FRIDAY FLICK: 'GAMER'

Starring: Gerard Butler, Michael C. Hall

Directed/Written by Mark Neveldine and Brain Taylor

Review by Timothy Black

This Friday, Tempest Pictures has selected the new Gerard Butler flick 'Gamer' as our victim. It's an action movie that was released just a few days ago, and we've got all you need to know concerning the flick. If you don't feel like reading, then just scroll to the bottom and get the final word, as well as the rating. Or, you could be nice and read the review I slaved over for hours. Your choice.

The Plot:

Gamer is a high-concept action thriller set in a near future when gaming and entertainment have evolved into a terrifying new hybrid. Humans control other humans in mass-scale, multi-player online games: people play people...for keeps. Mind-control technology is widespread, and at the heart of the controversial game is its creator, reclusive billionaire Ken Castle (Michael C. Hall). His latest brainchild, the first-person shooter game "Slayers," allows millions to act out their most savage fantasies online in front of a global audience, using real prisoners as avatars with whom they fight to the death.

Kable (300's Gerard Butler) is the superstar and cult hero of the ultraviolent "Slayers." Kable is controlled by Simon, a young gamer with rock star status who continue to defy all odds by guiding Kable to victory each week. Taken from his family, imprisoned and forced to fight against his will, the modern day gladiator must survive long enough to escape the game to free his family, regain his identity and to save mankind from castle's ruthless technology.

Gamer stars Gerard Butler (300, The Ugly Truth), Michael C. Hall ("Dexter"), Amber Valletta (Transporter 2), John Leguizamo (Righteous Kill, Assault on Precinct 13) and Kyra Sedgwick ("The Closer").

The Ugly:

We're taking the Good, Bad, and Ugly backwards today...because that's really the flow of the entire movie.

The first five minutes of the film are just that...ugly. 'Walk out of the theater' ugly. The opening sequence throws you right in the middle of a game of 'Slayers' in action, and we're treated (for the millionth time this century) to a full-on barrage of needlessly shaky-cam, and lightning fast cuts. If you can tell what's going on in the first five minutes, my hat's off to you. Because I couldn't figure it out. The cinematographer apparently decided it would be cool to toss the camera into the air repeatedly during huge explosions and gunfire. Repeat after me please: THIS DOES NOT MAKE A MOVIE INTENSE. IT MAKES A MOVIE TERRIBLE. If you want an example of good 'battle scene' camerawork, check out 'Saving Private Ryan'. You can at least tell who is who and what they're doing. With 'Gamer', you'll need to slow the camera down to 1/3rd the speed and ZOOM OUT to figure out what's going on.

If you can hold on through the terrible opening scene, then things start to get a little better...if you care by that point.

Other noteworthy nuggets of 'ugly': Ludacris. But let's be honest...who didn't see that one coming? Oh yeah, Milo Ventimiglia manages to make a quick cameo in which his fans will immediately lose all respect for him.

The Bad:

After the painful first few moments, the movie gets a bit better, and starts to establish itself as a solid B-Movie, with a few unfortunate issues.

Let's get this straight right off the bat: this is NOT a Gerard Butler flick. Any ladies out there thinking they'll be able to see 'the next Johnny Depp' in a really heart-wrenching role are going to walk out of the theater in the first 5 minutes. Butler has next to NO LINES for the first half of the movie. Unless you like seeing him brood and stare off screen, or shoot guns...you aren't going to be blown away by his performance.

In fact, the entire first half really pales in comparison to the latter half, leaving the viewer to think that the problem was in the writing. It felt at moments as if I was watching a scene when I wanted to be elsewhere in the story. While the audience is stuck with Butler in Ludacris-Land, we wish we could be checking in with Society, or the bad guys...but we're forced to sit in on a scene that has its lines ripped directly from every mind-controlling/post-modern/near-future/sci-fi/minority report film that came before it. Yawn.
Oh, wait...I forgot...it's NOT a copycat routine, because they throw in a lot of cursing. Y'know...because it's the future. And everyone curses like a drunken sailor in the future. Cause society has changed...cause it's 30 years from now...get it?

Besides suffering pacing problems, 'Gamer' also runs a fine line on content, as it begins to demonize and make fun of its target audience. Think about it: who is going to go watch this movie? Gamers. So why would you portray gamers as overweight perverts who eat constantly. A lot of folks I talked with thought the movie went off track in that respect. Honestly...in a film that has its TARGET AUDIENCE as the TITLE, there's no reason to bite the hand that feeds.

I'm not a 'realism' nag by any means...so I'm not going to mention the obviously over-the-top plot and action sequences, because it doesn't matter to me...but seriously: why would Kable go to the final face off without a gun? I still can't rap my mind around that. He spends 45 minutes blowing stuff up with automatic assault rifles, and he decides to fight the 'final boss' (no pun intended) with fists of fury? Ah...I'll overlook it.

The Good:

Alright...don't get me wrong: if you can make it through the below-average first half, the rest of the film actually becomes extremely watchable.

The best casting decision by FAR was Michael C. Hall. This guy is seriously one of the most underrated actors in the business. Hall just WORKS as Ken Castle, and the best scenes in the flick are the ones that center around him. Even down to his most minute mannerisms, Hall turns what could very easily be an annoying character into celluloid gold. If we could have spent less time with 'Luda' and more time with 'Dexter', the film would have been much a lot more palatable.

Right about the time Kastle goes to find his wife, the film takes a turn for the best. Each scene is certainly watchable, and oftentimes very entertaining. The biggest problem is that most audience members have lost their interest in the film by then.

The biggest thing that sticks out to me is this: if this film is labeled as a 'Video Gamer' movie, then it's only mildly impressive. BUT...if this film is labeled as a 'Social Commentary' movie, then it takes gold.

This is a hilarious take on what the planet would be like if the 'Facebook Culture' ruled the world for the past 30 years, with no red-haired conservatives standing in the way. Let's be honest: the 'conversations' that take place in this movie could be ripped from any internet message board on the planet...and seeing them acted out in real life is quite entertaining at times. I just wish 'Gamer' could figure out what kind of movie it wants to be.

FINAL SCORE: 70% (C-)

Bottom Line: If you can make it through the first half unharmed, then the film starts to make up ground in the final 30 minutes. The only problem is that it can't make the ground up fast enough. By the time the movie is over, you aren't left thinking about the story: you're left thinking about the movie, and how it could have been better...and when that happens, you know something didn't work.
Unfortunately for a lot of Butler fans out there, 'Gamer' was certainly a lot of madness, but it was not a lot of Sparta.

FRIDAY FLICK: 'THE GOODS: LIVE HARD. SELL HARD.

Starring: Jeremy Piven
Directed by Neal Brennan

Review by Vincent Rouse

In 'The Goods: Think Hard, Sell Hard', Jeremy Piven (known for great roles like Ari Gold on Entourage, The Dean in Old School, and Buddy Israel in Smokin’ Aces) plays the role of Don Ready, a “gun-for-hire” used-car salesman. He is hired to the task of selling every car on the lot in a random town in sunny California, and meets some interesting characters while there. Sounds like the premise of a pretty entertaining comedy, right? Wrong.

If you couldn’t tell, I’m a huge Piven fan. I had high hopes for this movie, but those hopes were torn down by ridiculous plot lines, poor improv, and terrible cinematography. Don’t get me wrong: Piven still did a pretty decent job in this movie, but all he had to push were really cheap jokes and slapstick humor. Almost all 'one-on-one' scenes in this flick seemed completely improvised, with no clear set of directions, and no ultimate destination.


Prime example: One particular scene included Piven making an off-hand insult about the Japanese (channeling Pearl Harbor anger) while an Asian man stood next to him. The rest of the crowd, energized by Don Ready's powerful and convincing oratory, grabbed the Asian man and started beating him. (A racism joke...whee.) Afterwards, Don Ready realizes the chaos he has spawned, and yells at the mob to stop the attack. What follows is a three and a half minute improvised 'joke' about hate crimes...the scene was pure slapstick and distasteful (like many of the scenes in the picture), and in a regular 'Will Ferrel'-style comedy, it would have lasted about 30 seconds. Unfortunately, the scene drags on and on until the audience no longer things it's funny...just lame.


When the rare event happens of two characters actually interacting on a personal level (and the even rarer event of decent acting happens), the scene will drag on for far too long, and at the end scene, you'll be treated to a wonderful anti-climax where you find out the main conflict didn't really matter anyway (much like this movie as a whole). I really got the feeling that this film didn't have a script, and the director just told everyone to 'be funny' when he called action.


And while we're on that note, the entire last half of the movie is filmed so horribly that you'll wonder why you even paid money to be subjected to it. This isn't 'shaky cam' effect. It feels like a 'we-don't-have-time-to-set-up-a-tripod-because-we-just-came-up-with-this-scene' effect. It feels like watching a student film. I felt 80% of the time as if the director really didn't care what happened on screen...just so long as they could make the 90-minute time mark.


The film does have a few good moments, however. Will Farrell (who clearly was called in for a single day of work) has a classic cameo, though he only interacts with Piven twice briefly. Ed Helms (The Hangover) plays the son of a competing car lot's owner, and an upcoming boy (er...'Man Band') performer. Next to Piven, Helms provides the only breath of fresh-air when it comes to acting ability in this train wreck.


Overall, The Goods simply doesn't live up to its name. Although I'm sure some people may really enjoy certain comedy bits, it all was a bit too much for me. Was it crude comedy? Yes. But was it good crude comedy? Not by far. 'Don Ready' will leave you begging for campy frat-pack movies to return to the good-old days of 'Ricky Bobby' and 'Ron Burgundy'.

If you're going to go out and watch a comedy this weekend, use a little common sense and Think Hard about skipping this one.


4/10

Pros: Funny characters, Farrell cameo, Jeremy Piven
Cons: Everything else

FRIDAY FLICK: 'PUBLIC ENEMIES'

Starring: Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard

Directed/Written by Michael Mann

Review by Austin McConnell

As promised, every Friday Tempest Pictures takes a new (or classical favorite) film to review. This week, we take a look at 'Public Enemies': a relatively new flick that is still playing in some theaters across the country, and is gearing up for a DVD release soon.
The Plot:

In the action-drama Public Enemies, acclaimed filmmaker Michael Mann directs Johnny Depp, Christian Bale and Academy Award winner Marion Cotillard in the story of legenday Depression-era outlaw John Dillinger (Depp) - the charismatic bank robber whose lightning raids made him the number one target of J. Edgar Hoover's fledgling FBI and its top agent, Melvin Purvis (Bale), and a folk hero to the nation besieged by financial hardship and ready to celebrate a mythical figure.

No one could stop Dillinger and his gang. No jail could hold him. His charm and audacious jailbreaks endeared him to almost everyone - from his girlfriend Billie Frechette (Cotillard) to an American public who had no sympathy for the banks that had plunged the county into the Depression.

But while the adventures of Dillinger's gang - later including the sociopathic Baby Face Nelson (Steven Graham) and Alvin Karpis (Giovanni Ribisi) - thrilled many, Hoover (Billy Crudup) hit on the idea of exploiting the outlaw's capture as a way to elevate his Bureau of Investigation into the national police force that became the FBI. He made Dillinger America's first Public Enemy Number One and sent in Purvis, the dashing "Clark Gable of the FBI".

However, Dillinger and his gang outwitted and outgunned Purvis' men in wild chases and shootouts. Only after importing a crew of lawmen from the Dallas bureau and orchestrating epic betrayals - from the infamous "Lady in Red" to the Chicago crime boss Frank Nitti - were Purvis, the FBI and their new crew of gunfighters able to close in on Dillinger.

The Good:

The cinematography of 'Public Enemies' is interesting. Where most period films often indulge in the 'wide shot' to show off vast sets and breathtaking scenery, Mann employs a different school of thought, using far more handheld shots than still ones. This helps to create the gritty and raw effect on screen, and it was very nice to see that he didn't go overboard on the 'Shaky-Cam' pills (ala Bourne). While the film has a lot of action where the camera will twist and turn, Mann makes it a point to set the camera down on solid ground during the 'talking-head' scenes, giving the viewers a nice breath of fresh air every now and then.

The acting is top notch. Everyone is at their best here. Coming out of the showing, I couldn't think of a single actor who overdid it or fell short. Each cast member was on par with their characterization, though I felt Depp had maybe one too many of the slick, charismatic monologues while playing Dillinger. Even Bale did a good job as the second-lead. He's the kind of guy that needs to stick with the stone-cold serious characters, because it's what he does best.

The soundtrack consists of your basic cinematic notes. Cellos and orchestral tunes fill almost every nook and cranny of the picture, and while it's nothing too spectacular, and indeed all eventually starts to sound the same, you don't mind too much, because it helps to move the flick along.

The story progression works exceedingly well, and I really got the sense that I was watching something that will remain a great piece of film throughout the years. It's a wonderful feeling sitting in the theater and feeling as if you're truly watching one of the next 'cinematic classics'.

The film is an epic by all means. The tone is consistently dark, action-packed, with just the right amount of Johnny Depp-humor peppered throughout to let the air cool every now and then. The greatest thing that stood out to me was that the film, while running 140 minutes long, never once felt dragged out. I was on the edge of my seat the entire time, and even though I'm a history buff, and I already knew how it would end, I still was holding my breath the entire time.


The Bad:

The film has its rough spots. I've already mentioned Depp has a few too many 'Depp' moments for my taste, but most people would overlook or forgive that.

For one, I really wish we could have seen some more 'Depression' in this 'Depression-Era' movie. Most of the sets and characters you will see (when not in prison) are folks in the big-city life, who don't look too bad off, financially. I would have appreciated a few scenes of poor folk cheering for Dillinger (although a scene of Dillinger waving to a delighted crowd while on the way to jail got a huge thumbs up in my book, and I thought Depp played the scene wonderfully).

Costuming was a problem. Don't get me wrong: the threads look great. But the number one negative I've heard from almost everyone I've talked about the film with was: 'I couldn't tell who was who.' The story consists mainly of your classic 1930's males, and just like every other film set in this era, all of the men are obscured and hidden underneath a long overcoat and hat. Apart from Depp and Bale, it can be painfully difficult to try and decipher who you're watching in certain moments (especially during the night scenes). During one of the large shootouts, I thought Dillinger had been killed at one moment, until 3 minutes later, when Depp walked across the screen.

Don't get your hopes up for a lot of character-vs-character showdowns (that don't involve guns, anyway...) Depp and Bale share the screen for maybe all of 5 minutes. I only remember a single scene of them together, in what is essentially a staring contest mixed with slick one-liners. Any other time you will see them in the same place is during a pursuit, or gun battle. I would have liked for them to have another scene together to 'conclude' their feud.


The Ugly:

Two big uglies that prevented this from being the perfect flick.

First: the sound can be atrocious at times. While the theater I went to had the speakers turned down a bit low, the opening scenes definitely had some issues. Characters at one moment were barely audible over a whisper, and then a moment later...BOOM! The sound seemed to even itself out after a bit, but it was kind of annoying having to lean forward in my theater seat for the first 15 minutes to try and desperately hear the story.

Second: ...this is going to be a filmmaker thing, but I have to say it. I couldn't stand the shootout at the Little Bohemia Lodge. Director Mann decided to film this bit with either a different shutter speed, or in 60i digital video, and it looked terrible on screen. When film is projected at 24 progressive, you should film it in that format. The shootout was obviously filmed with a digital video camera, because the deinterlaced picture makes the entire sequence look like a shaky home movie. Seriously. Go watch it. You will literally cringe. There were people (non-filmmakers) who turned to their neighbors during the sequence and said, 'Is this sped up? Is there something wrong with the projector?' I really hope they somehow decide to fix that scene for the DVD...because it dropped this flick from getting a huge plus.

FINAL SCORE: 90% (A-)

Bottom Line: Once you look passed the very few bumps in the road, this could very well be one of the best pictures of the year. The story of Dillinger lives on through this wonderful piece of celluloid, and it will hopefully be stacked up there as one of the all-time greats. If you're looking for action, drama, and an ending that will have you thinking about the entire ordeal for weeks later, then Public Enemies is the flick for you.