Probably my last Blog for awhile. This week is gonna be a game-changer for sure. So I wanted to go out with a Bang, and who better than Mel Gibson to usher us into a new era. Despite all the personal peccadilloes I really love the guy. So many of his films helped shape not only my filmic culture but my persona as well. Melvin was too cool as Mad Max and Martin Riggs. He was awesome as William Wallace in Braveheart. His crying jag on the balcony of his Manhattan sky-high apartment in RANSOM was heart-ripping. The guy could do no wrong in my eyes. So with great anticipation I saw his return to the big screen awhile back and here's what I thought: Saw the first screening ever of Mel Gibson's comeback film EDGE OF DARKNESS. Definitely a work in progress, it wasn't color-timed, had temp-music, etc. Martin Campbell the director was there. Lots of nervous looking suits as well. The usual drill.
Massive spoilers ahead... but I will try to contain them and spare the story:
In the film Mr. Gibson plays a police officer called Craven. The film starts slowly, Mel Gibson/Craven picks up his daughter at the train station (I think) and they go home... strangely she's throwing up what seems to be blood and Mel doesn't bat an eye lash... it's obvious he loves his daughter, she's the only thing left in his life. They are having supper when she begins bleeding from her nose and then profusely vomits lots of blood into her plate. In agony, she screams that she needs to get to hospital and that she has something important to tell her dad. They step outside on the porch and a car speeds by, the mysterious driver sceams out: CRAVEN! And blasts the daughter square in the chest with a shotgun. Instant death. It's gory and graphic and very shocking and unexpected. Mel cradles his dead daughter and this is the first 10 minutes of the film. The Mrs and myself thought we were in for a real treat... but alas that was not to be. I'm a big Mel Gibson fan. Grew up on the awesome Lethal Weapons, Braveheart, Mad Max... hell, I even liked CONSPIRACY THEORY. I liked Apocalypto and thought the Jesus torture-fest PASSION OF CHRIST was brave filmmaking. But why Melvin chose this as his comeback film befuddles me. It's not a bad film, it's just so-- mediocre... and there are lots of plot holes. LOTS. I will mention the first and most glaring one: After his daughter is gunned down, everyone assumes that the shooter meant to kill Mel. They think it's a botched cop killing. Sounds reasonable but.... right before she was killed, the daughter was coughing blood, begging to be taken to the hospital and desperately wanted to tell her dad something really important, just as she's about to tell Mel, blam! She's gunned down. What would you do if you were a cop who saw his daughter projectile vomiting blood. Did someone in the audience say: "Maybe call for an autopsy?" Is that what Mel does? No. Instead, he goes to the morgue to identify her body (she died in front of him?!?!? Why does he need to identify her!?), Mel cuts a lock of his daughter's hair (at the morgue) as a keepsake and THEN HAS HER CREMATED!!!!
We're about 15 minutes in and I'm angry at Mel and the filmmakers. This is a problem that should have been caught at the script level. Now the reason they cremate her is to drag out the mystery. Bcs if they perform the autopsy, they would find out a very important clue that would showcase the apparent botched cop killing in very different light. So instead, they drag out the "mystery" and we get to see interminable scenes of barefoot Melvin on the beach grieving for his daughter and pouring her ashes into the ocean. Why the ocean? Who cares, it's a nice visual. At this point I can't believe that William Monanhan (Departed) wrote this script (maybe he needs to adapt more Asian cop films)...oh, did I mention that Melvin is a Boston cop with a full blown Bostonian accent...the accent is not bad, it's not good, it just feels forced. And yet, Mel is good in the film, as he always is. Anyhow, after all the grieving, Mel goes to his daughter's apartment and empties out her backpack and finds a Geiger counter which starts going crazy when he brings it close to his jacket... what does he have in his pocket? The sheared lock of his daughter's hair! LAME plot device alert. Mel starts to put the pieces together. His daughter was a scientist/slash activist (to be honest it was never made clear and was very muddled, we never even get a flashback that explains her involvement... I know flashbacks are weak sauce storytelling wise but I felt like I needed one. At this point, the Mrs was completely lost and losing interest quick.)
Anyhow, so Mel realizes that his daughter, who was a disgruntled scientist was poisoned with radiation. How she got poisoned was clever and I won't reveal it.
Did I mention that Ray Winstone is also in this as some high level cleaner who befriends Mel, but we're not really sure who's side he's on. His character is really under-developed and Ray's talent is wasted. You can see why Bobby Deniro hight-tailed it out of this production. There was nothing there for him to work with in terms of character. I love Winstone but he needs to stop appearing in lame supporting roles.
Eventually, Mel finds out that his daughter was working for General Stryker (Danny Huston) in another asshole role. Stryker owns some kind of nuclear power plant (I wasn't sure what it was but if people try to sneak into the compound, they release radiated steam to poison them or some shit like that).
I don't want to spoil the rest but Melvin takes charge of the situation... he wants revenge real bad and several people come to a very bloody and very gory end. One thing I've always loved about Mel is his penchant for gory violence and he doesn't shy away from it here. There are two genuinely shocking moments of violence that made me jump in my seat. And we see glimpses of the mad man Riggs in a few scenes... in fact, I wish Melvin would make another lethal weapon after seeing what a tough guy he can still be. Melvin looks like he can kick serious ass anytime. Anyhow, I digress.
This is a revenge film, pure and simple. Not much character development for Melvin's character. Once again, I'm not sure why this film spoke to him...
Basically, I can't give this film a good grade. It just felt too ordinary. Not special enough, even with Mel in it. I wish he would've chosen something else as his comeback vehicle. There is still much work to be done and the film could be made into something somewhat enjoyable with a few edits to clarify what's going on. But overall, it was an underwhelming exercise, especially considering the talent involved. It wasn't bad, it wasn't good, it was blah. And blah is terrible place to be. I will see this film again when it's released because I hope that somehow Mel can right this ship. If anyone can, Mel Gibson can. Your Friend, D. |
Sunday, September 20, 2009
MEL GIBSON'S EDGE OF DARKNESS REVIEW
Thursday, September 17, 2009
MY REVIEW OF UP IN THE AIR
"When something like Up In The Air comes around it restores my faith in film."
"This is only Reitman's third film and he's showing such a level of confidence here that it's almost scary. Where does he go from here? UITA is going to be on everyone's Ten-Best list, and Clooney will be nominated for Best Actor. Clooney has never been so good. In fact, I feel he was born to play this character, a charmingly aloof business-track smoothie called Ryan Bingham.
"This is the Clooney who dashes around Italy on a motorbike with an Italian lap-dancer strapped to his back. This is a character Clooney was born to play, always impeccably dressed, meticulous in his words, basically a throwback to the great stars of yesteryear. In the film he plays a professional whacker...yup, the big companies fly Clooney around when they don't have the balls to fire a long time employee and he's good at it. He's got it down to a science.
"And he lives his life up in the air. He has no attachments, he has an empty apartment, he's a stranger to his family, nothing tethers him to this world... and that's the way he likes it. His only goal in life is to accumulate enough air miles so he can get the top secret super-platinum card given to you by the pilot himself.
"Of course, a complication arises. Clooney/Bigham's way of life is threatened when a young female whipper-snapper (Anna Kendrick) strolls into the office and comes up with a way to save the company loads of money by grounding Clooney and the staff of flying assholes whose job it is to fire you. The solution: fire people by web-conference, which is the next level of demeaning. Clooney freaks at the notion of not being able to accumulate his air miles and, in a great scene, he completely schools the young Ivy-league girl on why firing people over a web camera will not work.
"Clooney is masterful in this scene. Cary Grant crossed with Warren Beatty. He's amazing to watch. At the heart of the film is the notion of what drives us in life and what's most important to us as human beings. Clooney is a superficial jerk who meets a superficial lady (Vera Farmiga), and they strike up a very modern relationship. They have palpable chemistry in the film. They meet all over America in swanky hotel rooms with no strings attached. I don't want to spoil the film but by the end Clooney's character wants more from life and from the girl. Although he may be too late in making these needs known.
"I saw the film two weeks ago, and I still haven't been able to shake it. It was a test screening but it was a near perfect film, except for one minor dream sequence which was a little on the nose. In the film, Clooney says he's crisscrossed the world so many times that he could've gone to the moon. Well, you can guess what the dream sequence is: Clooney dressed like an old-timey astronaut floating up through buildings in downtown Omaha. It's trippy but felt out of character for the film.
"The film tackles all the big questions of life, prime among them: What is the meaning of life? It's relevant because it deals with corporate downsizing. There's so many levels to the film and I don't want to spoil to much. Basically, UITA is an absolutely amazing film. Love it and can't wait to see it again. As a former Montrealer, it's great to see the Montreal-born Reitman hitting it out of the park or, in hockey parlance, 'scoring a hat trick.'
"Oh, and there's a great ass-shot in the film....astounding."
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
TOP ELEVEN BEST FILMS OF THE YEAR SO FAR
Everyone makes lists. This year I thought I'd make my own. It's the TOP ELEVEN BEST FILMS that have resonated with me this year. Why eleven? Because I made the list and refused to leave off one film. So suck it up. All the heavy-hitter Oscar Contenders have yet to arrive, so the list will ultimately fluctuate. This list is comprised of the films that hit from January 1st until September 14th.
Friday, September 11, 2009
I WILL READ YOUR FUCKING SCRIPT (with a few conditions)
This morning I open my email and what do I see: The now infamous Josh Olsen "I won't read your script" rant. You can find it here--http://bit.ly/1WVbMX. Of course, I already read it the night before, posted it on my Twitter, passed it through my lower intestines and digested it. But a few industry friends felt obligated to send it to me, as a way for excusing their douchy behavior. I have a bone to pick with Josh Olsen.
Back to the email. It was from a very dear friend who is about to direct a feature film. In the email he professes in 3 short words his feelings about the Josh Olsen Rant (heretofore known as the JOR): I LOVE IT.
I feel Olsen's rant/article--ranticle, is a bit disingenuous. I think people are missing that the article was written with tongue in cheek. But it does ring of truth. Although, I strongly believe when you reach a certain level of fame/success/accolades I feel it's your God-damned duty to give something back. And in JORs specific case, he wasn't even asked to read a whole script--IT WAS A TWO PAGE SYNOPSIS. Two minutes of his life. Let's get right to it. Josh's article should be titled: I don't work for free. I get it. No one likes to do free work. NO. ONE. Hell, some people don't even like to work when they are handsomely renumerated. I have some great famous actor stories but that's another blog.
My policy (and I'm nowhere near Josh Olsen's fame/success, so don't accuse me of comparing myself to him. I'm just starting out. But I also didn't compare myself to Picasso) is I don't accept complete strangers scripts. But I will read friends screenplays. I read the first 10 pages. If it sucks I stop. Simple. I use my common sense before I accept to read a script. I query the writers on the themes of the story and what it's really about (is there layers? etc). If it sounds good, I read. If not, I say I'm too busy. Josh Olsen says in the article: "would you go up to a doctor and ask him to explain a complex medical procedure?"... well, if I was just entering medical school, then yes, yes I would. Moxie gets you in the door... talent keeps you in the room. Skill, structure, character, storytelling and luck (never under-estimate luck, but the better of us make our own) gets your movie made.
Another trick I now use with people who are acquaintances and want me to read their material is-- I ask them to do the following 3 Things:
1) Write a LOGLINE-- Two lines describing the story.
2) Write a 2-3 Page SYNOPSIS.
3) Write a HALF PAGE on why you want to tell this story.
If they complete the above task, I will read their script. So far, no one has come back to me with the aforementioned task. NO ONE. Not even one person. Because for the casual writer, it's too much work. It reveals that all they really want is for you to do all the heavy-lifting. It's a good process that weeds out the wannabe's from the real deal writers.
Back to my friend's email, artists shouldn't forget where they came from because many people helped them along the way and the Karma Police have a habit of showing up at the most inappropriate times.
Your Friend,
D.