Aeon Flux

Without a doubt in all the random titles I've picked up in my 4 for $20 runs at blockbuster this is most definitely the worst. The film is a scant ninety minutes long but I was completely bored within the first fifteen. It basically takes all the elements of films like the Matrix, and manages to make them completely uninteresting. The film takes place in a post apocalyptic world where 99% of the world's population has been killed by a virus and the survivors are living in a walled off city led by a totalitarian regime. Charlize Theron stars as the titular Aeon, a member of the resistance who's sent to kill the cities leader. Of course everything may not be what it seems, blah blah blah, etc. etc etc. After about a half an hour I could not have cared less what was going to happen.

The film gives off the appearance of having style when in reality it thinks that having lots of bright colors and dressing the characters in S&M esque gear qualifies as interesting (really why do all these films think that in the future we'll stop wanting to wear comfortable clothes). It also doesn't help that Charlize Theron goes through the entire film as if she's under the influence of pain killers. It would be one thing if she acted like she was high on weed, that would have at least implied a bit of personality, but in this case its like she decided sleep walking equaled bad-ass. Let me assure you that it does not. This reminds that I'm not really convinced she's that good of an actress. I know she has an Oscar and everything and I liked her in her guest spot on Arrested Development (and of course I find Mighty Joe Young to be one of the great cinematic masterpieces of all time), but man she's been in some crap (Reindeer Games, 15 minutes, In the Valley of Elah, Childrn of the Corn III). Not a Kate Hudson level of crap, but it wouldn't hurt to say no to a script occasionally.

Oh yeah I didn't even mention that Frances McDormand was in this as the leader of the resistance and she has orange hair. So that's something.

Whatever, go watch Equilibrium or the first Matrix if you want to see this kind of film done correctly. And by correctly I mean at least acheive a level of modest entertainment.

Inglourious Basterds

I've always liked Quentin Tarantino. Say what you want about the guys style, he has a unique voice and always tries to do something interesting with whatever genre he happens to be working with whether it be a hong kong martial arts epic, a seventies style blacksploitation, or in this case a WWII film. Inglourious Basterds exhibits all of his stylistic trademarks (dialougue heavy scenes, chapter titles, and obscure cultural references) to great effect (which if you don't like Tarantino may be a bad thing) and is in general a highly entertaining movie going experience. That said I have a few thoughts:

1) The film is really extremely well cast. I'm repeating other reviews here but Christoph Walz and Melanie Laurent are particularly good as, respectively, the nazi 'Jew Hunter' and escaped jewess seeking revenge. I even enjoyed Brad Pitt's Tennessee-bred Nazi hunter who leads the squad of Basterds (his utterly ridiculous porn mustache certainly helped).

2) One of the reasons I enjoy Quentin's films is that, much like Woody Allen, he seems to revel in the spoken word. The film itself is incredibly dialogue heavy with relatively little action (especially considering its a war film featuring a nazi scalping band of American soldiers) with most of the considerable tension being generated from conversations between characters. The opening scene in particular, featuring Walz's character questioning a french farmer he suspects of harboring jews, is a master class in the slow burn and runs for a good 25 minutes during which at no point did I feel anything but increasing tension.

3) The film is incredibly entertaining, but it doesn't quite reach the level of Tarantino's best work (Kill Bill, Jackie Brown, etc). It is a bit disjointed and goes a bit crazy at the end, but the real thing holding it back is the fact that all the characters are really just sociopaths to one degree or another. Incredibly entertaining sociopaths to be sure, but sociopaths none the less. This kept me from becoming emotionally invested and as a result I didn't feel the intended impact of the climax.

4) That said Quentin pretty much throws any attempt at historical accuracy out the window and gives us the WWII he wants...and that's fine. In some ways its like Rambo II where stallone goes back and essentially re-fights the Vietnam War except it has style and is actually, you know, good. The ending goes completely insane (not necessarily a bad thing) and the film could probably stand to have dropped 15 minutes, but those are quibbles. Its still one of the most satisfying film going experiences I've had this year and I look froward to what Tarantino does next.

GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra

Watchable if forgettable. Don't get me wrong that still puts G.I. Joe thousands of miles past Transformers but its still nothing to get excited about. The plot is pretty much what you would expect so I won't get into it (of course if you think its an independent film about gay cowboys eating pudding it may not be what you expect), and to be honest its probably better than any movie based on a line of childrens toys (even a line that I spent an inordinate amount of time with growing up...shut up) has any right to be. There are some nice set pieces, and it generally keeps moving along at a reasonable pace. The biggest drawback is that the ostensible Protagonist, Duke, is played by Channing Tatum like he thinks he's in Platoon (though with less acting ability than Charlie Sheen). This is not the recommended approach for an over the top summer blockbuster that features characters named Sgt. Slaughter, Destro, Ripcord, and Cobra Commander (among others). This problem extends to the rest of the Joes (including Dennis Quaid, Rachel Nichols, and Marlon Wayans who yes I know was in Requiem for Dream but hasn't really done anything worthwhile since then. If Kate Hudson didn't exist there would be no better example of an actor who keeps getting credit for one good film even though the rest of the filmography is a disaster), whereas Cobra is not only better cast (Christopher Eccleston, Sienna Miller, and Joseph Gordon Levitt) but they seem to realize the level of ridiculousness that characterizes this type of film and go suitably over the top in their portrayals. Had they 'good guys' actually reflected this sense of fun and ridiculousness the film might have actually ended up being a better than average summer blockbuster or at least a fair amount of fun.

Funny People

You know how everybody complains that directors/writers/producers don't get enough freedom, and that studio's are inhibiting them by forcing a some arbitrary set of rules (ie. running time) on their creative vision? I'm beginning to think the criticism is unwarranted. In general when you see a creation where the creative force is allowed to do whatever he wants the result ends up unwieldy at best (Synechode, NY) or a fiasco at worst (Heaven's Gate). I think there has to be some tension and sacrifice in the creative process otherwise the final product is bloated with every idea that the creator ever had since they never have to sit down and make any real choices. Funny People is this type of film. Judd Apatow has become such a money making machine that the studio's will pretty much let him do whatever he wants, and Funny People is the manifestation of all the themes and Apatowism's (good and bad) that have populated his prior work. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing fact that he was completely unfettered this time out meant that we just got more of everything and which gets really draining after awhile. Think the first cameo (Andy Dick) is funny? Here's twenty five more. Like the first standup routine? How about another 1/2 an hours worth (actually this is the aspect I liked the most, but after awhile even it became draining). No subplot is left unintroduced, no avenue unexplored, and eventually the whole thing becomes a bit of a mess. I definitely feel like there's a good film trapped in here, the excess just needs to be trimmed away to find it.

Now I'm going to say something positive (shocking I know). Even with all of the aforementioned problems I would rather see a film like this than much of what else is playing these days (cough...transformers...cough). This film at least is the manifestation of a talented artists quest to make an engaging piece of work, and it didn't bore me and even had some memorable moments. Even though it ends up jumping the rails and being undone by its excesses, at least its nice to see somebody actually trying to do something interesting even if they ultimately fail. Plus, by not being great it allows me to make snarky comments on a little read blog. So a big win for everyone.

Note: I just started watching the first season of Carnivale on DVD and if you want to talk about something that's completely original and insane this is it. So much mythology and unexplained symbolism was introduced in the first two episodes that it makes Lost seem as complex as Everybody loves Raymond. I don't know if its going to be any good but its certainly intriguing.

500 Days of Summer

Allow me to open with a little rant that is only sort of directed at this film (note: the following paragraphs may involve a little stronger language than we usually engage in here at What I'm Watching. I would like to claim its for artistic purposes, but it really has more to do with the fact that somebody a few rows behind refused to silence their super vibrating phone for the entire run time of the film and I'm still annoyed. Its was like a freaking wasp buzzing for two hours - not good times). Anyway there are a few trends evident in most romantic comedies (particularly independent ones) that are really starting to get on my nerves. First when did male protagonists in all these films become, for lack of a better term, whiny little bitches? Its seems like every other film these days features some emo sissy boy who falls madly in love with an annoyingly unique woman that can't be caged and ends up dumping him at some point. This sends whiny into an emotional tailspin that he can only apparently cope with by getting plastered, laying around his apartment for weeks, grow previously unseen facial hair, and generally acting like he's just experienced 9/11, the sinking of the titanic, and involuntary castration all at once. I mean seriously- man up. I know being the heartless bastard that I am that I can't fully appreciate what it feels like to be emotionally broken, but come on. I refuse to believe that you can't continue to function like a relatively normal human being while dealing with emotional issues (I find heroin to be particularly helpful). I don't think these guys should be all John Wayne and go out and plow the next thing that looks at them, but I'd like to see a little self respect. This leads me into my next complaint which that our protaganists are always a creative butterfly trapped in a soul crushing job (which generally requires the wearing of a tie) for no apparent reason, but its takes getting their heart ripped out for them to get their shit together and go do something they don't actually hate with their entire being (like being, I don't know, a puppy salesman that markets exclusively to paraplegics). Hey Hollywood how's this for an original idea? Guy realizes that he needs to so something else with his life and mixes in a few night classes without having to have his balls ripped off by some borderline sociopathic indie-rock listening she-devil. You think that might work doctor? Anyway the last issue I feel like mentioning has already been covered by The Onion AV Club so I'll just send you over there to read about Manic Pixie Dream Girls.

All that aside I actually found 500 days of summer to be fairly watchable. Oh it has all of the elements that I mentioned above, but manages to keep them at (mostly) tolerable levels. The two leads (Joseph Gordon Levitt and Zoey Deschanel who I still can't decide if I find her attractive or not) are actors that I generally like and they maintain a nice easy chemistry for much of the film. I also liked that the film resolves the issue about whether they'll get back together right at the beginning, and rather spends its time using flashbacks to document what went right and wrong in the relationship. It also incorporates some nice whimsical fantasy interludes (like a musical number) that generally work and add to the proceedings. Its not perfect (of course, remember I hate everything). Like a lot of films in this genre its a little too pleased with how clever it thinks it is, and features some characters that only exist in the minds of people who don't actually pay attention to how reality works (like the ten year old sister who gives advice like she's freaking Dr. Phil). However my biggest problem with it has to do with how Los Angeles is portrayed. If you watched this film you'd think that everybody gets around the city by utilizing a mass transit system that not only gets you where you want to go with minimal fuss, but is a fun and exciting way of doing it. This is complete and utter nonsense. Nobody who can possibly help it takes mass transit in LA. The subway is nice in theory but it rarely goes anywhere useful (like say - THE FUCKING AIRPORT!!!!) and if you don't live within walking distance of a stop you have to take a bus which means at least another hour of travel even if you're going a few miles. Nobody in their right mind would engage in this on a regular basis if they could possibly help it, yet this film makes it seem like getting around the greater Los Angeles is as simple as Manhattan (do not be fooled). So yeah, the film's not bad but still succumbs to some annoying cliches.