The Campaign

The Campaign is almost as ridiculous and lowest-common-denominator focused as real life politics. Yes, a satire of America’s democratic process should be filled with brainless gags. But the goal should be for the tomfoolery to be consistently funny as well as over-the-top. The Campaign loses sight of the funny and ends up being staggeringly boring by bombarding you with one stupid gag after another with no break to come up for air. Sure it has the random funny bit to wake a chuckle or an "awww” out of you but with the sheer volume of jokes thrown out in the film there are bound to be a few hits amongst all the misses.

Will Ferrell plays the philandering husband and multi-term North Carolina congressman, Cam Brady. Two deep-pocketed CEOs, the Motch brothers, played by Dan Akroyd and John Lithgow, decide to put up a rival/puppet candidate against Brady in the 2012 election. They chose the lisp-talking mustachioed Marty Huggins, played by Zach Galifianakis. Both candidates are asses who find ways to make bigger asses of themselves and each other than they already are. The thing about Huggins is that he is an ass with a heart of gold and two adorable pugs who steal every scene they are in. So, if I had to vote for the lesser of the two evils then I would vote for him almost solely because of the pugs. Aside from the cute and cuddly pugs, only two other things make this movie somewhat bearable. The first is Dylan McDermott who played the ruthless campaign manager Tim Wattley. He was subtle and he was the most amusing character in the film. The second was seeing Wolf Blitzer and Chris Matthews deliver the news of the candidates high-jinks, from the baby punching and the Uggie punching to the sex tape being used as a campaign commercial. I could go on, but I am already trying to forget the hour and a half of my life that I lost to this film.

Killer Joe

William Friedkin directed the crap out of Killer Joe. It is hard not to appreciate the way he smushed together dynamic humor and appalling images. Killer Joe is laugh-out-loud funny. And not that sort of uncomfortable laughter you might do when you see a stranger (or friend) trip and fall. You know, the laughter that comes when you aren’t sure if the stranger (or friend) is seriously injured or not? It’s not that laughter. It’s the laughter that comes from real comedic timing and delivery on the part of an outstanding ensemble cast.

Emile Hirsch plays Chris a drug dealer from a north Texas town who gets himself into a financial bind when his mom steals his supply. His solution? Hire a contract killer, Joe played by Matthew McConaughey, to kill his mom so he can collect on her life insurance policy. Oh gosh, will this plan go off without a hitch? I’m not sure if I’m giving too much a way, but no. Things will not go off without a hitch. Not even close. The story is ridiculous and highly entertaining. And Hirsch, who I’ve only every referred to before as Speed, was excellent in his role in this silly/violent/silly plotline. And as far as McConaughey is concerned, I’m beginning to think he plays himself in every movie he is in, Killer Joe is no exception. And contrary to how that might initially sound, I actually mean that as a compliment…

The compliments don’t end with the two of them. I have appreciated Thomas Haden Church for a long time now. I am ready for others to love him as much I do. This movie may help with this. He plays Ansel, Chris’ dimwitted father. He is amazing. No one can play dumb like he can. And his splotchy facial hair is so hideous that I can’t help but be proud of his commitment to the role. Ansel is married to his second wife, Sharla played by good ol’ Gina Gershon. That woman knows how to play a tramp. She is a contemptible character in the film. But for as vile as Sharla is, she does not deserve the treatment she receives from Joe in the film. And I have saved the best for last, Dottie. Juno Temple plays her and oh, how she plays her. There is something sad and yet beautiful about her character. She is complex and powerful even though she has the outward appearance of a weak and childish girl. If I didn’t know that she was from England, I would have thought that she was born and bred in Texas. Temple has talent oozing out her pores. And if you have any question about her pores you can see just about all of them in this film. She is not shy about baring it all.

If you are shy about people baring it all then Killer Joe will not be your cup of tea. Also, the film is dark, disturbing, and has the potential to offend great masses of people. Killer Joe is rated NC17. This could be because the rating system is completely inconsistent, unpredictable, and unfair. It could also be because of the pesky graphic violence and nudity. But none of the violence or nudity seemed out of place or excessive. Of course, if you go into this film expecting male frontal nudity and women beating up men, you will be let down. Don’t let that dissuade you from seeing the film though. All of the violence in the film felt incredibly real. It is a fact that it’s just more common in life that we hear about men hitting other men and women and not so much women beating on other women or men. And for some reason people find naked women less offensive than naked men. The film takes advantage of these two facts. Also, I would be remiss if I did not mention the fried chicken in this film. Although I already won’t eat fried chicken, if I did before this film I would think twice about eating it after this film. I will leave it at that.

Safety Not Guaranteed

For a film based on a classified ad that was posted as a joke/filler ad in the 90s, Safety Not Guaranteed was not awful as one might expect. In fact, the story-lines in the film were remarkably earnest and more than sufficiently entertaining.

Kenneth placed a classified ad seeking a companion for a time traveling expedition warning that he had only done it once before and safety was not guaranteed. One magazine employee, Jeff, along with two interns, Arnau & Darius, were assigned to investigate and report on what this Kenneth guy was all about. In the process of learning more about the temporally mysterious Kenneth, they find out about themselves and each other. There was an overwhelming amount of self-discovery in this film which could have gotten old fast. But surprisingly it didn't. At least not for me. And I think that may be because of how the robust and honest stories unfolded, how the weirdness happened, and how the friendships blossomed so convincingly in the film.

(FilmDistrict and Big Beach)

Kenneth, played by Mark Duplass, was a tough nut to crack. He was the sort of guy who does a balancing act on the thin line between endearing and annoying. He acted as though he was stronger and more intelligent than he actually was and he had a mullet. Darius, played by Aubrey Plaza, was the female intern who was able to gain the trust of Kenneth. She was a loner-girl with family issues. She was likable and witty, but she keeps most people at a distance. The chemistry between the two of them was quite distinct. Their story-line seemed to be the main focus of the film but it was obvious early on that their story alone was not enough to support the entire film. Thankfully, you have the ever-so-full-of-himself Jeff, played by Jake M. Johnson, and the not-even-remotely-close-to-full-of-himself Arnau, played by Karan Soni. These two end up spending less time working on the article about the "time-travelling" Kenneth and more time learning how to come out from behind their emotionally protective barriers and behave like normal and functioning humans. Jeff started off as a prick but after spending time with the super shy Arnau he became slightly less prickish, almost respectable. And Arnau’s confidence meter climbed a few noticeable notches throughout the course of the movie. They were characters who were worth the time invested in watching the film.

When you break it down each of the four main characters in the film could be classified as depressed, but depressed in an 'entertaining to watch' kind of way. It was impressive how well the characters came across as real people. I have met Kenneth's and Arnau's before, several, in fact and all in primary school. You can be certain there is a douchey Jeff on almost every street corner. And there are probably loads of Darius’ in the world, although most of them are not as thin and pretty as Plaza. It was nice to watch these true-to-life characters evolve the way they did in the film. It was not nice to see Plaza and Duplass kiss though. As much as they worked well together, the two of them kissing somehow felt wrong. There were little things like that throughout the film. It was full of a number of strange contrasts. But all the complaints I had about film were balanced out by some thing to praise about the film. It was familiar yet unexpected, serious yet silly, and just what I was looking for yet I didn’t know exactly what I was looking for.

Bernie

Richard Linklater done-did-good with Bernie. In making this film, he gave Jack Black an opportunity to show the world that he has serious acting chops and he gave Shirley MacLaine the opportunity to have some fun with a role that she was oddly perfect for...

In Bernie, the two main characters were people with "issues." You had Black, who played Bernie Tiede, an effeminate (aka super gay yet also super Christian) assistant funeral director and MacLaine, who played Marjorie Nugent, a rich widow with a forceful personality (aka often ornery and likely misunderstood). Bernie and Marjorie met and became "friends" while Marjorie was grieving over the loss of her husband. The relationship between Bernie and Marjorie was an unusual one and not at all a healthy one. You see, it ended when Bernie shot Marjorie in the back and stored her in her own freezer for a few months while he used her money to become something of a small town philanthropist. He was found out and tried for her murder and then things became even more interesting.

The storyline was woven together with interviews of townspeople talking about Bernie and Marjorie. The interviews had the potential to detract from the story. They didn't, instead they made the movie. The interviews were a big reason why Bernie was fun to watch. They were necessary. The film wasn’t so much about who Bernie and Marjorie were but how they were perceived by others. Marjorie was hated because she was a rich "bitch" and Bernie was loved because he was overly friendly and did things for others. It was an interesting dynamic but the way people judge others in itself is not unusual. The unusual thing was that Bernie was so loved by the townspeople that, even after giving a confession, a large portion of the townspeople wanted him to be set free. It was up to Matthew McConaughey as the quirky District Attorney Danny Buck Davidson to go outside of the box and outside of the county to receive a fair trial against Bernie. It is a unique story that is told with some serious flair.

You can describe Bernie as almost any genre and provide a somewhat accurate description of what the film is. I choose to describe it as a dark-comedy/docu-drama/crimey-whimey type film. It has a lot to offer and it is worth checking out. There are many things to appreciate in this film for anyone who has lived in, visited, loved, hated, or just simply heard about Texas. And although the story is based on events that happened in a Texas town, it makes little sense to hold that fact against the film because the film is more about small town mentalities and eccentricities than anything else. Plus it's a chance to see Jack Black really act. He surprised and impressed me. I wouldn't be too shocked if he ended up with an award or two for this performance.

(Millenium Entertainment)

Oh and Dale Dudley played a very believable radio personality in the film. It was a stretch for him, I am sure, but he pulled it off. So there was amazing acting all around, from Jack Black all the way to Dale Dudley.

Dark Shadows

The recipe for Dark Shadows appeared to be as follows: a pinch of Beetlejuice, a dash of Edward Scissorhands, and a reckless amount of excrement. The film was made without any care or consideration for the loyal fans who expected a decent film. Dark Shadows conjured up images of meadow muffins. Evil meadow muffins. You see, meadow muffins don’t sound half bad when you hear the name. But once you are within viewing and smelling distance the awful truth of what they are comes out to assault your senses. And Dark Shadows did not take long to show its true colors as a big mound of poop.

Sure, my expectations were high. It was not only a Tim Burton film starring Johnny Depp, but it was also a film based on a beloved gothic soap opera. I am not convinced Burton had a clear idea of what this Dark Shadows film was supposed to be...other than an excuse to work with his buddies Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, and Michelle Pfeiffer. Fun for Burton, bad for the audience. If it was meant to be a spoof then it was a failure. It lacked both intelligence and humor. The dialogue had more cringe-worthy moments then I could count. The plot development seemed haphazard and uncomfortable. And the acting was painfully below average. The most well executed part of the film was the clear and undeniable advertisement for McDonald’s. Did I go out and pick up some McDonald’s on my way home from the movie? No. I did not. Would I recommend this film to anyone that I like? No. I would not.

The Pirates! Band of Misfits

aka The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!

I am unclear on the reasoning behind changing the title of a movie based on a book called ‘The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!’ to ‘The Pirates! Band of Misfits’ for US and Australian audiences but I don’t hold that against this movie itself. I did before seeing the film. But after seeing it, I can safely say that ‘The Pirates! Band of Misfits’ is not a horrible title. The film is about 75% pirate-y and 25% scientist-y. And the pirates truly are a bunch of misfits, which is a big part of their appeal.

The clay figure characters, the sets, and the humor in this film are so well thought out and executed that it almost doesn’t matter that the plot ended up being the weakest part of the film. The characters are unmistakably Aardman. They have crazy little teeth and express more emotion than any number of human performers ever could. The sets used in the film are intricate and stunning to look at. The film is laced with an overwhelming amount of wit and whimsy. There is something to giggle at, snicker at, or just plain laugh at in almost every minute of The Pirates! The plot ends up being something of a let-down because while it is never entirely unimaginative, it is quite conventional.

The film is a pirate caper set in 1837, which centers on The Pirate Captain (Hugh Grant) and his quest to finally be voted Pirate of the Year. I think it is safe to say that The Pirate Captain is not well suited to be a pirate, or a captain, let alone Pirate of the Year. He’s not a great pillager and his plundering skills are lacking. Nevertheless, his small and tremendously loyal crew is willing to help him with almost every silly, misplaced step along the way. During their pursuit toward the ultimate pirating prize, The Pirate Captain and his crew meet a young Charles Darwin (David Tennant), his brilliant ‘manpanzee’, and an evil Queen Victoria (Imelda Staunton). The main scientist of the film, Darwin, informs the crew that The Pirate Captain’s plump parrot Polly is not really a parrot, but in fact, a dodo. Polly may just be the key to the Pirate Captain finally getting the recognition that he so desperately desires.  But one of the many things I learned from this film is that nothing in a pirate’s life comes without some sort of cost. After all, what respectable children’s movie doesn’t come loaded with a whole lot of knowledge nuggets?

I left this film with three things that I did not have before:
1. A greater appreciation for the actor who plays the second in command, The Pirate with the Scarf , Martin Freeman. (It made me more interested in seeing how he will do in The Hobbit.)
2. A more solidified belief that 3D is unnecessary. (I did not see it in 3D.)
3. A hankering for some ham. (That’s right. Ham.)

Beginners

Beginners seemed like an interesting enough film in its own right, but knowing that Christopher Plummer picked up several awards, including an Oscar, for his supporting role in the film it became a nagging sort of necessity that I see it. Since it was his first Oscar win, I had to see how good of a performance he actually gave. After all, as many of us know, he was robbed of a nomination, let alone a win, for his role in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. But let’s not dwell on that...

Beginners was a sentimental, depressing, and complex film. The story was set in three different time periods in the life of an American graphic designer, Oliver (Ewan McGregor). In the ‘present’ part of the film Oliver was dealing with life after the death of his father Hal (Christopher Plummer). He was also dealing with a new romantic relationship with Anna (Mélanie Laurent) and having a new roommate Arthur (Cosmo), his late father’s Jack Russell terrier/scene stealer. In the ‘recent past’ part of the film Oliver was dealing with the passing of his mother, the news that his father was coming out of the closet AND the news that his father had also been diagnosed with the terminal cancer. Finally, in the ‘not-so-recent past’ part of the film Oliver was dealing with being a kid who had a great relationship with his melancholy-yet-loving mother a less than great/almost non-existent relationship with his busy hard-working father. There was a lot going on in the film and it was all handled in an honest and charming way. However, even with three plot lines going on, there were still a fair amount of lulls in flow of the film.

Thankfully, there were no lulls in the chemistry between the four lead characters. I thoroughly enjoyed the interactions between them. The strongest character, in my opinion, was Arthur. He was a little ray of sunshine in an otherwise depressing film. Arthur is, of course, a dog but writer/director Mike Mills made him a hopeful and uplifting character in a very clever way. He did this by expressing Arthur’s thoughts in the form of subtitles. I understand this could very well be considered too ‘cutesy’ for some, but for me, I loved it. In fact, Cosmo would have been a better supporting actor nominee than Plummer based on this film. Cosmo played his role subtly and playfully. He was a dog full of soul and intrigue. I’m not completely blinded by Cosmo’s performance though. Plummer did do a fantastic job. He played an old man with ease, but considering his age and film career, I would expect nothing less.