Runner, Runner

I’m a fan of Justin Timberlake the actor. From his legendary status on Saturday Night Live to his unsung performance in The Social Network, he deserves the recognition he gets. But Runner, Runner is not his strongest performance. The same can be said for Batman-to-be, Ben Affleck. The film follows Timberlake’s character, a monetarily struggling grad student who loses his small amount of money in online poker. Since he’s a genius, he figures out he was cheated and goes to confront the tycoon responsible, Affleck. Intrigued by the big paydays offered to him, he accepts a position with the company whose dealings aren’t quite legal.

After a few strong performances, which were relatively subdued, Affleck’s character is full of big monologues and over-the-top moments. Affleck does well with it and is believable even though he usually plays the good guy. His bad guy persona is pretty intriguing. Timberlake’s character develops throughout the film, as we expect a lead character to do. Yet for a genius, he learns pretty slowly, especially when he gets set up on a few separate occasions.

Timberlake is a talented actor, but he continues his recent trend of sounding like he’s reading his lines for the first time on screen. It may be the fact that he is so natural in certain settings that when he’s forced to show range it’s a bit forced. We all know comedy sketch and talk show JT, so since he sounds different in drama, it’s noticeable. I still think he’ll have an Oscar in the next few years though. Runner, Runner is a compelling story filled with adequate twists and turns. The drama of the poker and gambling is underutilized in place of character development by repetition, which gets a bit old. To say the movie is predictable would be unfair because there are surprises, but after the fact I’m surprised I didn’t see what was coming.

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.

Rush

Ron Howard’s Rush pushed its superhero lead, Chris Hemsworth heavily during promotion. But the film splits its screen time with Daniel Bruhl acting as a very intriguing foil to Hemsworth. Rush is the true story of the 1970s Formula One racing rivalry between James Hunt (Hemsworth) and Niki Lauda (Bruhl). Hunt was a playboy and risk taker, while Lauda was much more calculated and reclusive. It makes for a very intriguing dynamic acted out by two strong actors with great performances. The movie shows range for Hemsworth beyond his Thor cape and is an important establishing performance for Bruhl after his breakout in Inglourious Basterds.

Formula One racing and the inherent risk involved is definitely an exciting topic to cover in a film, but with Rush the character elements are just as engaging. Hunt has the traits Hollywood movies love to portray. He has a drinking problem, is promiscuous and more interested in success than following rules. But throughout the film, Lauda’s introverted personality and scientific understanding of racing is presented as equally admirable to Hunt’s dynamic likeability. Credit is due for writer Peter Morgan and director Ron Howard because this very easily could have been a rivalry that had audiences one-sided with their allegiance.

Beyond the characters, the story balances insider racing information well with enough race car terminology to make it authentic without overloading those not familiar with the sport. The pace covers a few racing seasons, which frames the story well. A number of career developments are brushed over like Hunt’s early success in Formula One, but only big fans would really want to watch too many car tune up scenes explaining why he does well. Lately Howard is best known for his work on The Da Vinci Code and subsequent sequels, but that should change with this return to form as a true Oscar contender.

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.

Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs 2

Children’s film franchises usually follow the trusted timeline of releasing as many sequels as possible in the quickest amount of time possible. It makes sense since once a kid becomes a teenager their interest in their childhood favorites has probably waned a bit, unless that movie is Shrek because those are the best. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs had a four year break between the first film and the new sequel. But it just so happens the cast contributing their voices to the film have all become more famous during that time, so maybe that break wasn’t so bad.

Cloudy 2 has Flint (Bill Hader) getting a job at his idol’s company. But when he finds out his food machine is still working and making living food, he has to return to his home island and try to stop it. The plot borrows heavily from Jurassic Park, but these similarities come across as intentional since the menacing dinosaurs are replaced with creatures like the “toco-dile supreme” and the “double bacon cheese-spider.” For a while seeing the different “foodimals” is fun, but naming them off takes up entirely too much time on screen.

The voice cast led by Hader and Anna Faris does well to give the characters personalities beyond their own comedic tendencies. It may seem like that goes without saying. They are actors after all. But very often famous voices overwhelm their animated counterparts. That’s not the case with Cloudy 2. Overall, it’s a pleasant movie that lacks a bit of depth in terms of plot development. They wander around Jurassic Park, I mean Swallow Falls, for a long time both admiring and hiding from the “foodimals.” But it has the fun concept that will draw in young viewers. Plus the long break between the two films is solved by some quick exposition early on. So there’s no issue with that.

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.

Don Jon

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a pretty likeable commodity in Hollywood at the moment. That doesn’t change with Don Jon, but the star’s directorial debut, which he also stars in and wrote, deals with a topic not necessarily common in Hollywood. Gordon-Levitt plays Jon, who is committed to his family and church while also being a ladies man with a porn habit. When he begins dating a girl (Scarlett Johansson) with a strong liking for romantic comedies, unrealistic expectations for the opposite sex begin to make things difficult.

As an actor Gordon-Levitt is a strong lead for the film giving depth to his character that could have very easily been a 90 minute impression of “The Situation” from “The Jersey Shore.” Instead we get a guy happy with his life, who comes to a realization that his habits may not be as well-rounded as he thought. As for his direction, the film looks good, well thought out and composed for a hybrid audience of mainstream viewers and art house fans. Johansson and Julianne Moore, who plays Jon’s night school classmate, don’t come across with the depth Gordon-Levitt has however. In fact, all other characters are flat and serve a singular purpose.

Don Jon is not your typical September release. I don’t really know what month would be more fitting for the film because it’s different than all other releases this year. I’m not seeing the star turned director is the next Spielberg or anything, but there’s no doubt he went for it and aimed to make a strong first impression. The way the script addresses pornography in mainstream culture isn’t preachy in the least, but it still gets a point across about separating one’s thoughts from gender stereotypes. Don jon sends a message that Hollywood (and western culture in general) needs to hear. And it all came from the pen of the long-haired kid in “3rd Rock From the Sun.”

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.

Ain't Them Bodies Saints

After watching Ain’t Them Bodies Saints, I have no idea what the title means. Internet research tells me it means nothing. But I do know what the movie is about. Casey Affleck and Rooney Mara play a young couple torn apart after a robbery and subsequent shootout with the police. Affleck’s character goes to jail and Mara is forced to raise their daughter alone. He then escapes from jail to try and be with them. The two Oscar nominees give understated and strong performances for first time director David Lowery in the indie drama that was released to big buzz at the Sundance Film Festival.

Visually, Lowery does well making each shot count with impressive visuals to accompany the classic feeling plot. The simplicity of a jailbreak story to reunite a husband and wife is not anything new, but the emotional themes that confront Mara’s character in particular carry the film. Her main allegiance shifts from her husband to her daughter and that creates some tension filled scenes. Ben Foster, who plays, a cop Mara shot during that initial showdown proves to be a worthy foil for Affleck’s character, well-equipped with a mustache and cowboy hat. The movie does take place in Texas after all.

The story’s pace begins slowly but hits its stride as an engaging character story, well written and tension filled. After seeing Mara’s recent movie choices, this less tortured character suits her acting style very well as a quietly engaged and introspective mother. It’s not like she’s playing a character with a peachy life, but compare it to The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and Side Effects and this is a cake walk. The film has flown under the general public’s radar to this point, but if it sneaked its way into a few award categories this season, it would be well deserved.

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 Butler

It turns out The Butler isn’t the big screen adaptation of the life and times of Geoffrey from “The Fresh Prince of Bel Air.” Instead it’s the much more serious, and real, account of Cecil Gaines. Gaines, played by Forest Whitaker, was born into slavery and worked his way up to become a White House butler serving under eight different presidents. Those presidents are all portrayed by different well-known actors in an often strange guessing game presented to the audience. John Cusack as Richard Nixon, is the strangest one. The plot follows Gaines and his family through the Civil Rights Movement and a number of other important historical events in a timeline through 20th century American history.

Whitaker shows his ability as a strong actor by developing his character through a number of difficult situations. He’s more believable as the middle aged version of Gaines than he is the young 20-something, but that’s probably because Whitaker is 52 years old. David Oyelowo plays the main character’s son, who becomes a Civil Rights activist progressing through the different movements. They include marching with Martin Luther King Jr. and dipping his toes in the Black Panther Party. This role allows for an emotional performance that leaves him sympathetic while being one of the main causes of drama in the story.

The film addresses a number of serious and personal topics to Americans who lived through the powerful moments depicted in the film. But the presidential acting choices mentioned earlier take the focus off of Whitaker’s character and on to the roulette of big names. Robin Williams, James Marsden, Liev Schreiber and Alan Rickman also play the commanders in chief. It also must be noted that the script does a great job of keeping things a-political for the first two acts, making the moments about the characters and the events not the ideology. But this shifts when Rickman’s Ronal Reagan takes office and a strange back and forth ensues where the story seesaws between how the character and the audience should view the conservative leader. It’s by far the clumsiest portion of the film. But The Butler is overwhelmingly a strong presentation of American history through the eyes of a likeable, unsung hero. With a strong script and quality lead performances, it is strange there is so much weight put on the supporting role casting.

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.