2011 SXSW FILM FESTIVAL EMERGING VISIONS SELECTION!
Unrated
79 minutes

**
When reviewing a film, I normally hate to generalize or resort to hyperbole. But in the case of “Septien,” I really think it fits. There are two kinds of people in the world: People who won’t care for “Septien” and people who will think it’s amazing. The latter type of person will really “get it.” They’ll see themes and allusions up the wahzoo. They’ll hail the film as a work of art. And who knows, maybe they’re right. Real art is many things to many people. Sometimes, however, the reason a work of art leaves so much open to interpretation is because the artist hasn’t fully fleshed out their idea.

Michael Tully wrote, directed and stars as Cornelius Rawlings, one of three brothers living on a small backwoods farm in rural Tennessee. Cornelius has just returned unexpectedly after an unexplained 18-year absence. His brothers are pleased to see him but less pleased that Cornelius remains mum on pretty much every subject. The brothers quickly re-assume their roles. Ezra is the maternal one. A secretly self-loathing closet case, he keeps the house in a compulsively tidy state and prays for the souls of the others. Amos is the tortured artist, draining resources as he paints disturbing scenes for hours on end without any intention to sell his work. He’s both reverent of Cornelius and jealous of him. Cornelius is a passive-aggressive brat whom everyone adores anyway. Why they do isn’t exactly clear, though he does possess a tremendous amount of squandered athletic talent. To say these are broken people is likely inaccurate because they were probably screwed up all along. After all, they aren’t the only irreverent rednecks in town. Must be something in the water.

Helping out on the non-working farm is the resident simpleton, Wilbur. He spends his days running a metal detector over the grounds, finding a surprising array of items. Why someone would bury a working VHS camcorder (with a battery charger?), is beyond reason. But it gives Wilbur a chance to make a movie so that we can see what a beautiful soul he has. He sleeps in a tire and counts kitty petting as one of his hobbies.

By now you’ve probably guessed which camp I’m in. I didn’t want to hate “Septien.” I enjoyed the tone, which was suspenseful with the essence of a Harmony Korine film. (Incidentally, Korine’s wife, Rachel, has a featured role.) The flat line delivery that is so prevalent in this type of indie darling didn’t bother me here. It almost made a kind of sense that these characters would speak so dispassionately. Ezra’s (at times cliché) colorfulness was a nice contrast to his dusty, bearded brothers both in wardrobe and personality. Though I didn’t actually like any of the characters, they earnestly compelled me. With the promise of a big payoff, I gave it the benefit of the doubt right up until the end. Of course, I won’t give away the ending. But you should be warned. The big reveal isn’t that much of a surprise. The aftermath is confusing and, though it involves a lot fire, rather lackluster.

The enjoyable elements aren’t enough to make a successful film because the story takes a very long time to get going. After numerous lengthy scenes of character development, we’re introduced, in a single long shot, to a man in black. He appears out of a Honey Bucket and slowly walks off camera. He enigmatically pops back in from time to time, once with some creepy twin girls. But we don’t actually meet him till the film’s final act. That man is the plot. I guess, seeing as how he’s on foot, it just takes him a while to get there.

I understand that it’s not meant to be plot-heavy. I know that we’re getting a detailed look at whom these people are. But every movie needs to have some sort of plot. “Septien” barely meets that requirement. Every once in a while, something happens that feels like a turning point, such as the aforementioned buried camera mystery or Amos believing his paintings are prophetic. The brothers ominously sing themselves to sleep with a song about expelling demons. Cornelius repeatedly hustles local jocks into sports competitions they can’t win. All of these things feel like they should lead somewhere explosive. But they don’t. Either it turns out to be nothing or, at best, it’s something relatively insignificant to the plot as a whole.

The people who will really love “Septien” won’t mind waiting for Mr. Plot Device to show up looking like a hillbilly Hasselhoff. They’re too busy appreciating the hell out of the film’s quirkiness. They could sit and watch a character develop all day long. They’re the people who loved “Gummo” and think civilians make more interesting actors than the professionals. I’m the other guy.

Originally published on FilmThreat.com (now defunct). 

January 26, 2011
Categories: Filmpinions . Tags: filmthreat . Author: Baxter . Comments: Leave a comment

2010
Rated R
100 minutes

***

It’s truly amazing what a talented actor can do with a mediocre script. In this case, I’m not just talking about Robert Downey, Jr. At this point, everyone expects him to nail every role he takes on. He could play Nomi Malone in a shot-for-shot remake of “Showgirls” and still find some emotional complexity in the character. I’m also referring to Zach Galifianakis. I’m just gonna say it. The dude is underrated. Seriously. Bear with me on this. Yes, he’s primarily known for “being weird” and letting his body be (sometimes literally) the butt of the joke. And some people love him for that alone. But underneath his comedic social ineptitude lurks a sea of pathos. Sometimes it’s buried pretty deep. So in “Due Date”, when it pokes its head out and waves hello, it’s a thing of beauty. It also makes what would have otherwise been a pretty forgettable film into a repeat-viewer.

Boiled down, “Due Date” is a worst-case scenario of what would happen if you ended up on the wrong side of the T.S.A. Robert Downey, Jr. plays Peter Highman (the script is mercifully light on jokes about his surname), an architect with anger-management issues and a father-to-be. He meets an eccentric aspiring actor named Ethan Tremblay (Zach Galifianakis) through an inadvertent bag switch at the Atlanta airport. Reunited in first class, the two of them accidentally talk their way onto the “No-Fly” list. This is terrible news for Peter who only has a few days to get to Los Angeles so he can witness the scheduled C-section of his first-born child. Ethan, whose dream is to land a role on “Two and a Half Men,” is also L.A. bound. With his wallet still on the plane, Peter seemingly has no choice but to accept a ride from the man largely responsible for his predicament.

If this plot sounds familiar, it’s probably because you’ve seen “Planes, Trains and Automobiles.” Similarities aside, this isn’t an unofficial remake. While Steve Martin’s character represents the Everyman in an absurd situation, R.D.J.s Peter is just as crazy as the man he’s traveling with, albeit in a more socially acceptable way. Ethan is unstable in pretty unconventional ways, made moreso by the recent passing of his father. He carries his father’s ashes in a coffee can intending to find the perfect spot to scatter them on his way to Hollywood. That’s a pretty solemn plot point for a mainstream comedy.

As the trailer suggests, “Due Date” is largely vehicle destruction, comedic violence, masturbation humor, pot jokes and “oh-no-he-didn’t” moments. But R.D.J. and Galifianakis add an undercurrent of loneliness and daddy issues that brings the film to a new level. Since Peter’s father bailed on him when he was a kid, he’s determined to be there for his child from Day One. He’s also terrified of the prospect of fatherhood. Ethan’s father loved him, but he was probably the only person in the whole world who did. Though he is generally a happy-go-lucky person, Ethan has definitely not yet come to terms with his loss. When he finally finds a spot to sprinkle his father’s ashes, he eulogizes, “Dad, you were like a father to me.” Obviously, the line is played for laughs, but it feels like there’s more to it. Ethan’s dad was there for him. Peter’s was not. Not all dads are like fathers to their children. Whether or not this was the intended reading of the line, it comes across that way because of the caliber of talent involved. If only every mainstream comedy were cast this way. Imagine Phillip Seymour Hoffman as “The Hot Chick”! Cate Blanchette as “The House Bunny”! Gary Oldman and David Thewlis in “Wedding Crashers”! That’s the world I someday hope to live in.

Many people are calling “Due Date” the placeholder between “The Hangover” and “The Hangover 2,” but it’s just as good, if not better, than the former. The quality of the latter remains to be seen, but I can count on two hands the number of sequels that were as good as the original. While Todd Phillips isn’t exactly (“Mad Men” creator) Matthew Weiner in the dramatic subtlety department, he’s made a movie with a lot more heart than “The Hangover” and a lot more depth than the John Hughes film it vaguely resembles. Not bad for a placeholder.

Originally published on FilmThreat.com. 

November 5, 2010
Categories: Filmpinions . Tags: filmthreat . Author: Baxter . Comments: Leave a comment

2010
PG-13
112 minutes

**

The old “inherit a baby” gag has a long cinematic tradition. “Life As We Know It” offers another take by combining a trite rehashing of parental ineptitude jokes with an odd couple romantic comedy. As you might imagine, the result is just awful. And not even in a fun way.

Holly (Katherine Heigl) and Messer (Josh Duhamel) are two chronically single people set up on a blind date by their respective best friends, committed couple Alison and Peter. Holly is a little black dress wearing, professional baker who likes to mention the fact that she was in a sorority. Messer (his surname) is a motorcycle riding, sports broadcasting technician and Id-controlled slut. The date ends five minutes in when he accepts a booty call right in front of her. Holly storms off, saying she never wants to see him again. But she’s shit out of luck, because Alison and Peter get married and breed. Holly and Messer become honorary Aunt and Uncle to the offspring. Forced to spend countless hours together at every family function, they tease each other with the sort of cruelty that can only mean they secretly want to bone.

One year later, Alison and Peter Novack fall prey to that popular Hollywood Orphan Maker, the fatal car crash. Holly and Messer are shocked to learn that they’ve been appointed custody of the Novack’s daughter, Sophie. Astoundingly, their best friends never thought to tell them that they might one day become insta-parents. Furthermore, it seems ill-conceived to choose two inexperienced single people who allegedly despise each other to raise your kid together. Though to be fair, they might not have had much of a choice. At the funeral, Holly and Messer meet the Novack’s shitty neighbors (including a sassy fat lady and a gay stereotype couple) and incapacitated family members (it’s funny when grandpa can’t breathe!). Perhaps they did the right thing. Since Holly and Messer loved their friends and love Sophie, they decide to suck it up and play house. Luckily, they also inherit the Novack’s beige mansion so at least their hardships take place in suburban cushiness.

Naturally, what follows are typical scenes of incompetence and inconvenience. Changing a diaper is hard! Feeding a baby is messy! Children’s music sucks! Babies never let you watch the game in peace! There’s never time to get laid! Their neighbors impart platitudes about poop and lack of sleep. Underneath all of these clichés, there inevitably brews a love story. Though Holly enjoys a brief courtship with a handsome pediatrician, it can never work because clearly she’s meant to be with the insensitive commitment-phobe. Convenient, since they have custody of a child together.

I’m not sure why these people don’t have any friends or family to help them. The neighbors stop by but mostly just to talk smugly and ogle Messer. I guess he’s supposed to be really hot or something. No wonder he’s so slutty. People are constantly throwing themselves at him. It must be hard to refuse poon when it’s handed to you on a silver platter. Holly is pretty much the only one who doesn’t want a piece of that ass. Though she’s no prize pig herself. I think people intend to cast Katherine Heigl as the relatable Every-girl. However, either the Every-girl is a vapid, uptight beyotch, or Heigl is incapable of disguising her natural personality. Then again, Holly’s bakery is called Fraische. It’s like “fresh” but pronounced “fray-sh”. Who could like a person like that?

Only in the movies do people fall in love with people they hate. If constant arguing and childish insults are indisputable signs of true love, then Holly and Messer are Romeo and fucking Juliet. They fight constantly. They fight over parenting styles and scheduling conflicts. They fight about how uptight she is and how he is a skanky ho. As they argue over whose life inheriting a baby inconveniences most, little Sophie watches them and cries. Hilarious! And so romantic!

What sets “Life As We Know It” apart from other rom-coms is its fresh view on fighting in relationships. Holly and Messer find a home movie of Alison and Peter arguing the day they brought Sophie home from the hospital. They’re relieved because they viewed their friends as ideal parents. That means, they decide, that hostile arguing in front of the baby is totally fine. Later, the perfect boyfriend overhears Holly and Messer fighting and he breaks up with her because he spots their venom as a surefire sign of true love. “If my [ex-]wife and I fought like that”, he tells her, “we’d still be married.” So antagonism is not only OK for babies, it’s also the basis of a stable marriage. Be that as it may, it’s not very fun to watch two people fight for almost two hours.

With all this well-worn territory, the writers could have at least attempted to do something unique with the ending. But no, it’s another fucking race to the airport. Why do they always need to get to the airport? Doesn’t every single person in western civilization own a cell phone? Notice I didn’t dignify that with a spoiler alert. That’s because if you couldn’t figure out the ending from the trailer, then I can’t help you.

Originally published on FilmThreat.com. 

October 8, 2010
Categories: Filmpinions . Tags: filmthreat . Author: Baxter . Comments: Leave a comment

2010
Rated R
120 minutes

***

Do you like apples?

Way back in 1997, Ben Affleck wasn’t what you’d call a gifted actor. But he did write a script with fellow Bostonian, Matt Damon. When that script got the coveted Green Light, and it came time to decide who would play the lead, I imagine Ben conceded, knowing his friend was the better actor. Will Hunting was a meaty role and it led to a lot more meat for Damon. Meanwhile, Affleck was stuck playing one-note guys for years to come. Some part of him must have longed for his chance to play a working-class Boston savant. As both director and star of “The Town”, Affleck finally gives himself that chance. And he doesn’t even screw it up. Like, at all.

Naturally, “The Town” in question is a borough of Boston. According to the opening titles, Charlestown is known for producing more bank robbers than any other city in the world. The film doesn’t exactly explain why that is, but it does show Charlestown as a very tight nit crime community, with transgressive skill passed down through the generations like a family business. Instead of being a math genius, Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck) is a bank-robbing savant. He and his merry band of thieves are organized and efficient, turning bank robbing into an art form. They wear disguises and sometimes even play characters. They get in, get the money and get out, leaving no trace of DNA behind. Ordinarily, they take no prisoners. That’s why it’s a surprise to the rest when Jem (Jeremy Renner), the ticking time bomb of the group, decides to take a hostage to aid their getaway. Things get even more complicated when they learn that the hostage, a pretty girl named Claire, lives in Charlestown and could possibly identify them.

Wary of Jem’s violent tendencies, MacRay offers to check in on Claire and find out if she knows anything. Of course, since she’s a pretty girl with a philanthropy streak, and he’s a gold-hearted gangster, he soon falls for her. Even though she doesn’t really remember anything, their budding relationship puts his whole team in jeopardy as the F.B.I. closes in on them. Even though they specialize in leaving no trace, they’re basically the only four guys in town who could have done it. Furthermore, the main G-Man assigned to their case (Jon Hamm) is hard-ass with something to prove. And he won’t stop until all of the suspects are either behind bars or dead.

Unlike Will Hunting, MacRay wants nothing more than to just leave Charlestown, preferably with his new girlfriend. But nobody will let him. Not Jem, his oldest friend who chose to do time rather than rat MacRay out; Not coked-up Krista, Jem’s sister and MacRay’s ex, who uses her baby as a way to garner sympathy; Certainly not the Irish florist/crime boss (Pete Postlethwaite) who insists that the gang to pull off one last, seemingly impossible job even while the heat builds under them.

There’s a lot of conflict in “The Town”. It unfolds slowly and builds on itself, leaving the viewer with a keen understanding of MacRay’s inner turmoil. The film doesn’t explicitly state why he saw gangster as a viable alternative to his foiled professional hockey career. But it offers plausible cause as to why he’s remained a gangster even though he’s an otherwise nice guy. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t be surprised to find this sort of layered characterization in serious noir drama. But this is Ben Affleck we’re talking about: Ben “Pearl Harbor Sucks and I Miss You” Affleck. I really have to hand it to him. He’s studied and learned a few things over the years. He’s not at all painful to watch anymore.

And apparently, he also knows how to direct. From a directorial standpoint, “The Town” isn’t necessarily a revelation, but it’s competent. The overall story is pretty cliché. But the action scenes are exciting, the interrogation scenes are tense, the getting-to-know-you scenes with Claire are full of heart and most of the dialogue is delightfully hard-boiled. Every scene hits its intended note. It certainly helps that Affleck filled in his supporting cast with phenomenal talent.

Hamm! Who doesn’t love Hamm? This pony knows all the tricks. As Don Draper, he’s the suavest motherfucker on the planet. But comb his hair forward and his whole demeanor changes. His F.B.I. agent is still cocky, but his intimidating asides make him sound like a dick. Don’t get me wrong; he’s a delightful dick. It’s very fun watching him kick some serious ass during a raid and try to get the guys to cave in the interrogation room. He’s supposed to be the good guy, but he’s obsessed with winning at all costs, and that makes him shady as far as heroes go. MacRay and his gang aren’t necessarily the bad (or good) guys either. That’s part of what makes “The Town” so entertaining. In many ways, it’s a standard heist picture. But it’s also about people. It’s like Ben Stiller’s character says in “The Zero Effect”. “There aren’t evil guys and innocent guys. It’s just…a bunch of guys”.

Like “Good Will Hunting,” “The Town” is all about redemption. But in this case, it’s not just for Doug MacRay, but also for Ben Affleck. Clearly tired of the “Gigli” jokes, he’s worked hard to better himself as an actor and a filmmaker. And apparently, it’s paying off.

How do you like them apples?

Originally published on FilmThreat.com (now defunct).

September 17, 2010
Categories: Filmpinions . Tags: filmthreat . Author: Baxter . Comments: Leave a comment

2010
PG-13
148 minutes

***

The trouble with making a movie about dreams is the same thing as the advantage to making a movie about dreams: Anything can happen. So what do you do with a literally limitless universe? In “Inception,” Christopher Nolan chooses to mostly ignore it. He takes a couple of dream elements (like flying and paradoxes) and expounds on them. But, for the most part, it’s a pretty linear heist movie set inside a dream world. He mainly focuses on the mind of his protagonist, a man plagued by guilt. It’s exciting, engaging, special effects-laden and certainly multi-layered, but “Inception” is nowhere near as dreamy as it could have been.

Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an Extraction Agent, typically hired to steal secrets from the subconscious minds of the rich and powerful. However, Cobb’s got his own secrets, which increasingly hinder his work productivity. Regardless, he’s the best in the business. (It’s unclear how competitive his industry is.) Mysterious circumstances keep him from reuniting with his small children, but Saito (Ken Watanabe), a powerful C.E.O., could make it all go away. That’s why Cobb agrees to take One. Last. Job. Cobb’s employer has a plan to do away with his future competition, Robert Fischer, Jr. (Cillian Murphy) who is about to inherit his dying father’s energy company. Only this time, instead of extracting an idea, Cobb must implant one. It’s called “Inception” and he’s only done it once before, with tragic results.

To carry out the mission, Cobb assembles a Pulp A-Team. Among them, his right-hand-man, Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), an Impersonator (Tom Hardy), to play trusted figures in the subject’s life, and a chemist who can make sure that Fischer is sedated long enough to finish the job. Because he’s no longer mentally stable enough to do it himself, Cobb must also hire an architect (literally) to construct a world convincing enough to keep Fischer from suspecting that he’s been infiltrated. Cobb’s protégé is Ariadne (Ellen Page), who follows in her namesake’s footsteps, guiding Cobb through the labyrinth to prevent him from losing himself in the dream completely.

It’s a fine cast and everyone is up to the task at hand. DiCaprio fares well with the tortured brow-furrowing bit. Gordon-Levitt deftly channels a suave noir persona. Tom Hardy is every bit as charming and disarming as his character requires. Cillian Murphy’s big blues bring an ocean of sympathy to a potentially one-dimensional corporate-type. In fact, most of the supporting characters seem like fascinating individuals. Though they aren’t fleshed out on screen, one gets the impression that each of them could easily head an awesome spin-off film. I don’t know who should get more credit for that: the actors or the writer.

Speaking of writing, Nolan must have gone through a hell of a lot of cocktail napkins to outline this puppy. You’ll probably want to hit the bathroom beforehand, but it’s not a hard script to follow if you pay attention. It certainly doesn’t hurt that the rest of the team constantly explain the rules to newbie, Ariadne. Even when the narrative enters dreams-within-dreams and then dreams-within-dreams-within-dreams and deeper still, this is a story that’s been crafted and coded for mainstream audiences. It’s kind of a shame, actually. Instead of constantly upping the ante by seeing how many layers deep they could go, it would have been much more interesting to focus and expound on one dreamscape.

Anytime we’re talking dreams-on-film, it’s impossible not to think of David Lynch, the master of dream approximation. Apart from lots of slow motion (making “Inception” at least 30 minutes longer than it needs to be), floating and some M.C. Echer-esque architecture, nothing particularly weird or dream-like happens. No one does anything random or irrational. Humans often have more than one dream in a sleep cycle. How cool would it have been to witness that transition? In real dreams, nothing makes immediate sense. When you wake up, you must go back over the events, sometimes repeatedly, in order to interpret them. Often, you never fully understand what it all means. Perhaps corporate heirs do have dreams this linear and straightforward. Of course, it’s possible we’re not in Fischer’s dream at all. Even so, there’s little need to go back over “Inception.”

I can’t help but feel that with less studio pressure, Nolan could have given us a film of Lynchian proportions. It might not have been the blockbuster that “Inception” will inevitably become, but it would have been an instant indie classic. Apparently, Nolan spent 10 years writing the script. One more year might have yielded something mind-blowing. As it stands now, “Inception” is merely mind-tickling. As the Impersonator says, “You mustn’t be afraid to dream a little bigger, dah-ling.” I couldn’t agree more.

Originally published on FilmThreat.com.

July 16, 2010
Categories: Filmpinions . Tags: filmthreat . Author: Baxter . Comments: Leave a comment