“Hacksaw Ridge,” a new war film from director Mel Gibson, is much like the man himself; blustery, loud, occasionally profane and with a muddled moral core.
The film opens with grim imagery, soldiers with their faces blown off, engulfed in flames, before jumping back in time sixteen years to tell the tale of real-life pacifist Desmond Doss (Andrew Garfield). Growing up in podunk Virginia Desmond is a high spirited boy who almost kills his brother during a play fight spun out of control. When his mother (Rachel Griffiths) tells him the most egregious sin of all is the taking of another person’s life, he allows the potent words to sink in and take root.
Later, after a whirlwind romance of the, “Today I met the girl I’m going to marry,” type he enlists in the army, despite the protests of his WWI vet father (Hugo Weaving and his fiancée (Teresa Palmer). A conscientious objector, Desmond refuses any kind of weapons training, insisting instead to go into battle as a medic. In boot camp his fellow cadets treat him like a pariah while his superiors (Vince Vaughn and Sam Worthington) threaten him with a court martial. “I’m not off up above,” he says pointing to his head. “I just believe what I believe.”
“Hacksaw Ridge” is the kind of movie that presents the main character as an underdog, but you know by the end of the film someone will say, “That crazy SOB was the bravest man I ever met,” or words to the effect. And so it goes. On Hacksaw Ridge, an impossibly tall cliff on the Japanese island of Okinawa, his mettle is tested when his platoon is attacked and overwhelmed. Without firing a shot, or even touching a gun, Desmond dodges death in the form of Japanese soldiers, bullets and grenades to bring aid to his colleagues.
This is a morality tale about a man whose noble intentions are misunderstood by everyone. Based on real events, it nonetheless has the feel of Hollywood fiction. Perhaps it’s because of our cynical times, but stories of the indomitable spirit seem to take on a corny edge no matter how much gruesome stuff—legs turn in the hamburger meat, rats eating corpses—the director uses to paint the screen.
That may be unfair, but there is an undeniable aw-shucks vibe that permeates the air. Gibson clearly respects the moral high ground his main character takes, but allows Garfield to play Doss as a hokey cliché, with one hand on the bible and a goofy grin plastered on his face. It’s amiable enough work but when the “hellfire of combat” kicks in he tends to get lost amid the action.
And there is a lot of action. By the time the movie shifts location to the titular warzone Gibson goes full tilt with skilfully shot, hardcore battle scenes. For a film about pacifism he doesn’t hold back, bringing his usual subtlety (think “Braveheart,” “The Passion of the Christ” or “Apocalypto”) to scenes of dismemberment and even a glimpse of ritual Seppuku. It’s wild and woolly and often very effective. A slow speed chase sequence in one of the cliff’s tunnels has tension and a couple of good jump scares. It’s solid filmmaking, if just a little safe. There’s nothing here as oddball or challenging as the use of arcane languages in his last two films or “Passion’s” female Satan. Instead he’s made a conventional, if somewhat gory inspirational biopic that suggests, come for the old time religion, stay for the blood and guts.
It’s hard to separate Mel Gibson from his films. “Hacksaw Ridge,” despite its lack of his usual eccentric flourishes, still feels like it could only be made by a man torn between deeply held faith and a wild side that sometimes runs free.
“99 Homes” is an angry movie. An examination of the personal cost of the 2010 real-estate collapse in Orlando, Florida, it bristles with rage at the fate of families thrown to the curb when banks foreclosed on their homes. It’s an ugly story and one that should serve as a cautionary tale.
Andrew Garfield is Dennis, a construction Jack of All Trades who borrowed $85,000 against the value of his home to start his own company. When the economy went south, so did his company. Soon Richard Carver (Michael Shannon) a predatory real estate flipper with a steely gaze and an electronic cigarette is at the door with an eviction notice. Within minutes Dennis, his son (Noah Lomax) and mother (Laura Dern) are homeless.
“I didn’t kick you out,” he says to Dennis as movers empty the house. “The bank did. I just represent them.”
With no job, no house and no prospects, Dennis makes a deal with the devil and begins assisting Carver with evictions and semi-legal wheeling and dealing. It’s a Faustian deal to be sure, but soon Dennis is able to see light at the end of the tunnel, and maybe even earn his house back.
“99 Homes” features a gut wrenching eviction scene that establishes the tone for the rest of the film. It’s the stuff they don’t show you on reality flip shows, the personal, tragic side of foreclosure.
It’s not a subtle film. Shannon is entertaining as always, but the only thing missing from his take on Carver are devil horns and a red cape. He’s more a metaphor than a character. He’s the personification of capitalism run wild; an amoral businessman who ruthlessly exploited predatory lending, unfair mortgage rates, bailed-out banks to make a fortune for himself. In his wake is a trail of destruction, foreclosed homes and destitute families. “You get numb to it,” he says.
Garfield goes along for the ride, at least until his guilt gets the best of him. His character has the best story and character arc, but it’s the sheer power of Shanon’s menace that we’re paying to see.
“99 Homes” asks many questions, most notably, What would you do to keep a roof over your head? The answer lies somewhere between the film’s moralizing and melodrama, serving as a cautionary tale of a terrible time in our recent history.
At two-and-a-half hours the new Spider-Man movie is almost equal parts action and story. The first fifteen minutes contains not one, but two wild action sequences that’ll make your eyeballs dance. If you haven’t had your fill of special effects for the week your thirst will be quenched early on. Then the onslaught of story begins. Jammed packed with plot, bad guys and lots and lots of moony-eyed love, it’s the busiest superhero movie in recent memory.
Fresh out of high school Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is being pulled in two different directions. He loves Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) but is troubled by a promise he made to her late father (Dennis Leary) that he would never let anything bad happen to her.
Meanwhile, Peter’s old friend Harry Osborn (Dane De Haan), heir to the OsCorp fortune, is battling a hereditary genetic disease he thinks can be cured with a dose of Spider-Man’s blood and Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx), a low level OsCorp electrical engineer, has an accident that rewires him into Electro, a highly charged villain with the power to control electricity.
“The Amazing Spider-Man 2” is this is a movie with several well-crafted dramatic moments. Too bad most of them feel like they’re lifted from another movie and dropped into this one as placeholders for the action sequences. Peter Parker is shedding tears over his love life one minute, swinging on webby vines through the streets the next. Both tones are well executed, but they often feel forced together.
Garfield works to distance himself from Tobey McGuire’s Spider-Man. First thing you notice is that he’s not as mopey as McGuire; as Parker Garfield is nerdy and angsty, not downcast and ennui ridden.
Secondly, he’s witty when playing the web slinger. The Sam Raimi “Spider-Man” movies didn’t use Spidey’s comic book sarcasm but Garfield’s Mach 2 version isn’t shy to let loose with some entertaining trash talking.
His portrayal is bright, punchy and more akin to the comic books than anything McGuire or Raimi put on film.
Emma Stone’s football-sized eyes and smart smile rescue Gwen from the simply fulfilling the girlfriend role. She brings some spark to the character and shares some good chemistry with (real life boyfriend) Garfield.
Speaking of sparks, Foxx could have used a few more as Electro. A bundle of neurosis before his electro charged accident, Max becomes one of the rare villains who was more interesting before he got his powers.
De Haan, who was so good in “Chronicle,” is interesting as Harry / Green Goblin. His obsession with finding a cure for his disease is a springboard for his transformation into the Goblin and Da Haan embraces a malevolence that makes the character memorable.
“The Amazing Spider-Man 2” has good actors—plus a fun cameo from Paul Giamatti—a love story and some good action—you will believe a man can swing above the streets of New York—so why does it feel somewhat unsatisfying?
Maybe it’s the two-and-a-half-hour running time, or the something-for-everyone mix of action, heartbreak and comedy, or perhaps it’s the fact that it feels like a well made copy of the first Garfield “Spider-Man” movie, which itself was a riff on the McGuire movies.
SYNOPSIS: Fresh out of high school Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is being pulled in two different directions. He loves Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) but is troubled by a promise he made to her late father (Dennis Leary) that he would never let anything bad happen to her. Meanwhile, Peter’s old friend Harry Osborn (Dane De Haan), heir to the OsCorp fortune, is battling a hereditary disease he thinks can be cured with a dose of Spider-Man’s blood and Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx), a low level OsCorp electrical engineer, has an accident that rewires him into Electro, a villain with the power to control electricity.
STAR RATINGS:
Richard: 3 Stars
Mark: 2 Stars
Richard: Mark, at two-and-a-half hours the new Spider-Man movie is almost equal parts action and story. The first fifteen minutes contains not one, but two wild action sequences that’ll make your eyeballs dance. If you haven’t had your fill of special effects for the week your thirst will be quenched early on. Then the onslaught of story begins. Jammed packed with plot, bad guys and lots and lots of moony-eyed love, it’s the busiest superhero movie in recent memory. Did you get caught up in the film’s web?
Mark: No, Richard, the movie got caught in its own web. Too much of the film is like the last one, which was very good, but do we need to rehash the origin story yet again? The action sequences are good, and they’d better be, because the plot and characters are feeling kind of tired by now. Not that there aren’t good things in the movie. I liked the Jamie Foxx’ villain, who was sadly sympathetic in a Frankenstein kind of way. And Dane DeHaan, as tortured Oscorp heir Harry Osborn, has the best scenes in the picture, with an otherworldly look that reminded me of a British fascist circa 1936 or Tilda Swinton’s illegitimate son; I’m not sure which.
RC: I thought he kind of looks like the Evil Annoying Orange with a better haircut. To each his own. He does have some of the best scenes in the film, and this is a movie with several well-crafted dramatic moments. Too bad most of them feel like they’re lifted from another movie and dropped into this one as placeholders for the action sequences. Peter Parker is shedding tears over his love life one minute, swinging on webby vines through the streets the next. Both tones are well executed, but they often feel forced together.
MB: The movie seems more like a pastiche than a sequel. Sally Field, bless her Norma Rae heart, invests her part with the intensity of a Eugene O’Neill play. Jamie Foxx makes a sympathetic villain in the Frankenstein mode even though he’s made up like a rogue member of Blue Man Group. But Richard, why is Spidey so cocky this go round? His awkwardness is usually part of his charm.
RC: That’s more from the comic books. The Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies didn’t use Spidey’s sarcasm but on the pages of the comics he wasn’t shy to let loose with some trash talking.
MB: the movie is watchable and intermittently entertaining, but the franchise needs to invigorate itself to keep me in its web.
“Never Let Me Go,” the new Carey Mulligan film about a world where children are cloned and raised to be spare parts for the ailing is the least science fictiony sci fi film ever. There are no spaceships, ray guns or robots anywhere to be seen. Instead it is a beautifully acted, deliberately paced story about the nature of love, loyalty and the cost of life. Based on Kazuo Ishiguro’s 2005 novel of the same name—called the book of the year and the decade by Time magazine—it’s not an easy movie. There are no villains, even though these children are essentially being slaughtered, nor is there much dramatic conflict. In their place are questions, ideas and an intellectually devastating climax. Grounding the movie are three remarkable performances. Carey Mulligan is luminescent as Kathy in a performance so subdued and so beautiful it’s hard to believe she is acting. Keira Knightley digs deep as organ donor Ruth and Spider-Man-to-be Andrew Garfield (also soon to be seen in “The Social Network”) shows some real promise. “Never Let Me Go” is a sophisticated horror film that will stay with you long after you leave the theatre.
Any movie brazen enough to put the word “amazing” in the title really should go the extra mile to ensure that the movie is, in act, amazing. Otherwise filmmakers run the risk of opening themselves up to reviews that begin like this: “Amazing Spider-Man,” more like “So-So Spider-Man.” There’s nothing that much wrong with the reboot of the Sam Raimi series, but it doesn’t have the oomph I would have expected from a talented director—the ironically named Marc Webb—hitting the reset button.
Like first Raimi film—which was released just ten years ago—“The Amazing Spider-Man” is an origin film. Peter Parker (“The Social Network’s” Andrew Garfield) is a misfit teen who develops superhuman powers after being bitten by a radioactive spider. His spidey-senses tingle when danger is about and, as the song goes, he can “do whatever a spider can.” His new powers put him in the path of his scientist father’s old partner Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), an amputee doctor experimenting with cross genetic engineering to find a way to regrow his arm, and into the arms of Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone), the cute daughter of a hardboiled police captain (Denis Leary).
There are differences between Raimi’s take on the story and the new film. He no longer organically shoots webs, they now come out of a mechanical webslinger. There’s a new romantic interest—Gwen replaces Mary-Jane Watson (played by Kirsten Dunst in the older movies) as Parker’s paramour– a new villain—Curt Connors appeared in the other movies as Peter’s professor—who morphs from human to giant lizard determined to infect everyone with lizard juice and J. Jonah Jameson, the Daily Bugle’s Editor-in-Chief is absent.
The biggest change, however, comes in the character. Spider-Man Mach 1, Tobey McGuire, played the webbed wonder’s human counter-part as a sweet, but awkward and bullied loner. Garfield takes a different approach. His Parker is rebellious, angst-ridden who taunts his enemies with wisecracks and gleefully yells, “I’m swingin’ here!” as he zigzags trough the air supported by his newfangled super webs.
It’s an interesting, fresh take on Parker, which Garfield, despite being eleven years older than his character, pulls off with aplomb. He’s made the character his own, balancing Parker’s nervous energy with Spider-Man’s cockiness.
Emma Stone’s Gwen and Martin Sheen and Sally Field as Peter’s Uncle Ben and Aunt May bring some necessary heart to the story, but this is a summer blockbuster, so the emphasis is on the other stuff; nine-foot long lizards and fight scenes, but despite the large scope of the film it seems on a smaller scale than Raimi’s movies. Or at last as small a scale as a movie about a giant reptile and a radioactive superhero can be.
The visionary rethink that Christopher Nolan brought to Batman isn’t here. It does have the best Stan Lee cameo to date, beautiful photography and more humor than the previous films, but coming just five years after the last Raimi film it doesn’t feel as “amazing” as it should.
“Hacksaw Ridge,” a new war film from director Mel Gibson, is much like the man himself; blustery, loud, occasionally profane and with a muddled moral core.
