Dredd

Let’s begin by talking a little bit about the title character of the new sci-fi bloodbath, Dredd. Played by Karl Urban, Judge Dredd is a futuristic police officer who acts as judge, jury and executioner in a crime ridden super-city overrun by drugs and strangely tattooed gangs. Then when he and his rookie partner, played by Olivia Thirlby, get trapped in a gang controlled apartment tower, they must confront a dangerous drug lord (Lena Headey) in order to escape. The odds that this film would be good, by any stretch of the word, were slim. Luckily I’d take those odds on a movie any day. So to the theater we go.

Urban plays Dredd in a way that would make the comic book purists proud. The audience doesn’t learn much about the character, but that’s the way he wants it. Among the corrupt, he represents the faceless arm of the law, which is apparently a bad ass, angry arm. Though even with the limitations on the character and the wardrobe, Dredd wears a large helmet that only leaves his mouth and chin visible, Urban carries the film with solid resolve and ideals that the audience can get behind.

The film looks firmly at its heavily stylized violence to keep up the tension. The results are mixed in this aspect. While the waves and waves of expendable henchmen getting mowed down fits with the few versus many premise, instances like a vagrant getting crushed by a heavy door for no reason are just for unnecessary shock value. Plus the use of the Slow Mo drug, which makes the world seem like everything is going really slow, proves a less interesting aesthetic choice the tenth time it’s used. But you can’t blame them for wanting to take advantage of the cool concept. Ultimately, that’s how the movie turns out, cool, if not a bit over-the-top.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

The Words

When a movie boasts so many sought after young actors like Bradley Cooper, Zoe Saldana and Olivia Wilde, the odds seem pretty good that a promising script and/or director are involved. The Words is a movie about an author who wrote a book about a character that finds a book and publishes it as his own. Then when the original writer of that book comes to confront the thief, the audience finds that the stolen book is actually the story of a part of his life. It’s the Inception of the literary world. That description is a bit confusing, but it really is the story of life imitating art and the parallels between fiction and real life.

Cooper’s thieving author is portrayed as the film’s main protagonist and gives a great performance with subtle realism that flickers through a number of high and low points in the character’s situation. The main weakness acting-wise comes from the beginning of the plot wormhole, the author’s author played by Dennis Quaid. Quaid provides the bulk of the film’s narration while reading a selection from his book at a public event. But the way the veteran actor reads sounds like a fifth grader reading from their literature text book.

After a slow opening, The Words moves along well with the interweaving story lines that each prove interesting and different. The resolution of Quaid’s scenes brings the film full circle and shows a well-developed story arch. It’s also worth mentioning that the Ben Barnes led sequences are fittingly emotional. Barnes, who plays the real life version of the protagonist in the stolen book, gives a great performance. I’m not entirely sure though if the three separate layers are necessary. It just adds a bit of confusion as to who the audience should care about most. But the movie is definitely an interesting watch.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

End of Watch

I wish there was more drama in End of Watch. Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Pena star as Los Angeles cops who perform traffic stops and other menial police tasks. I’m kidding. The movie is actually full of possibly the worst situations a cop could actually be in. From start to finish there is little in the way of breaking the tension. At every turn something more brutal occurs than the scene before. When the hotshot duo continually stumbles upon the work of a Mexican drug cartel, they must deal with the added risk of having a price on their heads.

The chemistry between Gyllenhaal and Pena makes for a realistic on camera bond between two quality actors. Though it must be said that some of the drama actually takes away from the realism. The found footage perspective, which unceremoniously and inexplicably vanishes in the film’s back half, would mean that the audience would be forced to witness some everyday, boring police work. It doesn’t happen except for a two-minute look at the characters filling out paperwork. The rest is gunfights, chase scenes, murders, etc. If it weren’t for the comedic exchanges between the two, the movie would just be a bloodbath.

Putting the point-of-view breaks aside; End of Watch is an emotional trip inside a police cruiser. The intensity level remains consistently high because of the complete realism built by Gyllenhaal and Pena, with the help of some quality dialogue. I just can’t get over the fact that these cops are more soldiers than they are typical police officers. I anticipate this being a gateway role for Michael Pena who positions himself as a viable option for a comedic or dramatic lead. Gyllenhaal we already know about, always pretty solid. Maybe next time they can star in something with less decapitated bodies.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

Lawless

It seems that many movies about historic periods make viewers a bit nostalgic for a time they may or may not have actually experienced. That is absolutely not the case for Lawless, a film set in the prohibition era south filled with moonshine, crime and some very seedy individuals. Shia LaBeouf stars as Jake Bondurant, the youngest of three brothers, prominent in the Virginia moonshine trade. But when the law comes in to clean up Franklin County with an eccentric special agent, (Guy Pearce) Jake, and even more so, his older brothers, (Tom Hardy and Jason Clarke) work to stay profitable, and alive, against the growing odds.

While other gangster films have showcased this era, Lawless takes a look at the more poorly dressed backwoods version of rum-running. There are even a couple of Al Capone references to make sure it’s clear that these aren’t the high profile guys. But they are definitely interesting characters. I’m not sure how close these dramatized Bondurants are to their historical counterparts, but the fact that the story claims to be based on a true story makes the unbelievable moments that much more believable. Who knows if certain people actually survived such radical injuries, but I’m buying it.

LaBeouf gives a performance that is needed to tie the whole film together. Poignant when he needs to be, the character’s youthful naivety builds audience support and provides tons of drama. It’s hard to look away from Hardy’s performance though. With the exception of his much too huge appearance, a result of his bulking up for The Dark Knight Rises, he stays true to the character with a southern drawl, which borders on mumbling. A viewer may miss something with the dialect, but they get the picture with such an intriguing character. He even has his own legend among the citizens of the movie about him being invincible. Lawless combines the quality acting of its stars with rich subject matter to create a standout film to end the summer with. It has just the right balance between big budget thrills and movie house performances.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.

The Campaign

Is it the most authentic political movie we’ve ever seen? No, though The Campaign does surprisingly well to bring the pettiness of political battles to light in a satirical way. But when Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakis star in a movie, the comedy tends to be the main and only concern. The story has Ferrell playing a dim-witted congressman, who fits all the stereotypes of the philandering, self-obsessed politician. Then a pair of wealthy brothers (John Lithgow and Dan Akroyd) finance an opponent in order to impose their will on the district. The opponent, an unsuspecting, naïve local, played to cringe worthy glory by Galifianakis, gives the congressman an unsuspected run for his money.

Released in the thick of the American presidential campaign, the film does well to keep its distance from any actual candidates. Bringing political stereotypes and themes to the forefront, the script has the comedians attempting to outdo each other with anything that has damaged campaigns in the past (drunken driving, infidelity, negative advertisements). It really sheds light on how ridiculous campaigns are. But more importantly the movie produces almost constant laughs. It was a pleasant surprise also that Ferrell keeps his distance from his popular impression of President George W. Bush, which has been used to death.

The Campaign follows the blueprint of other Will Ferrell situation comedies. This time he’s a congressman instead of a news anchor or Nascar driver. He similarly begins to lose important aspects of his life because of his own ego. The level of predictability weakens the overall feature throughout. This includes the ending which lacks any sort of originality. This is by no means a movie that belongs on the Will Ferrell scrap heap. It isn’t his funniest, but when you’ve starred in around 50 movies, every one can’t be the best.

Each film earns either zero, a half or a full arrow in five categories. The categories are Acting, Writing/Directing, Emotion, Innovation and Overall Impression. The arrows are added up to equal the full score.