New in Town

© 2009 Ray Wong

0

Renée Zellweger seems to have been stuck in a rut lately. Since her Oscar-winning performance in Cold Mountain, she's turned her attention to romantic comedies, and the result has been less than stellar. Perhaps she should take Kate Winslet's advice and do a holocaust movie. Or perhaps she should read the scripts before committing to the projects.

1Lucy Hill (Renée Zellweger) is an ambitious business executive from Miami living what she considers a good life -- fast track up the corporate ladder, a posh condo, and an active life as a single woman. But being the only woman in the management team means she's to work harder, and soon she finds herself being sent to do a thankless job -- going to a small town in Minnesota, in the dead of winter, to downsize a manufacturing plant. Determined to do what it takes to succeed, Lucy sets out to get in and get out of the god-forsaken town as quickly as possible.

2There, she meets a slew of folksy townspeople, most of whom work at the plant which is pretty much the biggest employer. There is Blanche (Siobhan Fallon), her executive assistant who doesn't quite know personal boundaries, and Stu (J.K. Simmons), the beloved foreman who doesn't take Lucy seriously. And Ted (Harry Connick Jr.), the widowed union rep whom Blanche is trying to fix up with Lucy.

3Lucy, of course, would have nothing to do with these hillbillies. She's supposed to automate the plant and lay off half the employees. But the more she gets to know these people, the more she understands what's been missing in her life. And despite her first impression, she realizes just how sexy the down-to-earth union rep really is...

4Renée Zellweger (Leatherheads) is not a bad actress, but she needs materials that play to her talent and ability, not the other way around. Lately she simply hasn't found the type of roles like the one that netted her an Oscar. Here, she's trying to act cute and sassy but something is off. At first she comes off as smug, and a bit too "weathered." She eases into the role much much as she comes back down to Earth to play a more simple person. Zellweger isn't necessarily miscast here, but she hasn't really risen above the material either.

5Harry Connick Jr. (P.S. I Love You) is an odd choice for the "hillbilly" love interest. He does okay, displaying an disarming charm. But his role is too calm, despite an earlier scene in which he and Zellweger get into a verbal spat, to make an impression. He is just blend as the romantic lead.

6The supporting cast is rather good in their stereotypical parts, with Siobhan Fallon (Baby Mama) in an amiable role as the meddling secretary. Her fake accent is a bit off-putting, as are that of the other "Minnesotans." J.K. Simmons (Burn After Reading) is his normal goofy, grumpy self, playing the grizzly foreman.

7Written by Ken Rance (Wednesday Afternoon) and C. Jay Cox (Latter Days), the screenplay is lame at best, contrived at worst. It's your typical fish-out-of-water story, and the writers pick the most polar (pun intended) opposites: sunny Miami and deep-freeze Minnesota. The problem is, as a comedy, the plot and characters are uninspiring, cliched and stereotypical. I wonder what Minnesotans think about this. The jokes are lame and the characters lack certain believability. Even the courtship between Lucy and Ted seems forced, even though the leads have good chemistry together. There mutual attraction is there, but the progression of their relationship is so trivial.

8There are two plot threads going on, one involving the unlikely romance between Lucy and Ted, and the other involving the townsfolk and plant. To the writers' credit, they manage to mesh the two subplots together. The problem is that neither has enough dramatic conflict to sustain the film. The plots move along fine, but somehow we just really don't care, especially since everything is so predictable. We know from the every first scene where the story is going.

Danish director Jonas Elmer (Nynne) keeps the plot moving and the characters' interactions simple. The production is workmanlike but it's surprising to see how plain everything looks, even in sunny Miami. I've seen better production value in TV shows.

New in Town is a tired, conventional romantic comedy that may have worked in the 80s but fails to truly engage today's cynical audiences. It's one film that won't stay in town for too long.


Stars: Renée Zellweger, Harry Connick Jr., Siobhan Fallon, J.K. Simmons, Mike O'Brien, Frances Conroy
Director: Jonas Elmer
Writers: Ken Rance, C. Jay Cox
Distributor: Lionsgate
MPAA Rating: PG for language and some suggestive material
Running Time: 96 Minutes

Ratings:

Script – 5
Performance – 6
Direction – 5
Cinematography – 6
Music/Sound– 6
Editing – 7
Production – 6

Total – 5.6 out of 10

Inkheart

© 2009 Ray Wong

photo0

Inkheart has a great premise that every writer could only dream of. But alas! What transpired is a mess of movie non-magic.

photo1After nine years of searching all over the world, Mo "Silvertongue" Folchart (Brendan Fraser) finally finds the book he's been seeking while traveling in Europe with his teenage daughter, Meggie (Eliza Bennett). When a mysterious man called Dustfinger (Paul Bettany) tracks them down, Meggie starts to question what her father is hiding. What she doesn't know is that Mo has a special power: he can conjure things and characters from books he reads into the real world. But he can't control his power, and he accidentally put his wife, Resa (Sienna Guillory) inside a book called Inkheart, after releasing bad guy Capricorn (Andy Serkis) and his minions to the real world. Dustfinger happens to be one of the characters as well.

photo2And that's why he's been searching for the book, in hopes of releasing Resa. Meanwhile, Dustfinger makes a deal to help Mo find Inkheart so that Mo can put him back into his world. At the same time, Capricorn tracks Mo and Meggie down and capture them -- he wants Mo to bring him the treasures and power from the books, and he destroys the only copy of Inkheart Mo has. Desperate, Mo escapes and finds the author of the book, Fenoglio (Jim Broadbent), who agrees to help them by rewriting the story. If only they can get to Capricorn first before he captures and kills everyone.

photo3Brendan Fraser (Mummy 3) has recently made a character playing Indiana Jones lite in action-adventure movies. The once promising dramatic actor is now reduced to action heroes in most of his films. That's not to say Fraser is not good at what he does. He has the good looks, the charm, and the earnestness that makes him perfect in these roles. Still, there are no depths in these performances and Brendan seems to particularly cruise through this one. Eliza Bennett (Perfect Life) is a bit too old to play Meggie (who's supposed to be 12), but she does a good job.

photo4Paul Bettany (The Secret Life of Bees) does his best with the inconsistent role of Dustfinger. His character is so poorly written that we can empathize but not necessarily sympathize. Helen Mirren (National Treasure) is one of the good things in the film even though she's underused. At least she has a purpose and spunk. Sienna Guillory (Perfect Life) doesn't have much to do and she spends almost the entire movie as a mute. Jim Broadbent (Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull) is good as the self-aborbed author, but again, his role is very underwritten without much motivation or purpose. Andy Serkis (King Kong) is unfortunate to play a two-dimensional villain, and he overacts. His performance is uninspired and straight out of the rule book.

photo5Adapted from Cornelia Funke's novel by David Linsay-Abaire (Robots), the script is a big mess. The plot lines are all over the place with way too many characters and one-liners. There is absolutely no depth in any of the character and the plot twists are unfocused. The story also feels contrived and predictable. It's a shame because the premise has so much potential, but the result is a trite exercise of fantasy that relies too much on the good vs. evil plot with thin caricatures as characters. Two many characters and plot threads are convoluted, and the whole thing makes it hard for us to identify or care about anyone.

photo6Iain Softley's (The Skeleton Key) direction is adequate but not enough to lift the film from the material. The editing needs work, and some of the special effects are extremely cheesy. The camerawork is in general up to standards and there are some breathtaking sceneries and backdrops. But the look and feel of the film are inconsistent. The pacing is off as well -- there are a few moments when I couldn't help but check my watch. There isn't much tension or suspense; much of it is simply people running around and away from each other.

photo7While the filmmakers' hearts may be in the right place, Inkheart is a sore disappointment and a missed opportunity.

photo8

Stars: Brendan Fraser, Sienna Guillory, Eliza Bennett, Paul Bettany, Helen Mirren, Andy Serkis, Jim Broadbent
Director: Iain Softley
Writers: David Linsay-Abaire (based on Cornelia Funke's novel)
Distributor: Warner Bros.
MPAA Rating: PG for fantasy adventure action, some scary moments
Running Time: 106 Minutes

Ratings:

Script – 5
Performance – 6
Direction – 6
Cinematography – 7
Music/Sound– 6
Editing – 7
Production – 7

Total – 5.8 out of 10

Revolutionary Road

© 2009 Ray Wong

p0

There are dysfunctional marriages and families, and then there are the truly dysfunctional. But when you frame that dysfunction in the Eisenhower era, you get a strangely surreal look at the truth behind the "American Dream."

Frank (Leopardo DiCaprio) and April Wheeler (Kate Winslet) are a white-bread American couple living the American dream with a beautiful suburban house, white picket fences, a nice car, and two beautiful young kids. In fact, like everyone around them, including neighbors the Campbells (David Harbour and Kathryn Hahn) and real estate agent/friend Helen Givings (Kathy Bates), they're practically the poster children of that dream. However, the fact is Frank and April are insanely unhappy.

p1Frank is in a dead-end, meaningless corporate job in the city as a pencil pusher. As a dutiful wife and mother, April is an aspiring actress who has confined by those picket fences that Frank helps paid for with his dull job. They both bought into this suburban lifestyle and now find themselves trapped. Then one day, April has an epiphany: why not sell everything they own and move to Paris? She can make plenty of money doing secretarial work for the government while Frank has all the time he needs to "find himself." The idea is so appealing that Frank agrees to go along with it. Suddenly, happiness and purpose are injected into their lives once again and they even enjoy watching the jealousy on their friends' faces.

p2Then Frank gets a promotion. When he's just about to give up his so-called career, he (and his company) finds that he's actually very good at what he does. The new-found appreciation, accomplishment and, not to mention, big money rattle their plans. Frank's change of heart plunges April back into depression. And a devastating news makes her realize perhaps her marriage is a sham to being with.

p3Leonardo DiCaprio (Blood Diamond) is a good actor, but often I feel that he's limited by his looks and his range. It's not to say he's not doing great work, here. Yet he's unconvincing to me -- the role could have been played by other actors much more suitable. DiCaprio tends to shine in youthful roles that call for some mischiefs (Catch Me if You Can, Titanic). To me, he seems a little lost in the serious, extremely grown-up role.

p4Kate Winslet (The Reader) is more natural in the role of an unhappy housewife. Her range is also very good, going from an amiable girl-next-door to a scream queen on the verge of a nervous breakdown. She shows enough vulnerability and sensitivity to make us sympathize with her, even when we may not completely identify with her and her choices. She does great work here, although I still prefer her in The Reader.

p5The supporting cast is very good, even though the film focuses primarily on DiCaprio and Winslet. Michael Shannon (World Trade Center) is particularly riveting as John Givings, a man with a mental illness. Ironically, his character serves as the only person who dare to speak the truth. Kathy Bates (The Day the World Stood Still) is, as usual, remarkable as Helen Givings, the chatty agent who carries the shame and guilt for her son. Richard Easton (Finding Forrester) is quietly solid as her husband. Zoe Kazan (August) is excellent as a coworker with a crush on Frank. David Harbour (Quantum of Solace) is subtle as the neighbor who has a crush on April, and Kathryn Hahn (Step Brothers) is very good as his bubbly wife.

p6Adapted from Richard Yates' novel by Justin Haythe (The Clearing), the script is sparse with plot but ripe with tension. The dialogue is sharp and to the point, giving insight into the characters' inner thoughts and desires and conflicts and regrets without stating the obvious. If there's a flaw in Haythe's script, it's that it's so rich in subtext that it takes an effort to understand everything. However, the paths the characters take and their behaviors do not come across as random or inconsistent. Haythe is able to help us understand the complexity of their relationships, the web they've weaved and the subsequent, slow but painful descent.

p7Taking place through the course of one summer, the story focuses on Frank and April, but is actually a reflection of the social climate of America in the 50s, when middle-class Americans flocked to the suburbs to be "just like everyone else." It's really a social commentary of society then (and now): the office drones, the lovely facade everyone is putting up so they're not "different." As a story about two people in love, however, the writing feels a bit cold. Not to mention by focusing it on Frank and April, the rest of their lives (including their two children, who almost play no part in the film) becomes secondary, as if these two people were completely defined by their woeful existences in the suburbs. I mean, don't they have real friends? Don't they have hobbies and outside interests? I guess it's fascinating for me to take a peek into the lives of the 50s white-bread America, but I can't help but feel left out somehow. Frank and April's cold war is not the only thing that leaves me cold. In fact, most of the characters just aren't every likable -- I don't mind unlikable characters, but give me something to root for. Or I'll have to slap someone on the face soon.

p8Sam Mandes (Jarhead) is on top of his game, though. The director is always about quality instead of quantity, judging from the four features he's done in his entire career so far. Here, his keen eyes and steady vision help glue the whole thing together. The cinematography, set designs, costume -- every detail of the production takes us back to the 1950s. He also has a talent of letting his actors do their job, helping them bring the characters out without relying too much on dialogue or overt explanations.

The result is a study of relationships and the social construct surrounding those relationships -- the lies, the truths, the constrictions people make on their lives. In a way, we look at these people and find them pathetic -- what triviality! I mean, seriously, just quit your job and move already. Except I forgot it was a different time. On the other hand, I still see so many people living on "Revolutionary Road" now, it's indeed frightening how relevant this story still is.

Let's see how this film do on the road to awards and acclaims.


Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet, Michael Shannon, Kathy Bates, Richard Easton, Zoe Kazan, David Harbour, Kathryn Hahn
Director: Sam Mandes
Writers: Justin Haythe (based on Richard Yates's novel)
Distributor: DreamWorks
MPAA Rating: R for language and some sexual content/nudity
Running Time: 119 Minutes

Ratings:

Script – 7
Performance – 8
Direction – 8
Cinematography – 8
Music/Sound– 7
Editing – 8
Production – 8

Total – 7.6 out of 10

Bride Wars

© 2009 Ray Wong

photo0

I can just hear the pitch for Bride Wars now: It's My Best Friend's Wedding meets The Wedding Planner meets War of the Roses. It does sound like fun in an estrogenic way.

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) have been best friends since childhood, and they made a pact with each other to be each other's Maid of Honor when they get married, and preferably in June at the Plaza Hotel.

photo1Their dreams come true when their respective boyfriends Daniel (Steve Howey) and Fletcher (Chris Platt) propose. Just their luck, their dream wedding planner Marion St. Claire (Candice Bergen) is available and best of all, there are three time slots open in June at the Plaza. All is well until a mistake is made, and both Liv and Emma are booked on the same date, and the other bride would not change her date.

photo2At first, the two brides-to-be try to work things out; then everything comes to a head when both realize the other is not giving in. Their envy and insecurity escalate into an out-and-out war, completely with one-upmanship and childish behaviors. Their friendship is put on ice when they both vie to be "the" bride of the day.

photo3Kate Hudson (Fool's Gold) and Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married) are both engaging in their respective roles, sharing a good on-screen chemistry. Hudson is particular funny as the assertive, bossy Liv; her comic timing reminds us of her famous comedian mother. Her character is more brash, loud and outrageous but she also gets to show some emotional depth at certain key scenes. Hathaway, on the other hand, has the more difficult task of portraying a wallflower who learns to unleash her obnoxious, nasty inner self. Her character comes off as more sympathetic but also less consistent. Hathaway is at her best during some of the more introspective moments.

photo4The supporting cast is mostly peripheral in this two-women show. As their respective beaus, Chris Pratt (Wanted) and Steve Howey (DOA: Dead or Alive) are amiable but also as bland and generic as pastel wall papers. In fact, they're so similar that I have a hard time telling them apart sometimes. Candice Bergen (The Women) is utterly wasted as the famed wedding planner. She could have had so much fun with the role who is pretty much at the center of this "war." And Kristen Johnston (Music and Lyrics) is relegated to a caricature, although she does it so well.

photo5The script by Greg DePaul (Saving Silverman), Cacey Wilson (Creature Comforts) and June Diane Raphael (Creature Comforts) is surprisingly solid, at least in the first half. The writers have made a good decision focusing on the relationship between Emma and Liv and give the story a strong focus. The downside is it leaves no room for anything else. The beaus, for example, are reduced to window dressings, and the weddings seem to be afterthoughts. Still, the relationship between the two women is central to the story, and it is good enough to hold the movie together.

photo6There are plenty of cliches to go around, of course. And the jokes seem rather tired sometimes, and the behaviors of the two characters become more and more sophomoric and childish. Still, it works in the context, and serves as a social commentary on everything from friendship (especially among women -- for example, their friends would not take sides, or they're happy for their friends while being resentful about their own failed relationships) to our society's ridiculous pressure and emphasis on weddings and being a perfect bride. In fact, Kristen Johnston's character, despite being a pig, offers one of the film's most astute and true commentary.

photo7That said, the second half falls apart as the two women try to reconcile their friendship. Something doesn't jell there. Their behaviors are so outlandish that it seems awkwardly inconsistent for them to feel sorry for the other. Emma's "transformation" is especially unconvincing, and the ending is forced and manipulative and predictable, and totally out of character for Emma. Of the two characters, Emma seems to be the most sympathetic one but at the same time, also the most unconvincing and inconsistent. Not to mention there are plot holes and frustrating illogic. For example, they mean to tell us that Emma and Liv don't have any friends of family members outside of their mutual circle? And if St. Claire messes up their dates, don't you think it's her legal and moral obligation to fix it for them? Things like that may seem trivial, but they bug me nonetheless because they're only there for the sake of the plot.

photo8Director Gary Winick (13 Going on 30) is actually very good. The direction is well-paced, sharp and focused. The camerawork is smooth and the production doesn't distract from the story. Winick is able to keep the plot level and let Hathaway and Hudson do their own things. Still, there is nothing noteworthy here -- the film is well-produced and executed in a workmanlike manner.

Bride Wars is a cute, at-times funny, and entertaining buddy movie for women, in the same vein of Sex and the City. It's also smart enough not to alienate the male audiences by keeping the mood light and the pranks funny but clean. One does wonder what the film would look like if Judd Apatow had written and directed this. The final verdict is that Bride Wars is not as bad as I've thought, but it's only good enough as a bridesmaid, missing the altar by a final act.


Stars: Kate Hudson, Anne Hathaway, Bryan Greenberg, Chris Pratt, Steve Howey, Candice Bergen, Kristen Johnston, Michael Arden
Director: Gary Winick
Writers: Greg DePaul, Casey Wilson, June Diane Raphael
Distributor: 20th Century Fox
MPAA Rating: PG for suggestive content, language, and some rude behaviors
Running Time: 96 Minutes

Ratings:

Script – 6
Performance – 7
Direction – 7
Cinematography – 7
Music/Sound– 7
Editing – 8
Production – 7

Total – 6.8 out of 10

The Reader

© 2009 Ray Wong

photo0

Spanning almost four decades in post-war Germany, The Reader is a straightforward drama that examines the complex issue of shame and guilt.

Michael (David Kross) is studious student living in Berlin, Germany. A chance meeting between him and tram operator Hanna (Kate Winslet) changes his world. Michael becomes obsessed with the her, who is in her 30s, and soon they have an affair that lasts for about a year. Michael is an avid reader, and Hanna asks him to read to him all sorts of wonderful stories and poetry.

photo1Eventually the affair comes to an abrupt end when Hanna moves away; Michael is heartbroken. He later goes on to become a law student, but he's still hung up on his first lover, who taught him everything he wanted to know about women and sex. When his criminal law professor takes them to a trial, Michael is shaken to see Hanna again, only this time she is one of the defendants accused of heinous war-crimes. Hanna's lack of remorse for her actions shocks and devastates Michael. Yet, he possesses a piece of important information that may save Hanna from a death sentence. Ashamed of his affair and haunted by Hanna's past, Michael decides to keep his mouth shut. In turn, Hanna is sentenced to life imprisonment.

photo2Years and a failed marriage later, Michael (Ralph Fiennes) returns to Berlin and rekindles with his childhood. Tormented with guilt and shame, he reads the books to a tape recorder and sends the cassettes to Hanna in prison. She listens the tapes and realizes how much Michael still loves her, and that gives her a purpose in life. However, still ashamed and torn by his sense of justice, Michael refuses to write to Hanna. Eventually their paths cross again but their lives are so vastly different now.

photo3Ralph Fiennes (The Duchess) is known for his solemn, introverted dramatic roles. Here, he doesn't disappoint. He plays the emotionally stunted adult Michael solidly. Michael is incapable of having meaningful, deep connection with anyone, including his own family. Fiennes's subtle portrayal doesn't fail to convey that deep emotional scar and remorse. Kate Winslet (Revolutionary Road), although billed in a supporting role, gives a tour-de-force leading role performance as Hanna. She's at once cold, stern, distant, and kind, warm, and sympathetic. Hanna's world views and values are warped by her upbringing and circumstances, but Winslet amazes by revealing so much humanity an humility, even as the truth about the character can be truly horrendous.

photo4German actor David Kross (Adam and Eve) is affecting as young Michael. It's a challenging role playing someone on the verge of manhood and yet still a child at heart. Kross's Michael is naive, sweet, obsessive, determined and utterly in love with Hanna. His eventual devastation is heartfelt and sympathetic. At a young age, he also takes tremendous risk in doing many sex scenes with the older Winslet. The supporting cast also includes Lena Olin (Awake) as a Holocaust survivor -- her brief appearance offers a stark reflection to the core story -- and Susanne Lothar (Amen) as Michael's concerned mother.

photo5Based on Bernhard Schlink's novel and written by David Hare (The Hours), the screenplay has a clear three-part structure and adheres to the themes of shame and guilt. It doesn't shy away from the uncomfortable nature of the relationship between Michael and Hanna. At the same time, it doesn't try to preach or judge. It just is. The mystery in the second act unfolds nicely, and the conflicts and revelations are palpable. The third act is a bit weak compared to the other two. There really isn't a lot of explanation about the characters' motivations and reasoning, and sometimes it feels very frustrating, especially with the character of Michael. The man is so emotionally conflicted and stunted that we just want to run over there and shake him. Hanna's character, however, is very well-drawn. We feel tremendous sympathy for her and yet we can't really condone what she did. She is a true victim of her past and future, and every day she's living with the consequences.

photo6The novel and screenplay also explore the themes of guilt and shame fully without being on the nose. The characters, by and large, and driven by their shames and guilts. Yet, it's a bit unclear why, for example, Hanna would rather go to prison than to own up to her shame. And Michael would eventually live most of his adult life wallowing in his own shame and guilt. Such powerful and useless emotions. Still, I think the film does a remarkable job dissecting shame and guilt.

photo7Director David Daldry (The Hours) has done a great job bringing the story to life. His direction is focused, effective and affecting. His camera also doesn't shy from the truth, whether it is about the illicit affairs between the woman and the boy, or the horrendous truth at the trial, or Michael's behaviors as a man. Some of the sex scenes could be very uncomfortable for people who are not ready (although David Kross was eighteen when he made the film). That said, I give great kudos to Daldry for being truthful but nonjudgmental, and to both Kross and Winslet for being fearless in their portrayal of the characters.

photo8The Reader is also about the love of words. As a writer, I can appreciate the underlying theme of literacy and one's relationship with literature and words, and how they can both enlighten and hurt. While I wish the filmmakers had fleshed out some parts of the film and explored the themes more directly, I think The Reader is a solid film with outstanding performances, especially from Winslet. And I can't wait to read the book.

Stars: Kate Winslet, Ralph Fiennes, David Kross, Lena Olin, Susanne Lothar
Director: Stephen Daldry
Writers: David Hare (based on Bernhard Schlink's novel)
Distributor: Weinstein Company
MPAA Rating: R for sexuality, nudity
Running Time: 123 Minutes

Ratings:

Script – 7
Performance – 8
Direction – 8
Cinematography – 8
Music/Sound– 7
Editing – 8
Production – 8

Total – 7.8 out of 10