There will be no awards for Pain & Gain -- so it shan't get its own blog entry. It's a tried and true Michael Bay movie. It falls very short of The Rock (the movie, not the guy) and I doubt Transformers fans would find it all that exciting. It's nevertheless an okay crime movie that should have been funnier.
Bay -- who knows how to make things go boom -- doesn't know how to make things amusing. Most of the time, the amusement at a Bay film comes from his absurdly over the top filming style. However, if Bay's gonna stick it for the long haul, he would do with pulling a Richard Donner.
Consider the fact that The Rock (the guy, not the movie) is currently in two of the Top 10 films with Fast and the Furious waiting in the wings; we're going to have to actually start admitting that the guy is a bona fide movie star. And let's talk about Marky Mark and the $218 Million box office haul for Ted. There's no two ways about the fact that if you're going to put these guys in a crime movie, you better be aiming for something in the Get Shorty ballpark. Here the end cocktail is more Blow than I Love You Phillip Morris -- and it should have aimed for the latter -- this take doesn't quite work. If an editor tightened this thing by twenty-five minutes, dropped the True Romance-ing, and leaned on the Midnight Run, this sucker would have been far superior.
It's a rental. I could see truly enjoying this sucker over a couple of lazy Sunday cups of coffee.
42 Reasons Why The Supporting Oscar Race May Be On...
Brian Helgeland is a mystery to me. He's one of these screenwriters who is always on high profile projects -- especially since he shared an Oscar win with Curtis Hanson for 1997's attempted iceberg pic -- L.A. Confidential. He's definitely going to deliver quality -- but it can be all over the map -- ranging from the "let's dance to Bowie in medieval times" flick - A Knight's Tale - to the "is that my Oscar in there?!?!" Sean Penn-ery that was the muted crime drama known as Mystic River. That being said, it's tough to know which version of the Jackie Robinson story he was going to deliver.
Well, let me say this: Helgeland delivered the goods. While I'll admit there's about a half-dozen overly sentimental moments of the We Are Marshall variety -- in 42, they're mostly one on one moments with good actors: just when you're about to squirm at a saccharine scene... it lands. You'll forgive 42 these itsy bitsy flaws because more than anything else, it's great.
No, it's not The Natural. And it's not Ray. And that's a good thing. This is not the story of the greatest baseball player in the history of the world. And this is not the story of a man whose personal life was so dramatic that it needs to be on the big screen. That's not Jackie Robinson. This is the story of a great ball player whose ability to stomach racism was as vital to his success as his natural talent at stealing an extra base. Interestingly, Helgeland has been a bit vocal about the fact that he doesn't see 42 as a "sports movie" -- opting to be categorized as a film about a great man, breaking the color barrier, a encapsulation of a specific moment in America. That's all fine and good, Mr. Helgeland. But I'd argue it's the "sports" aspect of this story that makes it work; it's the "sport" that facilitates the delivery of your message.
There's something amazing about the marriage of movies and athletics. We love them -- whether they're about the business (Moneyball), the hilarity of grown men playing a game for a living (Slap Shot), a specific championship (Eight Men Out), or something that enhances the sheer myth of it all with a tale we wish were true (The Natural -- no sports article would be complete without at least two references to the Redford-Levinson great). There's about 2% of sports movies where the focal team or athlete doesn't pull it off. And yet we all sit on the edge of our seats when the director throws athletic triumph into question. I don't care if it's watching Olympiads in a great struggle -- the title of the friggin' movie is Miracle, what do you think happens? -- or the story of a kid who wants to win the season ender his way -- Teen Wolf. These films have us in the palm of their hands...
God I hope she sticks it!
God, I hope they score this touchdown!
God, I hope wins despite his dramatic injury!
They're gonna make it: don't worry.
Unless, we're talking about Rocky I, Friday Night Lights, Without Limits or Jeepers Creepers 2.
Sports get the audience on the hook, willing to take an emotional roller-coaster ride, setting aside huge chunks of their logic and historic knowledge.
This marriage worked very much in 42's favor. We all know what happened. We know he made it. We know that professional sports are -- if anything -- the flipside of what they were when Mr. Robinson joined the Brooklyn Dodgers. But we surrender to the story nevertheless -- and to the central thesis of the film: style and talent matter more than one's religion, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, etc. etc. etc. It's one of the definitive reasons why we have The Olympics. There's simply no argument that you're on Jackie's side -- consequently, the film becomes a reminder of how openly racist people were permitted to be -- how incredibly stupid it was/is -- and how easy it is to get past your own preconceived notions if you just try. I'm not joking when I say you hit the end of this film and find out some terrible things happened to the bigots and it's like you just heard Lecter say, "I'm having an old friend for dinner." That means you pulled this story off.
And it took -- among many great performances -- two actors in particular...
There's a remarkable discovery in Chadwick Boseman, Hegeland's Jackie Robinson. This is far and away the largest responsibility placed on Mr. Boseman's shoulders and he delivers. This is a complex character who weathers some truly challenging moments in the course of this film. 42 was not easy work -- even though Chadwick sure as hell made it look like it was.
The issue is that his performance -- and everyone else's performance -- is overshadowed by Harrison Ford.
It may come as a surprise to all of you that Harrison -- Dr. Jones, Captain Solo, Jack Ryan, Get Off My Plane, I Did Not Kill My Wife -- Ford has but one Oscar nomination for 1985's Witness -- losing to William Hurt for Kiss Of The Spiderwoman. At the very least, those who follow the awards might be saying, "Really? Nothing for Working Girl?" -- already dismissing Mosquito Coast, Presumed Innocent, and the heavily Oscar nommed Fugitive.
One nomination -- though he's one of the most successful movie stars in the history of cinema.
And the truth is Mr. McBeal hasn't had the smoothest go of it, lately. The fourth Indiana Jones didn't have too many folks psyched about the coming fifth installment -- though we're all going to go. Cowboys and Aliens didn't do what it should... and hopefully Anchorman 2 makes up for what Morning Glory couldn't deliver in the Ford-meets-Brokaw department. But 42 is a whole bag.
Ford slips into a true character that anchors the film. The film would be nowhere without him. It's a Hackman Hoosiers, Nolte Warrior, Russell Miracle kinda role. He's a remarkable engine. 42 is the perfect reminder of Ford's talent, sense of humor, and his sheer power on screen. He does logical-mean-old-man-who-isn't-gonna-put-up-with-your-shit damn well. He's officially thrown it into Bogie gear.
If Ford can get this locked in as a supporting role -- this could be the place to hand him a statue. Scroll through the list of supporting actor winners and you see that it's often an elder statesman getting a trophy for a solid role -- while also being just a touch lifetime achievement...
Connery, Gielguld, Williams, Jones, Caine -- twice!
To those who say he has too much screen time and should be in the lead category, I counter by citing the Hutton/Hopkins/Connelly trifecta -- the Bermuda's Triangle of how rolls are categorized and which ones win...
- Timothy Hutton provides the first, strongest leg of the "Go Ahead and Be a Lead in the Supporting Category" argument. The TH is the lead of Ordinary People. Unquestionably so. Nevertheless, he won the 1980 supporting Oscar. Why was he categroized as such? Well, according to anyone you ask: "because he was young." So what?! Why is it that people consider the Supporting Oscar to be Oscar Jr.? It's maddening! Hutton proves Ford could go supporting.
- The little Labyrither serves as Exhibit B. If you're going to say, "Well, she was just the wife." I say, "Shame on you, sir!" Jennifer Connelly may well have been the only woman in A Beautiful Mind. And MAN did she have screentime. Yet her Oscar's for supporting. Take a page, Harry.
- Finally, there's the back door approach of supporting roles going lead -- proving, like back in geometry class -- that there's no rhyme or reason to this thing: Anthony Hopkins. The former Sir Tony has such limited screentime in Silence of the Lambs it's remarkable to think that he was possibly considered to be in a lead role -- go ahead and look up how few minutes Hannibal had, you'll be surprised. Why's he lead? Because his character is important? Did you see The Dark Knight?
No comments:
Post a Comment