Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa

I completely forgot the feeling I get when watching a Jackass movie. That painful cringing, the writhing in my seat when I want to look away, but need to know what happens next. Then there are the multiple moments where I legitimately consider leaving the theater. But, of course I don’t. Well Jackass Prsents: bad Grandpa isn’t a true Jackass movie, but it’s pretty close. Johnny Knoxville returns to his crude old man role frequented throughout the series and the movie trilogy. But this time we get a story associated with him. Irving, the old man, is forced to take his grandson, played by Jackson Nicoll, across country to move in with his deadbeat dad.

The vast majority of the film is skits played out with Knoxville, Nicoll and normal citizens, who don’t know they are being filmed. Some scenes are just awkward like Nicoll telling a stranger on the street he is going to be his new father. Others are more uncomfortable as when Irving’s apparently dead wife falls out of her casket at her wake. Then there are the ones that cause the reactions I described above. How about Irving going to a male strip club and joining in the act? All three different types of skits are equally represented.

The story elements prove to be pretty weak. Early on they establish the premise for the movie, but any type of story arc is abandoned until the final act when all of a sudden an emotional context is forced on the audience. It comes across as completely out of place even though Johnny Knoxville shows that he actually is an actor, with the ability to do more than insult passers-by with insulting sexual innuendos. Nicoll is also decent, but he’s better in the improv situations than he is in the traditionally scripted segments. Bad Grandpa proves to be a worthy Jackass substitute, but it lacks the variety the previous films had.

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.

Captain Phillips

Captain Phillips gives a look at the hijacking of an American cargo ship by Somali pirates. Tom Hanks plays the titular captain, a real person who went through this ordeal in 2009. What makes the film memorable is the fact that the pirates are not the faceless villains that we think of when Somali pirates are mentioned. Instead their motivations and situations are examined alongside the civilians who are forced to take action in order to save their lives. The most prominent of them, Phillips is a heroic every man played by America’s favorite “every man,” Hanks.

As with most films based on true stories there are some questions about the authenticity of some of the scenes. But since the screenplay is based on the book account of the incident co-written by the real Richard Phillips, it has to be recognized as his version of the situation. But the actual story is so strong that there is no need to embellish it. Then the Navy SEALS show up to resolve the situation and the intensity ramps up even more. Visually, the film has a realist perspective that emphasizes the unappealing aspect of life on the sea.

At this point in his career, Hanks could play most roles and be hailed for them, but his take on Phillips presents a complex character that is tough to nail down. He does well balancing the reserved elements that define the character until he is finally able to pile on the emotion in the film’s final third. Those last scenes with the SEALS closing in on a resolution will earn Hanks a seat at a number of award shows, which frankly is a place he should be more often. This may not be the most glamorous credit on his résumé, but is intense and worthy of recognition. Also worthy of recognition is Barkhad Abdi, whose supporting performance compliments Hanks’ very well.

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.

Gravity

The hype for Gravity reminded me a lot of that which surrounded Avatar a few years ago. Everyone was talking about the 3D technology that accompanied the film. But those of us who follow movies closely have been told for years now how unnecessary 3D is. Gravity isn’t made by its 3D technology but it is a pretty cool implementation of it. The film has Sandra Bullock playing an engineer, and George Clooney is an astronaut, attempting to survive an accident in space. It’s enough to expel those childhood dreams of going to space, that’s for sure.

Director Alfonso Cuaron creates an incredible look at space that seems an accurate representation. I have never been, so I can’t confirm that. The look is so convincing in fact, when Bullock is spinning uncontrollably through space, the viewer feels that claustrophobia. When Clooney can’t move through open space, the viewer clings to the floor beneath them a bit more. Rarely have we seen a movie that has such an all-encompassing feel that brings the audience into the story with them. I mean, I even felt cold throughout the entire movie. But maybe that was just the drafty movie theater.

Bullock is the prominent figure in the movie with a vulnerable fish out of water performance. Clooney exudes the confidence of an astronaut in his element, but Bullock gives off the sense that her situation is how any of us common folk would feel in this disaster situation. Gravity is an emotional ride with an accessible presentation that gives it the rare feat of appealing to film purists and interesting the masses. So maybe I won’t ever go to space, but at least this movie told me what it’s actually like. I didn’t see a single Wookie in there.

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.

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.