Movie Review: LOOPER

LOOPER

2012

R

"The only rule is: never let your target escape."

-- Joe

Looper is a 2012 sci-fi action film written and directed by Rian Johnson that serves as his third directorial effort, and his first since 2008's The Brothers Bloom. The story tells the tale of a futuristic world in which time travel exists but is outlawed, used only by major crime syndicates for purposes of disposal. These syndicates will send victims back in time where men known as "loopers" wait for them only to execute them on sight. Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is such a man, and he maintains an extravagant lifestyle as a result of his career. One day, as Joe waits for his victim, or "loop," he finds an older version of himself (Bruce Willis) kneeling before him. After a moment's hesitation, Young Joe allows Old Joe to escape, sparking a massive manhunt by Young Joe's company to find the older man. As Young Joe and Old Joe start to interact through their meetings, light is shed on the elder Joe's current agenda for transforming his future into something much more desirable.

I apologize if the above synopsis seems a little bit shoddy, but I don't want to give away too much information about the plot and the storyline. What I wrote, along with the trailer posted below, really gives away the first half of the film. It's the second act that proves to be a little bit astonishing, and I'd rather not be the one to give it all away.

I've been anxiously awaiting this film for quite a while. Many of my readers will know that I have a bit of a man-crush on Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and that might have played a part in me seeing this film as soon as I did. The real selling point for me, however, is the return of a collaboration between Gordon-Levitt and director Johnson, who first joined forces for 2005's Brick. I'm sure that fact has probably been mentioned in every single review for Looper thus far, but I figured I'd reiterate it. Because I loved that film so much, the idea of another film from the two seemed like a gift-wrapped present at Christmas. What I'm here to tell you is that Looper does not disappoint. It's opened to some fantastic reviews - it currently holds a ninety-three percent approval rating on Rottentomatoes.com - and that only fueled the fire for me to get to a theater and see it as soon as I possibly could.

Let's start with the screenplay, shall we? In the past, a number of successful film franchises, such as Back to the Future and those little Terminator films, have dealt with the concept of time travel. For whatever reason, the plot device has remained a viable option for filmmakers in today's society as well, but I don't think I've ever seen it quite done like this. Johnson manages to create a cinematic world where the idea of time travel can understandably exist, and yet, he never takes the time to spell out the precise details for such an existence. Instead, he gives us just enough information for the audience to understand and believe the capability, and it's this tactic that sets Looper apart from the some of the other great time travel flicks. Rather than trying to bash the viewer over the head with drawn-out explanations, Johnson allows the explanation to be this simple: it exists, and it works. For the most part, that's all we need to know.

From there, the film plays out in a relatively straight-forward manner. Anytime you involve time travel, there are going to be a few moments where things can get a little confusing, but the screenplay does well to keep things from getting too convoluted. At the end of the day, I couldn't see any major issues with logic and continuity within the constructs of the story, but some nitpickers will surely find a few minor details here and there. The screenplay does go on to excel in the second half of the film, blending action sequences with a number of thrills and some fantastic plot twists towards film's end. While some of the storyline becomes a tad bit predictable, I can honestly say that I was not expecting the film's ultimately finale, one that just might blow your mind.

To bring this screenplay together, we'd need a pretty good cast, and that's just what we're getting. Gordon-Levitt is fantastic as Young Joe, and with a fantastic bit of make-up, he does his best Bruce Willis impression. In the early going, it's uncanny just how much the young actor mimics the likeness of the veteran, and I have to say I was thoroughly impressed. Willis himself also brings a strong performance to the screen. Always one of my favorite actors, I can honestly say that I don't think I've seen him bring forth this strong a character since his turn in 2005's Sin City. I might even go as far back as The Sixth Sense in 1999, if I think about it. Kudos to these two leading men for crafting engaging on-screen characters.

Now, the rest of the cast fills out incredibly well, and you're going to see quite a few familiar faces. Emily Blunt offers a great performance as our leading lady. She continues to impress me with her acting prowess. Also be on the lookout for the likes of Jeff Daniels, Paul Dano and Garret Dillahunt, each of whom brings a great bit to the screen. Where I was truly impressed, however, was with the performance of young actor Pierce Gagnon, appearing in only his third feature film. Even for such a young age, he brought quite a presence and power to the screen, which was definitely a necessity for his particular character. To stand toe-to-toe with the likes of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Emily Blunt is quite a feat, but the young Gagnon manages to do just that.

At the end of the day, Looper is a fantastic film, as well as an incredible addition to the science-fiction canon. Sure, it has a few minor flaws here and there, but with any film involving time travel, a bit of disbelief is a bit necessary. If you can let yourself get lost in this world and this story, I don't think there's any reason you won't enjoy the film. Rian Johnson strikes yet again, and I can't wait for his net endeavor.

 

Movie Review Summary

Grade: A

Status: Should See

Happy Birthday, Bruce Willis!

Today, we're celebrating the 57th birthday of actor Bruce Willis. The actor has made a name for himself as an action movie star, but he has been acting for quite some time. He made his first appearance in a feature film in 1980's The First Deadly Sin, but it wasn't until his starring role in 1988's Die Hard that he truly burst onto the Hollywood scene. He has reprised the role on three subsequent occasions, and there is supposedly a fifth Die Hard film in the works (it is currently slated for a 2013 release). In between those films, Willis has also starred in big-time flicks like 1994's Pulp Fiction, 1995's Twelve Monkeys, 1998's Armageddon, 1999's The Sixth Sense and 2005's Sin City. Often portrayed as the tough guy with a witty comment on the tip of his tongue, Willis has become one of the most popular action stars in Hollywood. So, to celebrate his birthday, I've listed my five favorite of Bruce Willis's performances, and I've supplied videos where possible. Once again, happy birthday, Bruce!

5. Hartigan
Sin City (2005)


*****

4. Joseph 'Joe' Blake
Bandits (2001)

*****

3. Dr. Malcolm Crowe
The Sixth Sense (1999)


*****

2. David Dunn
Unbreakable (2000)


*****

1. John McClane
Die Hard (1988)

Movie Review: DIE HARD

DIE HARD

1988
R


"These guys are mostly European judging by their clothing labels and... cigarettes. They're well-financed and very slick."
-- John McClane

Die Hard is a 1988 action film directed by John McTiernan that centers around a heist of a major corporation during their annual Christmas party. After six months of separation, New York City cop John McClane (Bruce Willis) decides to fly to Los Angeles to visit his wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia) and their kids for the Christmas holiday. He goes to surprise her at her office in the still-under-construction Nakatomi Plaza building where her company is celebrating an incredibly successful year. After a short time, however, a band of terrorists led by a German man named Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) breaks into the building and takes over, claiming that they are going to teach the greedy international company a lesson by stealing $640 million in bonds. Unfortunately for them, however, they do not realize that McClane is in the building and will do anything to stop them from their plot.

Obviously, the Die Hard franchise has proven to be one of the most successful action franchises in cinematic history, and with four films - and allegedly a fifth on the way - it's easy to see that they're incredibly popular with their fanbase. However, it all started with this Academy Award-nominated 1988 venture that put the name "John McClane" into the collective public consciousness. I can't quite remember the first time I had the chance to see this movie, but I remember loving it instantly, and I have to say that this viewing only made me appreciate it all the more.

Let's talk about the film's screenplay. It's difficult to make a convincing screenplay for an action flick because, in the course of cinematic history, nearly every action cliché has been tried and tested over and over again. However, I posit that there are two specific reasons why Die Hard's screenplay succeeds. First, the film finds a way to come full circle without leaving any loose ends. There are some larger, extremely important story arcs that need to be addressed before film's end, and your average action flick would address these and hope for the best. However, where Die Hard succeeds is in its attention to detail, coming full circle with even their minute references here and there. In stage production, there's an old adage that says, "If you show the audience a gun in the first act, it must go off in the second act." In a way, Die Hard follows this frame of mind. Even the slightest mention of something earlier in the film is addressed by film's end, and this attention to detail is simply fantastic.

The second reason the film's screenplay proves to be so effective is that it creates very unique and complete characters with whom the audience can relate. The characters themselves are extremely well-written; however, it's up to the actors to bring these characters to life, and I think that each member of the cast plays their part to a tee. Obviously, Willis has made a bit of a name for himself by portraying McClane time and time again over the years, but he brings his best performance in the role here, introducing us to the "shoot first, ask questions later" cop whose gruffness we all grow to know and love. However, I think that Rickman's Gruber is the best-written character, bringing a very precise set of ideologies to the table that Rickman portrays extremely well in what was his first feature-length theatrical release. We're also getting a bit of comic relief from some of the supporting characters (see: Reginald VelJohnson and De'voreaux White) who keep the movie on a bit of an even keel and play off Willis's brand of comedy quite well. Overall, I'd say we're getting a top-notch cast for an action film, which is saying quite a bit.

I'd also like to make note of the film's soundtrack, which relies heavily Beethoven's 9th Symphony as well as quite a bit of Christmastime music. The use of Beethoven in some of the film's scenes accentuates the scenes perfectly, and it stuck out so wonderfully that I had to mention it here. I apologize if this seems like a tangent, so I hope you'll forgive me for the digression.

Ultimately, Die Hard is one of the most iconic and well-received action films ever to hit the silver screen. It currently holds a 94% approval rating on Rottentomatoes.com, which offers the following critical consensus:

Its many imitators (and sequels) have never come close to matching the taut thrills of the definitive holiday action classic.

I don't think I could've said it any better myself. Die Hard set the gold standard for the action genre, and while there are some films that have come close in the twenty-three years since its release, you'd be hard-pressed to find one that truly and completely surpasses it in quality and enjoyability.

Movie Review Summary
Grade: A
2 Thumbs Up

Movie Review: UNBREAKABLE

UNBREAKABLE

2000
PG-13

Unbreakable is a 2000 dramatic mystery film directed by M. Night Shyamalan. The film opens on David Dunn (Bruce Willis), a married man on his way home from New York on a train that derails, killing everyone on-board - except him. Somehow, David walks away from the crash unscathed, causing everyone around him to wonder just how he managed to do so. After leaving a memorial service for all those killed in the crash, David finds a note stuck under his car's windshield asking him how many times he had been sick in his life. The question quickly becomes an obsession, and with the help of his wife Audrey (Robin Wright), David realizes that he had never once been sick in his life. He traces the note to a special art gallery where he meets Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson), a man who was born with a type of brittle bone syndrome. After conversing for a little while, Elijah believes that David may be "unbreakable," in that he cannot be injured. He starts to attempt to convince David that the world may need a person like him - a protector, so to speak. David shrugs off the notion, but as time goes by, he starts to wonder whether Elijah may actually be correct.

Now, I watched this film last night but was too tired afterward to write the review, so bear with me if this sounds a little jumbled. I had been meaning to watch this film ever since I watched The Sixth Sense because many people had told me it's actually good Shyamalan fare. And in comparison to some of his recent efforts (i.e., 2008's The Happening and 2010's The Last Airbender), Unbreakable is damn near brilliant. However, compared to the annals of the rest of film history, it simply falls into the "quite good" category. I had a very interesting viewing of this film, considering it's one of the only Shyamalan films I've seen in which I did not know the ultimate twist going into watching it. The Sixth Sense and The Village (which I have yet to watch) were both spoiled for me before I had the chance to see them, so they proved to be a little lackluster (although, the power of The Sixth Sense still ranks it at #142 on my all-time list). That being said, let's get to the actual review of the film...

We actually have a pretty good screenplay, although it literally makes you wait until the very last scene to punch everything home. This seems to be Shyamalan's sole purpose in making film - to make the audience wait until the final moments to garner some resolution. I have to say that I wasn't entirely expecting the final outcome, but as I thought about it as I drifted off to sleep, I realized how obvious it had been. I should have picked up on it a lot sooner, but perhaps I was tired from a long day of movies (in case you didn't notice, check out my other review from yesterday: Insidious; Source Code; Win Win). We've basically got a superhero story on our hands here, but it's not really packaged as such throughout the film. The story really focuses on Dunn's inner struggle as he tries to figure out just what's "wrong" with him. In a way, I guess you can say this is like an origins story of a superhero. The fact that it's all encased within this comic book universe that Elijah so craves makes it all the more dashing. My only real issue with the screenplay was that it moved so slowly that it never lets you properly hook into what's going on. Again, that could've just been me trying to watch it as I slowly succumbed to the wonders of dreamland - maybe I'll have to give this one another view on a fully functional day.

The acting is good, in a very subtle sort of way. I loved Bruce Willis in The Sixth Sense, and I wanted desperately to love him here as well, but I came away merely liking the character. However, his collaboration with Shyamalan helped to bring out the actor in Willis, rather than the comedic action junkie we had all grown to know and love. His roles in both The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable are so glaringly different from roles he's taken on in the past that it's a little awkward to see him as such. That doesn't take away the fact that he is a very good actor, though. Aside from Willis, there's really no one else to talk about except Samuel L. Jackson. It took me a little while for his character to grow on me, but eventually, I was able to fall into his warped sense of reality. Jackson plays him well, with an outward subtlety that almost masks the manic energy floating around inside Elijah's skull. It's quite a sight to behold, actually.

I'd also like to take a moment and give credit to James Newton Howard, who composed the score for the film. Although it's not quite as good as his composition for The Sixth Sense, it's still quite good and fits the film very well. Here's a little taste of the score, in case you're curious to hear it:

Overall, I think I'm going to have to go back and watch Unbreakable again in a few weeks. The more I think about the film, the more I like it, but I might want to give it another go just to prove that my feelings are warranted. In a day and age when Shyamalan has become a bit of a laughing stock in Hollywood, everything he does has to be taken with a grain of salt. However, Unbreakable might actually be one of his better films, and although it's not quite reaching The Sixth Sense, it could very easily come close.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: B-
1.5 Thumbs Up

Movie Review: THE BLACK MAMBA

THE BLACK MAMBA

2011

For the past couple months, Nike and the NBA have been hyping a short film by Robert Rodriguez that was going to be released over the NBA's All-Star Weekend. The short film, which stars Los Angeles Laker Kobe Bryant, is posted below, for your viewing pleasure. My review after the break:

Now that you've (hopefully) watched the video - it's just under six minutes long, so just watch it if you haven't already - I hope that you found it as enjoyable as I did. Yes, I know it's pretty ridiculous, but it has that signature feel of a Robert Rodriguez venture that I absolutely love.

Sure, the story's a little lame, but it's still well-rounded considering how short the movie is. The Boss (Kanye West) wants to take all the power away from the best basketball players in the world, and the Black Mamba (Bryant) is the only one who's eluded his capture. So The Boss sets up a final trial that he hopes the Mamba can't pass, and for a moment, it looks like he might get the best of our hero. You'll have to watch to see what happens.

In terms of acting, I wasn't terribly turned off. Kobe does pretty well with the dialogue he's given - the dialogue throughout the film is snappy and very well-written, as is the norm with Rodriguez fare. Sure, he's not an actor by any means, but I think he did a pretty good job for his first "foray" into the medium. We've got some great appearances from some big names like Bruce Willis and the ever-present Danny Trejo who play their parts to perfection. And even Kanye, who I don't particularly like, does well with his time on-screen.

Yes, this isn't my usual type of review considering I don't review the short films I see, but I felt compelled to do a little write-up for "The Black Mamba." It was ridiculous and far-fetched but wholly entertaining, especially for under six minutes. Kudos, Mr. Rodriguez. You didn't disappoint.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: B
2 Thumbs Up

Movie Review: DIE HARD: WITH A VENGEANCE

DIE HARD: WITH A VENGEANCE

1995
R


You can watch the trailer here

Any time you get a chance to watch Bruce Willis as his alter-ego John McClane, you're definitely in for a treat. Although the latest installment in the Die Hard franchise (2007's Live Free or Die Hard) was a bit of a step down, it can't take away from the series as a whole. Die Hard: With a Vengeance was the only film I had yet to see, but now I can say that I have seen, and am a fan, of the entire Die Hard saga. John McTiernan took this film and ran with it.

The story this time around doesn't take place at Christmastime like the other three films. Instead, we see a suspended McClane brought back into active service when a madman with an explosive edge demands that he lead the investigation. Speaking merely in rhymes and riddles, our villain sends McClane and a "good Samaritan" named Zeus (Samuel L. Jackson) around New York City looking for bombs placed at various locations. However, through all of the turmoil, a deeper plot is uncovered, and the identity of the villain becomes a piece of the puzzle. I won't give away that little twist, but it happens early enough in the film that it's hardly a spoiler. Anyways, gratuitous and sometimes ridiculous action ensues, and the rest can be left to the imagination.

The screenplay this time around is decent, but it's nothing truly spectacular. Granted, it would be tough to oust the original Die Hard film (which I believe is one of the greatest action films of all time), but this film definitely carries its own weight. The story starts off incredibly well, with a clever foe leading our heroes on a wild goose chase throughout the big city streets. The clues are thought-provoking and fascinating, and the villain is painted as a worthy adversary for our mostly-brute-but-sometimes-brains McClane. However, as soon as we finally see the bad guy, things start to spiral into your standard action flick, and it loses a little bit of its cleverness along the way. Still, it is just an action movie, so you can't knock it too much.

I don't have any complaints about the acting. Bruce Willis is Bruce Willis; I mean, he's taking a stab at a character he's already played twice, so I don't think there was really much contemplation about changing the psyche of John McClane. However, there are a couple interesting additions to the cast list that prove very effective. Jeremy Irons is great as our villain (a familiar role for him, if you take a glance at his filmography). He doesn't have a terribly large amount of screen-time, but he makes the most of the time he's given. If the Die Hard franchise does anything extremely well, it's that they present villains who aren't psychologically disturbed or absolute nutcases; rather, they give us brilliant individuals capable of developing mastermind schemes while keeping a sense of calm about them. Irons does well to continue this tradition. The second standout addition this time around is that of Samuel L. Jackson as our "good Samaritan." He saves McClane early in the film then becomes caught up in the action, much to his chagrine. Jackson plays a good character opposite Willis, and their banter throughout the film gives a rise in the tension as well as provide the occasional comic relief.

If I had any real beef with the film, it was just the overuse of the march, "When Johnny Comes Marching Home." It seemed a little out of place in the movie, and it was used over and over again. I constantly found myself taken out of the film just to think about why they put that instrumental bit into the movie. Then again, that's just personal preference; maybe you won't even notice it.

Personally, I think Die Hard: With a Vengeance stands as the second-best film from the franchise, barely squeaking ahead of its immediate predecessor. Obviously nothing will beat the original, but this is still a fun little movie if you're itching for some action.

Grade: B
Thumb... Up

Movie Review: RED

RED

2010
PG-13


You can watch the trailer here

I don't want to say, "Oh, how the mighty have fallen," but it's the first thing that comes to mind. On paper, Red seemed like a movie destined to succeed. With an all-star cast, whose four top bills have combined for eleven Oscar nominations and two wins, and a seemingly pleasant script, this action-comedy looked for a road to success. However, what you sometimes see on paper doesn't always translate well to the silver screen. Director Robert Schwentke should've been able to do better.

The screenplay itself is relatively simple: it follows Frank Moses (Bruce Willis), a retired CIA operative, as he tries to piece together the reasoning behind a CIA hit squads attempt on his life. Joining forces with some old associates, as well as a newfound love interest, Moses attacks the CIA itself in order to find the answers he's looking for. Like I said - pretty basic. With an action-comedy, you can't really afford to have too detailed of a plot, so the storyline worked relatively well. My problem, however, was that there just wasn't enough action or comedy to carry the film. The action sequences were few and much too far in-between, and the comedy relied on a variety of desperate grabs for laughter. Yes, I laughed throughout the movie, but the laughs seemed relatively cheap, and I couldn't begin to bring myself into the goings-on of the film.

Acting-wise, I have no real complaints. Willis is a little off-key with a character that's part John McClane from Die Hard and part Mark Wahlberg from The Happening. As one can imagine, this didn't turn out very well. Luckily, some of the supporting actors partially lived up to their billing, even if the material they had to work with wasn't entirely well-formed. John Malkovich and Helen Mirren stand out about the rest, and it's always a delight to see Morgan Freeman grace the screen.

Although there's nothing glaring that I can point out from this movie, it just didn't hook me and bring me into the story. The characters seemed one-dimensional, and the screenplay just didn't allow for much room to run. A cast like this should have knocked this one out of the park, but Red simply settles for the sacrifice bunt.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: C-
Thumb... Sideways

Movie Review: THE EXPENDABLES

The Expendables

2010

Rating: R (for strong action and bloody violence throughout, and for some language)

Directed by: Sylvester Stallone

Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Eric Roberts, Randy Couture, Steve Austin, Giselle Itié, David Zayas, Mickey Rourke

Analysis: Going into The Expendables, I can honestly say I wasn't expecting much more than some big, dumb, testosterone-filled fun. When you put some of the biggest action stars of the last thirty years (Stallone, Statham, Li), add a couple of wrestling icons (Couture, Austin), and toss in a couple of well-placed cameos (Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis), and all that should sum up to a big barrel of action-filled stupidity.

To be honest, I wasn't wrong. The film met and exceeded my expectations in nearly every regard; however, this doesn't make it a world-class action film the likes of Die Hard or Terminator 2. It is big. It is dumb. But it's definitely fun. There's a few scenes that absolutely make the movie. For example, the scene with Willis and Schwarzenegger is absolutely golden, and it epitomizes the stabs each star takes at one another throughout the movie. References to past work abound. In that sense, the screenplay is actually somewhat clever, but when it comes to the actual storyline, it's a little stale and unoriginal.

The most powerful scene in the movie doesn't come through cameos or through an onslaught of action. Mickey Rourke, who is entirely underutilized in this film, delivers one of the most harrowing scenes I've seen in any movie in recent past. He tells Stallone's character about seeing a woman jump from a bridge and plunge to her death, saying that he had the opportunity to save her but chose otherwise. The delivery is absolutely perfect from the Oscar-nominee, and it offers a little bit of softness for at least one of the characters in the film.

The chemistry between the ragtag team of mercenaries also helps the film along. This is epitomized with the relationship between Stallone and Statham, the two men seen most throughout the movie. Despite the extraordinary situations they are placed into, the relationships remain down-to-earth, giving the audience more access to relate to each individual. I think this helped keep me captivated with the movie, especially during the downtime between action sequences.

All in all, it's a big, dumb, fun movie with a few scenes that make it all worthwhile. If you want a testosterone rush, this one's for you.

Movie Review Summary:
Score: 5.6/10
Grade: C-

Should You Watch It? YES