analyzed. As a pulp thriller, this is somewhat acceptable; it would just have added an extra level of depth to a film that, for better or worse, is perfectly summarized by its own title - Cheap Thrills is nothing more than that. With such a promising premise, the film falls flat and doesn't live up to its potential.
One of the largest reasons for the film falling short is the film's tone. Even though it's branded as a "comedy thriller" and there are a few light-hearted moments, any sense of comedy is gone by the wayside. Rather, the film is built up with more and more exploitative scenes of desperation, culminating in a really dark ending. While this will attract horror fans, it didn't work for me. If the tone were more in line with a dark satire or had something "extra," I think I would have been more receptive to the film.
As I insinuated earlier, Cheap Thrills is nothing more than its title. There will be scenes that'll make you cringe, and horror/thriller/gore fans will love them. However, if you're looking for something with much more substance, you'll be better suited looking elsewhere.
[RH Review] Love is in the Air
The earliest part of the year always seem to be somewhat of a drag as far as cinema goes. Box offices are fueled by the lust of Valentine’s Day, and it seems that cheesy romance prevails over high quality filmmaking. However, if there is any time when the cheesiness of these types of films can be somewhat forgiven, it would be during these early months of the year when the holiday is celebrated.
Upon beginning Love Is In The Air (Amour et Turbulences), I had a lot of expectations of it being a just another corny romantic comedy. However, I had a slight hope that its French origin would give it a few interesting twists and turns here and there. Sadly, my original expectations were fulfilled. While it is definitely not the worst film in its genre, it lacks anything within the plot line in order to make it stand out from other films produced of this kind.
[youtube id="ViEiu0XrGNE"]
Love is in the Air
Director: Alexandre Castagnetti
Country: France
Release Date: January 31st, 2014
Julie (Ludivine Sagnier) is a young woman headed to the airport in order to get back to her fiancé in France. She is quite the perfectionist but has a drive to succeed with her artwork. Simultaneously, Antoine (Nicholas Bedos), an attractive womanizer of sorts, scrambles from the aftermath of a party to catch the next available flight to France. Coincidentally, he and Julie sit beside each other. The moment they lock eyes, a montage of flashbacks reveals that the two have had some sort of relationship in their past. They, while sharing their multitude of stories to passengers on their 6 hour flight, argue and reminisce on times when the chemistry was strong between them. As the sparks slowly rekindle, the pair finds themselves conflicted as to what will happen when their plane touches the ground.
As far as classic Hollywood film structure goes, this film fits right in. While it is pretty clear that those who made this movie were not signing up for anything life-changing, it seems like an effort to make this story more interesting was absolutely non-existent. The formula-ed film structure is utilized with little to no creative variation, and I must say that I could have told you the ending within the first scene. Like most romantic films, it was bland and full of situations that have been in far too many similar workings. Perhaps if they had veered a little bit off this extremely beaten path it would have caught my attention more.
I think romantic comedies set everyone's standards too high on how to live in a real relationship. As far as films in this category go, Love is in the Air was very well done. Little choices such as lighting or conditions on the airplane are well thought out for the tensions in each situation, but they don't make up for all of the convenient coincidences.
Although it only follows the classic, linear formulation for creating a screenplay, it is utilized in its best form to capture the lightheartedness that this film takes on. People love these kinds of movies because they are simple, fairly short, and make them feel really good about themselves after. It is easy to follow, and it would make for a good movie to watch on a rainy day. I can't see this being a movie to be remembered for a lifetime, but I guess it is a lot better than most creations out there.
Love Is In The Air is certainly not a film for everyone. Lacking a complex plot line or reason to think that the two main characters wouldn't end up together in any way is super ridiculous. It completely fulfilled all of the requirements in order to have it be extra corny. Nonetheless, if it weren't for its subtitles (because most Americans are usually too lazy to read them), I could see this film blowing up (unfortunately) like anything Nicholas Sparks smacks his name onto. Love Is In The Air is a cute, simple, romantic film that I personally did not enjoy just because of the cliché it perpetuates, but most normal, 20-something females probably will.