Posts Tagged ‘Films’

Life derails for Walter Garber, a NYC transit worker, when a former prisoner hijacks a subway train, takes hostages, demands money and demands only to talk with Garber. Tony Scott’s version of the 1974 film with the same title, “The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3” is full of action and passionate performances.

Both Denzel Washington (Garber) and John Travolta (Ryder) are full of energy throughout the film. The movie also stars Luis Guzmán, John Turturro, James Gandolfini, Alex Kaluzhsky, and Gbenga Akinnagbe. “Pelham” won’t be nominated for any awards, but it’s a captivating movie and a terrific opportunity to finally see these veteran actors, Washington and Travolta, acting together.

 The Good: - Denzel Washington – Going from playing an obnoxious crime boss to an inspirational debate teacher – Washington’s “Garber” adds “everyday man” to his recent resume. But Garber isn’t perfect, which makes the character even more appealing. Only Washington could give this character the sincerity needed to not come off as hammy. Would we expect anything else from the classy actor?   - John Travolta – I think the last time Travolta was this fuming in a movie was in “Face/Off” (or was that Nicholas Cage?). Covered in tattoos as “Ryder,” Travolta plays the wisecracking, angry-at-the-world subway hijacker impressively. It’s great to see Travolta and his acting talents back on movie screens (only this time without a dress).

- The Movie’s Pace – The story’s timing is well done – it’s not too long or too short. The plot progresses steadily and doesn’t get caught up with irrelevant details. “Pelham” gets to the point, and sticks to the point – and I like that in a movie.

- It’s An Action Movie Too – “Pelham” isn’t all talk – it’s not continuous negotiations or argument with Ryder, it’s not solely “what can they say next to make him stop.” Those theatrical elements are covered, but Scott has also offered audiences great action sequences complete with flipping cars, cop shoot outs, and a standoff!

The Bad: - Background Characters – Roger Ebert makes a great point, “This version occupies a denatured action-movie landscape, with no time for local color and a transit system control room that humbles Mission Control. That also may explain the film’s lack of time to establish the supporting characters, even Travolta’s partners.” I agree because, the lack of focus on the secondary characters establishes a lack of caring for them. However, putting more emphasis on them may have interrupted the film’s pacing and if that’s the case then I’ll pass – keep the movie the way it is.

- Slightly Over the Top – The cars flipping during collisions are a little dramatic, but it sure does make for an entertaining movie.   In The End: “The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3” will definitely keep audiences’ attention. But now that it’s competing with “Transformers 2” I think we’ll see it disappearing from theaters soon. However, make sure to catch it on DVD because Washington and Travolta’s performances shouldn’t be missed!

X-Men Origins: Wolverine was released in May in succession to the first three X-Men films and in prelude to the highly-anticipated Avengers film, which will be released in 2012.

As a kid, watching the show X-Men on T.V. to see Wolverine and my other favorites was a Saturday morning ritual. Now, to see his cinematic portrayal come to fruition indulges nostalgia.

The film’s opening credits coincide with a sequence that introduces Logan and his brother Victor, who we come to know as Wolverine and Sabertooth, respectively. The setting is 1840s Canada and the two young brothers flee their home and become professional soldiers, fighting in many wars such as the Civil War, WWI, WWII, and Vietnam. One could immediately detect the maudlin disposition of these two feathering pansies in the first twenty minutes.

After surviving an execution in one of the virtuous wars they so bestially fought in, Logan (Hugh Jackman) and his brother (Liev Schreiber) are approached by Colonel Stryker, who understands what they are. Stryker (Danny Huston) makes them an offer they can’t refuse; well they could refuse it, but that wouldn’t make for a very interesting story, would it? They agree to Stryker’s proposition and join his team. They do not realize that their agreement to help Stryker is a facade for a plan that will ultimately have relative consequence in the events that occur in the preceding X-Men films: the Weapon X program.

Logan and Victor fight alongside other mutants for Stryker’s cause before one day Logan decides that he no longer wants to be a part of the annihilation of innocent people. So he quits the team, much to the dismay of his manicure-needing older brother.

Logan escapes to the mountains of Canada, where he becomes a Brawny man-looking lumberjack and gains the love of a comely schoolteacher named Kayla (Lynn Collins), who licks his figurative wounds. Get it? Cause’ he regenerates. Through his intimate relationship with Kayla, he gains the inspiration for the moniker that is eventually dubbed to him.

However, his quiet life with the schoolteacher is vehemently interrupted when Sabertooth returns and Logan finds Kayla slain in his trail. Feeling the pain of love lost and enraged to avenge his fallen lover, he seeks answers from Stryker. Stryker explains to vindictive Logan that the only way to defeat Sabertooth is to work with him. After Logan agrees, he befalls the insidious will of Stryker and undergoes a procedure that renders his claws adamantium, making him virtually indestructible. The plot thickens…and from a pool of comatose recollections emerges….Wolverine.

Throughout the film, Wolverine and Sabertooth tussle in several scenes, some of which are charmingly graced by the presence of highly anticipated X-men favorites like Gambit (Taylor Kitsch), and Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds). Although Gambit is a tough character to portray well, Kitsch does it with aplomb. Ryan Reynolds integrates the comical charm of Van Wilder and the graceful swordsmanship seen in Blade: Trinity to do likewise. Liev Schreiber plays a ferocious Sabertooth, and appropriately portrays a formidable opponent for Hugh Jackman.

His performance is more memorable than that of that one dude’s from the first X-men films. And although it probably wouldn’t fit into the story, I would have liked to see Omega Red face off against his arch nemesis. Hugh Jackman is ultra jacked for the film. However, I don’t think the gruff machismo of Wolverine would approve of tanning. But aside from his spray-on tan and impotent howling, Jackman seems to pull it off.

Most people reviewed X-Men Origins: Wolverine unfavorably and said it has a dull storyline, and doesn’t compare to other superhero movies like Iron Man or The Dark Knight. While I agree the storyline is not strong, to compare it to other superhero films unrelated to the X-Men story is naive and presumptuous. The film sits comfortably in the company of the other X-Men films and its acts supersede many of the portrayals in the first three films. The action sequences are grippingly fun and flashy. If you’re an X-Men fan, see the movie…bub.

One of the greatest times of the year for top notch movies is the summer! Movie execs even change the dates their movies debut in order to take part in this sweltering time of year. Here are six films we can’t wait to see during the Summer 2009 movie season…

June

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen – Summer is an infamous time of year for sequels and 2009 is no exception.  The trailer alone for “Transformers 2” promises amazing action, explosive destruction, CG-palooza and there’s even a plot thrown in there too. Sam Witwicky (LaBeouf) discovers the back story of the giant robots that are causing demolition worldwide – Egypt, Paris and the US. The cherry on this sundae – IMAX footage, which is sure to enhance the already exciting special effects. June 24th.

Away We Go – “Go’s” trailer caught my eye when I saw “Adventureland.” The odd couple of John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph (two hugely funny actors not frequently seen on the large screen) had me scribbling down the release date in the dark theater so I wouldn’t forget. “Go” is a “road trip” film for adults as Krasinski and Rudolph travel to see family and friends to find a place that feels like home before they become parents for the first time. Maggie Gyllenhaal, Allison Janney, Jeff Daniels, and Catherine O’Hara are just a couple of the odd ball friends and family members visited by the pregnant couple. June 5th.

July

Public Enemies – Johnny Depp and Christian Bale – that’s all you need to be sold on this summer semi bio-pic. Directed by the successful Michael Mann (“Collateral,” “Ali,” “The Insider,” “Heat,” and “The Last of the Mohicans”) this film is already being talked about as the only summer film that will be remembered at Oscar time.  “Enemies” is a depression era crime drama about infamous bank robber John Dillinger (Depp) and the clean cut FBI agent determined to bring him in, Melvin Purvis (Bale).  Two stories from behind the scenes recount that Bale was in character 24/7 and that Depp was actually giddy at the opportunity to handle Dillinger’s actual brief case. This is going to be a real box office melter. July 1st.

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince – “Prince” should have been on the Fall ’08 list, but the higher ups who made the movie moved it to summer ’09 for financial reasons. The 2nd to last book in the JK Rowling series has a darker story that revolves around the origins of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. Through multiple memory type flashback sequences the audience and Harry will learn a lot more about Voldemort’s history. There’s also the prospect of love for some of our favorite Hogwarts’ students (but I won’t tell you who in case you haven’t read the book). July 15th.

August

The Boat That Rocked – Haven’t heard of this movie yet? That’s ok – you’ll be dying to see it because of the cast alone: Philip Seymour Hoffman (“Doubt”), Emma Thompson (“Stranger Than Fiction’), Gemma Arterton (“Quantum of Solace”), Bill Nighy (“Love Actually”), Kenneth Branagh (“Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets”), January Jones (“Mad Men”), Rhys Darby (“Yes Man”), Jack Davenport (the “Pirates” movies), Nick Frost (“Hot Fuzz”), Rhys Ifans (“Elizabeth: The Golden Age”), Kirsty Mather (“Mamma Mia”), and Tom Wisdom (“300”). What a line up! And it’s directed by Richard Curtis who did “Love Actually.” August 28th.

Inglourious Basterds – Yes, the movie title is spelled correctly. Leave it director Quentin Tarantino to find the craziest spelling for his latest film starring Brad Pitt, Mike Myers, B.J. Novak, Samuel L. Jackson and Cloris Leachman. “Inglourious” is two stories in one – the first is about a Jewish girl whose family is killed by Nazis, she leaves and ends up working at a movie theatre, and infatuated with a German war hero and plotting revenge for her family’s deaths. The second story – a group of Jewish-American soldiers who are working behind enemy lines plot their own scheme against the Nazis. How do the two stories relate? The movie theater is the key (how ironic). August 21st.

Oscar night is fast approaching – this Sunday – to be exact. Will it be a victory for “Slumdog” or “Benjamin Button?” Which tough guy will win: Mickey or Sean? Which of our best actresses of today is it going to be: Kate or Meryl?

If you don’t have your scorecards filled out yet, here’s Positively Celebrity’s guide to help you out because we’re predicting who’s going to walk away a winner and who we think should really be one.

Best Picture

“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”

“Frost/Nixon”

“Milk”

“The Reader”

“Slumdog Millionaire”

Should and will win: With its nearly unstoppable wins at the Golden Globes, SAG, BAFTA and guild awards, look for “Slumdog Millionaire” to take home the biggest prize come Oscar night and deservedly so. This vibrant, inspirational, romantic, and energetic film will leave you feeling like a millionaire long after you leave the theater.

Best Actor

Richard Jenkins, “The Visitor”

Frank Langella, “Frost/Nixon”

Sean Penn, “Milk”

Brad Pitt, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”

Mickey Rourke, “The Wrestler”

Should Win:  Langella has already won a Tony Award for his portrayal of Richard Nixon, and he deserves an Oscar too. He pulls off the enormous task of encapsulating the former president’s mannerisms and voice without coming off as a caricature. Just as challenging, he also makes the audience feel empathy for a man who went down in history cast off as a crook.

Will Win: This is close. It very well could be Penn, but I’ll give the edge to Rourke. Academy members love a comeback story and both Rourke and his character are the comeback kids of the year. He also showed us he’s got what it takes physically and emotionally by playing an emotionally complex wrestler with a heart.

Best Actress

Anne Hathaway, “Rachel Getting Married”

Angelina Jolie, “Changeling”

Melissa Leo, “Frozen River”

Meryl Streep, “Doubt”

Kate Winslet, “The Reader”

Should and will win: Winslet for her intricate, dark turn as a tram conductor-turned-Nazi prison guard. She gave heart and emotion to a remorseless woman who was involved in Nazi war crimes and seduced a teenager. It doesn’t hurt either that she’s been racking up awards left and right this season, has five previous Oscar nominations, and stars in a film with the Academy-favorite topic of the Holocaust.

Best Supporting Actor

Josh Brolin, “Milk”

Robert Downey Jr., “Tropic Thunder”

Philip Seymour Hoffman, “Doubt”

Heath Ledger, “The Dark Knight”

Michael Shannon, “Revolutionary Road”

Should and will win: Ledger for his dynamic, groundbreaking, and humorously creepy performance as the Joker. He stole the show from Batman by keeping our eyes glued to him whenever his chaos-loving sociopath came on screen. Unlike Jack Nicholson’s previous mediocre Joker, Ledger, with his smeared clown make-up, truly made for one darkly twisted clown.

Best Supporting Actress

Amy Adams, “Doubt”

Penélope Cruz, “Vicky Cristina Barcelona”

Viola Davis, “Doubt”

Taraji P. Henson, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”

Marisa Tomei, “The Wrestler”

Should win: Even though she was only in two scenes, Davis managed to bring a whole movie’s worth of character backstory, emotions, and desires into those few precious moments on screen. Plus, she more than held her own against heavyweight Meryl Streep, which is alone no easy task.

Will win: Now with Winslet out of the running (the Academy chose to nominate her in the leading category instead), Cruz will most likely win for her domineering, vivacious turn as an emotionally unstable, eccentric ex-wife. She also won a BAFTA Award last week, which is a good sign she might win at the Oscars.

Best Director

Danny Boyle, “Slumdog Millionaire”

Stephen Daldry, “The Reader”

David Fincher, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”

Ron Howard, “Frost/Nixon”

Gus Van Sant, “Milk”

Should and will win: Boyle for delivering the beautifully crafted “Slumdog Millionaire.” He delivered intricate chase scenes, oversaw soaring camera shots over Mumbai, and brought out emotional performances from his young – and even younger, untrained – actors.

There are some Woody Allen movies that are so good, you can’t think of anything more endearing (Crimes & Misdemeanors, Annie Hall, Match Point, even Scoop). Unfortunately, there are also some that miss the mark so completely that you can‘t think of anything more frustrating (Deconstructing Harry, Celebrity, and his latest flop, Vicky Cristina Barcelona).

Vicky Cristina Barcelona is only mildly entertaining despite standout performances from Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem. The story sets up a love triangle by placing its protagonists, Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Cristina (Scarlett Johansson) in Barcelona for the summer. Vicky is engaged to another American named Doug.

After meeting a Spanish painter named Juan Antonio (Javier Bardem), Vicky is unimpressed initially and further annoyed that her friend, Cristina, is swept away by his (not so) alluring charm. This soon changes after they spend a night out together and conclude the night making love. Vicky acknowledges the night as a mistake, but can’t stop thinking about Juan Antonio. The feeling is reciprocal, but Juan Antonio begins dating Christina because she is the ‘sure thing.’ To make matters more complex, Allen introduces his first love interest, Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz) into the proceedings, resulting in a three way love affair between her, Cristina, and Juan Antonio.

Maria Elena is just a little off her rocker. She attempts to kill herself unsuccessfully, before coming to stay with Juan Antonio (who by this time is living with his main squeeze, Cristina). A combustible situation like this can only last so long before blowing up and it does in a not so hilarious fashion.

The conclusion of this movie is so unsatisfying that I can’t put it into words. Also, I would have hated seeing this in the theater because the subtitles go by so fast that you can’t follow the Spanish being said. One of the best parts of the movie was Juan Antonio’s insistence that Maria Elena please speak English while staying in his house. That is about the only time I was sincerely amused. Oh well, Woody, I guess you can’t hit ‘em out the park every time.

There’s a lot more to wrestlers than their crazy super hero names, shiny neon-colored tights and over-bulged muscles. Or at least there is to Randy the Ram Robinson, the emotionally complex “Wrestler.”

Randy’s a past-his-prime wrestler who hasn’t moved on. He visits the hair salon to maintain his shoulder length long blonde hair, basks in the fluorescent light of tanning beds to keep up his golden tan, and continues pulling on those neon green tights to keep going back in the ring. Just as the little plastic Randy the Ram action figure representing his glamorous alter ego doesn’t fit in with the old beat-up van that makes do as his home when he doesn’t make the payment on his trailer, Randy doesn’t fit into the real world. 

The only world he knows and loves is wrestling. While the matches are all coordinated in advance down to each minute step, it doesn’t mean the fighting’s not real – or brutal making for a few very hard-to-watch scenes. One sequence in particular involving staples and barbed wire is not for the faint of heart. Then again it turns out to be too much for Randy too who has a heart attack that forces him to give up wrestling.

At this point the film becomes more interesting and complex because we’re brought more into Randy’s life. We see he lives alone in a messy, out-dated trailer where he plops into his bed with his clothes on and places his hearing aides on the nightstand. His only entertainment is playing wrestling video games staring his own alter ego on the old-school Nintendo system from the ‘90s with the neighbor kid.

The only people in his life he cares about are the luke-warm stripper he tries to befriend and his long-lost daughter. He’s come to know Cassidy (Marisa Tomei) from frequenting the strip club she works at, but she never quite warms up to him all the way. She distances herself not wanting to date a customer, but they’re brought together because Cassidy is past her prime too. She wants to move on to a better life with her young son but is stuck in the strip club being passed over for the much younger girls. “’90s suck!” they shout while dancing over the more familiar ‘80s music of their glory days.

One who has a harder time warming up is his daughter Stephanie (Evan Rachel Wood). They have the potential to make up and start new again – beautifully symbolized by them strolling through the old, torn-down buildings along the New Jersey shoreline they used to visit years ago. It’s a little hard to fully understand their relationship, however, because the film doesn’t go into their background. Why hasn’t he been around her so long? What did he do to hurt her so badly? In a poignant and sorrowful scene, he tells her he’s “a broken-down piece of meat” and doesn’t deserve her. But why?

Eventually, his self-destructive ways give in and he ends up hurting Cassidy and Stephanie once he starts connecting with them. Is that just the way he is – a narcissist who’s just absorbed in his own little world of wrestling? Or was he pushed there to his isolated world by the apathetic people around him that don’t reciprocate his feelings?

After all, we do see how he gets pushed to the breaking point from a series of rude customers at the deli he must work at to make ends meet after he had to quit wrestling. At first Randy doesn’t seem like he’s going to acclimate to his new deduced job. Depicted very cleverly, the camera tracks Randy from behind as he walks down the hall to the deli amid the familiar sounds of the roars and cheers of the wrestling crowd as he’s about to enter a match. Just as he would rip the curtain open to step into the match, he rips open the curtain into the deli – only now the rooting and cheering abruptly stops. This is Randy’s new life whether he likes it or not.

To much surprise, Randy does come to like it. He’s cutely content calling off the numbers of the customers waiting in queue, serving up their half pounds of potato salad and pieces of chicken breast, and making friendly, cheeky conversations with his customers. Yet, just as his wrestling days came to a halt, so did his deli days because of a couple of annoying, cluelessly rude customers who pushed him to his limits.

On the one hand, we want to tell Randy to grow up and to move on. Especially, in the sad scene where he gathers with some other washed up D-List celebrities in a local community building to sign autographs for a few sole fans, sell worthless memorabilia, to snap pictures with fans on junky Polaroid cameras.

But then again, Randy’s only happy wrestling and his life revolves around it. In fact, for much of the film’s opening the camera tracks Randy from behind as if his whole life is a lead-up into a match. And why shouldn’t it be? Life just rejects him, and he’s forced to just reject it right back. Even when people call him Robin, his real name, he adamantly rejects it by taking on the new name he gave himself for the wrestling world. It’s a constant tug of war between the real world rejecting him and him rejecting the real world. But, as he tells Cassidy, the only place he gets hurt is outside of the ring. So “The Wrestler” tells us that basically you’re on your own in this world so just do what makes you happy.

Gran Torino is a film that exemplifies an individual’s struggle within the ever-evolving society of modern America.

The film begins inside a church with the funeral of Walt Kowalski’s (Clint Eastwood) wife, Dorothy. Walt greets those that approach the casket to give their condolences. His grim, bitter-old man disposition is evident in the opening scenes. One could immediately assume that his demeanor is not solely a direct result of his wife’s passing. His emotional underpinnings are questionable and disquieting. This personality perplexity is unraveled when it is later explained that Walt is a Korean War veteran.

The funeral scene introduces a character that is prominent throughout the film: Father Janovich. As Father Janovich gives a profoundly dim eulogy about life and death, Walt sneers in disgust.

Following the funeral, people visit Walt’s home for lunch. There, Father Janovich presents himself to Walt mano y mano to outline his intentions. Janovich was close with Walt’s wife and explains to him that she wanted Walt to attend confession. Walt dismisses Father Janovich by stating that he is an overeducated, 27-year old virgin fresh out the seminary, and walks away. In this scene, it is made clear that Walt is forthright with everyone, including his two sons, which he disapproves of and doesn’t get along with. After lunch, people vacate and the storyline builds from this point.

The neighborhood in which Walt lives is occupied by many Hmongs. Walt’s neighbors, the Vang Lors-a Hmong family with two teenagers, a mother and a grandmother-always seem to irritate Walt. The grandmother speaks unfavorably about Walt constantly in her native tongue. Through Walt’s interactions, we realize that Walt is disconnected with the younger generation and subconsciously still stationed in Korea 1952. We later see that the teenage boy, Thao, and his sister, Sue, will be Walt’s connection with the young generation.

But in the relationship between these neighbors, conflict precedes concord.

The conflict between the neighbors is generated from a conflict within the veins of the Vang Lor bloodline. It all begins one day when Thao is walking down the street. As he walks, a Hispanic gang begins to harass Thao by calling him racial slurs, questioning his sex, and other things of demeaning nature. Thao’s cousin Spider and his Hmong gang see this and threaten the Hispanic gang with an Uzi. The Hispanic gang soil themselves and flees the scene. Spider and his gang begin to pressure Thao to join their gang in return for saving his tail. Thao refuses and makes on his way.

Later, Spider and his gang go to the Vang Lor household and continue to pressure Thao to join their gang. Thao eventually concedes. For his initiation, Thao is forced to do something that will trigger a chain reaction of problematic events; he is forced to steal Walt Kowalski’s 1972 Gran Torino.

Later that night, Walt is awakened from his sleep by noises from inside his garage. He immediately loads his shotgun and heads to the garage, prepared to waste the infiltrator. As Walt enters the garage, he points the shotgun at Thao’s face, driving him back until he runs away.

Spider and his gang return to the Vang Lor home the next night, and use physical force to make Thao finish his initiation. A fight breaks out, which causes a few elves on the Kowalski property to be destroyed. The next thing you know, Walt is pointing his shotgun at the gang members and telling them “Get off my lawn”. He says this in such a voice that will erect the hairs on your chinny chin chin. Spider and his friends are forced to retreat. The Vang Lors thank Walt repeatedly but Walt simply replies that he wants to be left alone.

Interjected between these incidents are the visitations of the persistent Father Janovich, bound to get Walt to confess. Walt continues to dismiss him, despite the father’s best efforts.

Walt’s birthday arrives amongst all the turmoil. There is a scene where he is sitting on the porch reading his paper. This scene is important because his horoscope in the paper says that extraordinary events will culminate at what may seem to be the anticlimax of his life. Walt dismisses this horoscope as he does Father Janovich and continues with his day. Later, as Walt is relaxing and drinking beer, Sue walks over and invites him to a barbecue that the Vang Lors are having. With it being his birthday, Walt feels inclined to accept her offer. It is at this barbecue where he meets many of the Hmongs, speaks with the family, begins to accept their culture, loosens up a little with Thao, and gets interpreted by a shaman. The shaman interprets Walt as not being “at peace”, which has implications for further along in the film.

Some days after, Thao, Sue, and their mother approach Walt and make a proposition to have Thao work for Walt for his attempted grand theft auto. Initially, Walt refuses his services downright. But after Sue insists and explains that a refusal of their proposition would be an insult to their family and their tradition, Walt agrees.

Thao begins work at Walt’s home the next day and everyday after that for two weeks. Walt and Thao unintentionally bond through the work, and eventually become friends. Sue also becomes close with Walt, and they begin all hanging out together. They conversate about many things, like how Thao needs to get a job to pay for school. When his second week of work nears completion, Walt gets Thao into the construction circuit, for which he has connections.

One day after Thao is returning home from a day of work at the construction site, his cousin Spider and his gang jump him and burn a cigarette into his cheek. After Walt sees this, he pays a visit to the member who got cigger trigger happy with Thao, and gives him the lambasting of a lifetime. This doesn’t seem to have much effect though, because later the whole gang brutally shoots up the Vang Lor home. Why they shoot up the home of Spider’s relatives and not Walt’s is unexplained. Fortunately, the aftermath is only a minor neck injury to Thao. Unfortunately, Sue, who was not home at the time, returns home later battered and raped.

This leads to a final confrontation.

Walt, enraged by these vicious acts, plots revenge against the assailants. He prepares himself, and then departs to the gang’s place of occupancy. The gang spots Walt from inside and each one emerges from various crannies of the house to point their guns at him. One would assume Walt had some sort of plan for defeating this pack of “gooks” as he so frequently and eloquently identifies them as. After he cautiously reaches for a cigarette, he quickly grabs what turns out to be a lighter from his pocket, and the gang opens fire. And there on their front lawn, Walt Kowalski lays, brutally murdered. The end.

Just kidding….among all the commotion, the neighbors see all of this happen and report it to the police, resulting in the incarceration of each and every gang member. So Walt did indeed have a plan.

His plan-to abolish the filth that plagued his friends, the Vang Lors -was the climax of Walt Kowalski’s life. Having enacted this plan, Walt is at peace.

The movie concludes with the funeral procession, which Father Janovich gives the eulogy for, and the declaration of Walt’s will. Thao Vang Lor gets the 1972 Gran Torino.

I enjoyed Gran Torino a lot. Clint Eastwood is tremendous in it. He is the director, producer, and star of the film. His candid quips and racial slurs incite much hilarity. The only negative aspect of the film was the acting of the Vang Lors. Thao and Sue could have been more convincing in many scenes. Additionally, Father Janovich was quite contradictory. One doesn’t have to be “fresh out the seminary” to know priests aren’t supposed to use God’s name in vain.

Got “Milk”? You better because it’s up for Best Picture at this year’s Academy Awards later this month. I only wish we learned more about Harvey Milk the person and not just Harvey Milk the politician.

In this fact-based account, director Gus Van Sant (“Good Will Hunting”) tells the story of Milk (Sean Penn) who went from a 40-year-old San Francisco hippie to become the first openly gay man elected to city office. We watch as Harvey builds an alliance of enthusiastic supporters, goes through relationships, and cuts off his long ponytail to put together a clean-cut façade to become a politician.

But what’s great about him is that even though he swapped flared jeans for a business-like three-piece suit, Harvey didn’t lose his inner spirit and initiatives. Never one to give in to the status quo, he’d personally run around and pick up dog poop to score votes from the people and challenge his opponents to debates. When one opponent asserts that gay teachers will in turn produce gay students, Harvey quips that if that were true there’d be a lot more nuns running around.

That kind of attitude makes Harvey endearing and inspirational along with one poignant scene where he pins a death threat on his refrigerator telling boyfriend Scottie (James Franco) that the threat is only as scary as they allow it to be.

The problem is that most of the other characters are not all that endearing. While Franco’s performance is good and is virtually in disguisable from his “Pineapple Express” stoner role, his character isn’t there when Harvey needs him the most and tells Harvey’s business acquaintance “Sorry I pissed in your pool.” He really did.

Diego Luna, as another of Harvey’s love interests, is stuck to a pouty, one-dimensional role, and Emile Hirsch and Alison Pill as Harvey’s campaign workers have some of the better performances. Unfortunately, Penn wasn’t as outstanding as I was anticipating. In fact, he’d often lapse too far into his “I am Sam” character. 

The story itself was also not quite as outstanding as expected with a slow storyline. The film mostly consisted of a never-ending stretch of loss after loss during Harvey’s campaign until he finally at last won. We also know that ultimately Dan White (Josh Brolin), Harvey’s colleague, ultimately assassinates him and due to the framing device of Harvey recording his story for it to be told in the event of his assassination heightening the tension throughout the film, the actual assassination scene is very anticlimactic.

We’re also left wanting more in terms of the emotions and motives of the characters. For example, why exactly did White kill Harvey? He always seemed off-kilter, so what was he going through to make him the way he was? What did Harvey did his whole life before he got involved in politics? Why was Harvey involved in the shallow, one-dimensional relationship with Luna’s character and wasn’t he affected by what eventually happened between them? Van Sant recently told Entertainment Weekly, Harvey’s life was quite romantic but it really didn’t seem that way in the movie.

So get “Milk” but know that it’s kind of like milk. Just as you should drink it but it’s not as good as soda, you should see “Milk” but it’s not as good as the other four Best Picture nominees.

Those romantics out there looking for a better ending to the one Kate and Leo suffered at the end of “Titanic” may be disappointed to see what their relationship is like in “Revolutionary Road,” their first film together since the big boat sank twelve years ago.

Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio play Frank and April Wheeler, a young, idealistic couple in the ‘50s based on the 1961 book by Richard Yates. They meet at a party, find each other interesting, and get married. Soon they have the stereotypical American dream with two kids living in a quaint house in the suburbs. He goes to work joining the other carbon copies of husbands just like him who are like workers in an assembly line everyday marching to and from work moving in a sea of hats. You don’t even know who is who – they’re all just hats that look exactly alike.

Being just like everyone else is adamantly not enough for April who meanwhile stays at home everyday with all her unfilled goals, fantasies and desires bubbling dangerously close to the surface. Finally, she gets the brilliant idea: “Let’s escape all this and move to Paris!” she tells Frank. Hesitant at first, he eventually agrees and they’re off to Paris – or at least that was the intention. Conflicts arise like Frank getting a job promotion and an unexpected pregnancy. Will they stay or will they go?

Meanwhile Frank and April are crippled by their incessant fighting. They got together because they thought they saw the same idealistic, ambitious, individualistic goals in each other; but, it turns out they don’t actually want the same thing lending to a film that consists of mostly just bickering. The film barely showed any happy moments so it’s hard to grasp that they ever did love each other making it hard to care if they do ever end up happy together.

While DiCaprio’s performance is satisfactory, it seems as though he prepared for his role by watching too much of Pete on “Mad Men” with an uncanny similarity of speech pattern. Actually much of the supporting cast is also just a big parody of the ‘50s with them acting as caricatures of the decade’s desperate individuals. “No Frank, he’s not welllllll,” Kathy Baker wails a little too dramatically.

In fact, the whole film comes off as a cliché of the 1950s. While the characters incessantly puff away at cigarettes and lunch over a wee bit too many martinis, the film doesn’t go beyond the surface and lacks the book’s emotional depth. It’s easy to see that, yes, Frank and April are both deeply unhappy but why? What’s more is that we don’t know who to side with or who to root for because we don’t really understand why they’re both so thoroughly messed up and mean to each other.

The stand-out performances are Winslet and Michael Shannon. Winslet gives it her all both verbally and through her subtle facial expressions. With just one slightly sullen look in her eyes and a pursed together smile, we can clearly see that she is trying to act excited over seeing her new suburban house for the first time even though she views it as a prison.   

Shannon, who plays the son of their friends, is the only one to garner an Oscar nomination for this film; and, while he isn’t in the film for that long he sure makes his presence known to the Wheelers. As a brilliant mathematician who’s spent time in a mental institution, he’s the only one who sees – or dares to – see through the Wheeler’s façade and to call them out on it. Wearing a squished up scowl on his face, he strolls into their perfect little house like a wrecking ball bringing all their true emotions, desires, and motives to the surface. His only crime is making people see themselves for what they really are.

So it’s quite ironic that the “crazy” guy is the only one who really knows what’s going on. Meanwhile, all the “normal” characters in the film are depressed and repressed. If that’s the way it is, “Revolutionary Road” will make you wish that you’re crazy.

A British TV journalist no one’s ever heard of interviewing Richard Nixon about Watergate. Boring, right?

Definitely not. Ron Howard’s film adaptation of the stage play “Frost/Nixon” is anything but. He takes the potentially boring subject matter of the post-Watergate interviews that’s arguably a generation too late and instead turns it into a taut thriller with compelling performances by its stars Michael Sheen and Frank Langella, who reprise their stage roles as Frost and Nixon, respectively.

The film initially starts with some old black and white video recapping the infamous Watergate scandal we’ve all come to know, but then we’re thrown into the colorful gaudy world of the 1970s where we first meet David Frost hosting a silly variety television show. He runs out on the stage to a roar of applause like a present day game show contestant and cracks corny jokes about sausage. Is this the man who could go one-on-one with Richard Nixon? 

No one thought so including Nixon himself, which is why he agreed to the interview. Any other “serious” journalist on CBS News or any other news network for that matter would be too much of a match for Nixon who just wanted a pushover who he could throw aside so he could spin his story and redeem himself to the American people.

He thought he found that pushover in Frost. (Plus, it didn’t hurt Frost paid him $600,000 nearly all out of his own pocket either.) We are inclined to think Frost is a pushover too. After all he picks up girls on airplanes, signs autographs like he’s Tom Cruise, and attends glitzy movie premieres and parties. But Sheen brings a determinative, appealing spark to Frost that makes us not willing to give up on him yet.

That and the story’s told through his point of view. Even as Frost leaves the heavy burden of research to his team, we see that Nixon isn’t the only one with his career at stake. Frost’s career was exiled to Australia along with his respectable reputation, and he’s relying on this interview to resurrect himself as well. So we’re not willing to give up that maybe just maybe Frost will beat Nixon. After all this is a game, a competition. Only one can win as Frost later tells Nixon.

This is where the tension comes in. There’s a series of four interviews Nixon is granting with the fourth one being the most important as it is devoted to Watergate. Each of the first three interviews are like individual boxing matches leading up until the very last big fight. At first, Frost get pummeled and thrown aside by Nixon who’s like a heavyweight champion. Although he’s far from it.

Langella makes Nixon an oddly sympathetic character. Yes, we all know he’s guilty; but, Langella excels in coloring Nixon as a haunted, lonely, self-loathing man. While he throws demeaning and patronizing slurs at Frost, it’s not quite evident he actually knows what he’s saying. He’s too aloof and isolated from anyone to know how to properly interact. Thus, Langella brings us a character that, while we’re not rooting for him, we still feel for him.

For that reason alone Langella is completely deserving of his Best Actor Oscar nomination, but don’t forget about Sheen. Like Frost, he holds his own against Langella and gives a great performance as a celebrity underdog with a lot of ambition.

In fact, both Frost and Nixon are underdogs and each holds virtues the other is so desperately lacking. So this battle of determination and ability is what propels this film far above just a boring history lesson. That’s what’s great about “Frost/Nixon:” its actors breathe real, complicated emotions into a riveting, true story. 

I only wish it concluded with telling a little more of what happened to the characters. Did Frost marry that girl he picked up on the airplane who turned into a fixture on the interview sets? Were Frost and Nixon really that amicable with each other at the end? If that pivotal, crucial scene that took place the night before the final interview was fictional, what really motivated Frost to suddenly give it his all?

The film isn’t a documentary, so it doesn’t have to answer these questions; but, kudos to a film for making me want to go crack open a history book to learn more.