Activity

This was one of the few John Candy movies I hadn’t seen before and I came in with high hopes, but “Summer Rental” is pretty terrible. It takes about thirty minutes for the family to even get to the beach, with the movie’s opening ten minutes devoted to an unnecessary preamble about our lead being a burnt out air traffic controller. There’s a mixup at the rental, an overly long intro to our main villain (Rambo’s Richard Crenna does comedy!), and a dog that seems to always get in the way. Once we get to the beach things start to pick up and Candy can start showing off his physical comedy chops, but the pacing is uneven through the rest of the movie. The editing in particular is rough, and shots switch quickly as if the Director accidentally yelled cut before an actor got out their dialog. There is a bit of fun with Rip Torn as the local beach town pirate restaurateur. Torn doesn’t need to do much to invoke a pirate’s snarl, and he and Candy bounce off each other well. Overall though this movie feels like a studio’s reaction to Chevy Chase’s “Vacation”, but with a lame sailing regatta and a D-level Casio keyboard score added on top. The only consolation is that John Candy got a redo a few years later with Dan Aykroyd in the excellent “The Great Outdoors” which is the mainstay vacation film in my family. It covers almost the exact same ground as “Rental”, but has a better supporting cast and dumber situations to set up Candy as the schlocky Dad just trying to make sure he gives his family some memories. Unfortunately, “Summer Rental” didn’t create any for me. It stinks!

“Gravity” is a movie that wowed me the first time I saw it in the theater, and lost some luster on the rewatch at home. More than most action movies “Gravity” really requires a nice, large theater, and even my 110 inch basement setup with 5.1 wasn’t up to the task. My kids liked it enough, but you definitely lose some tension when you know how the movie ends. The first time though, this movie ripped, and there are few movie experiences I remember feeling as physically present for (Jurassic Park comes to mind). What threw me off this time was the heavy handed, way too obvious symbolism. The in utero and man’s first steps scenes held the camera in pause just a little too long as if Cuaron was saying “you see what I did there right?”. This is an adrenaline laden action film, and these brief art house notes feel a little out of place. I would have enjoyed a little more comedy in their place. The special effects are brilliant, and the Newtonian physics are being tested at all times. Watching this in the theater I often felt dizzy, but without the physically large screen it didn’t create the same sickness. Maybe in the years since release, good space-based special effects have numbed me to just how awesome the effects in this movie are. I tend to over focus on things I don’t like, but “Gravity” oozes visual style and contains great pacing. It also includes some of the better first-person camera perspectives in film. Clooney is great as always. Bullock has ridden this tense bus-ride before and knows how important it is to breath in the quiet moments. Harris plays himself from another movie, which is funny. I walked away from this viewing of “Gravity” wondering why so much of the film feels real-time, but force “90-minute” reminders on us. A couple edits or time-lapses could have made this something closer to 1917 with an uncut barrage of action and that clock could have been made more precise. Instead, it just makes you question things a little too much. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fun ride, just try not to do any of the math in your head.

Watching "Casino Royale" twenty years after its release is a revelation. Quite bluntly, action movies don't look like this anymore, and I was surprised how gripping and tense the fight sequences were in this movie. Why? What feels so different? It's the minimal use of CGI, and the focus on stunt-work and practical effects. Nolan's Batman trilogy shares a similar raw feel and its because you're generally watching humans do all that jumping! It helps that "Casino Royale" has all the ingredients of a good "Bond" movie with an excellent villain and love interest. After a couple decades of cartoon bad guys Mads Mikkelson turns in a subdued, creepy performance as the major contrast for our hero. Eva Green might be my favorite bond girl. Most love interests of Bond say cheeky one-liners, but Green's has the backing of intelligence and wit equal to 007. It's an absurd thing to say, but this felt like a real relationship. I like nearly everything about the movie. You'll bounce between fifteen minute action scenes where not a word is said, to an equally long poker game that has nothing but good dialog. What I like about "Casino Royale" is that from a distance this movie follows the formula religiously, but at the same time feels like a fresh reboot of a very different, more confident, brutal Bond. Take the "chase" scene that starts after Green's Vesper Lynd is kidnapped. Having not seen the movie since release I blurted out "here we go" as the cars raced off. In less than a minute it was over, almost taunting me for assuming previous action expectations. If it has any flaw it's the overly long epilogue past the casino climax. I understand why it's there, and how it attaches Bond to our heroine, and sets up the sequel, but it does take a long way to close. Some small editing could have resolved to credits quicker. Still, this is a fabulous movie, every bit deserved of its praise on release. In the years since, when every movie is shot entirely on green screen sets, its only improved. Special effects generally only get better over time, but "Casino Royale" feels like a peak moment for action before Hollywood figured out how to make high quality CGI work so well, that nearly everything looks the same.

“The Devil’s Advocate” is a mediocre movie made great by one of Al Pacino’s best performances. It doesn’t work without him, and despite the star power of the lead cast, everyone crumbles at the altar of Pacino’s Satan. This is a role only he could pull off, and where his exaggerated mannerisms are an asset rather than a hindrance. Although his acting here is remembered for some amazing soliloquies, his facial contortions, tongue whips and guffaws are equally well suited to the beast he creates. The rest of the cast has a bad time trying to match Pacino’s bombast. I recently watched Point Break and thought it might be Keanu’s worst work, but he’s dreadful here. Charlize Theron struggles in the same way, trying to pull off a southern accent for a role that doesn’t really require it. Connie Nielson, in one of her first American movie roles, is one of several actors that can’t figure out how to cry. I remember a story Ethan Hawke told on Maron’s podcast about prepping for Training Day in an attempt to not get eaten alive in scenes against Denzel Washington; that he knew it would happen and just wanted to keep up. Keanu and Theron are utterly eaten alive in this movie. They react to Pacino’s frenzy with some of their own, and come off looking like community theater nerds trying to show off. The core premise of the movie is excellent. Of course the devil runs a law firm. Don’t think too hard about it. Of course the devil runs a law firm, “it’s the new priesthood”. Surprisingly, the court room scenes aren’t very exciting, and most of the fun instead happens on the streets of New York as Pacino monologues. The movie is supported with great set design, and Milton’s office is the standout with its gothic artwork and creepy sculptures. That’s all you need really. Pacino saying fun lines in front of a fun set. Unfortunately half the screenplay doesn’t have Pacino in it. It’s these scenes where the movie lags and keeps it from rising into that upper pantheon of thrillers. “The Devil’s Advocate” is fun, but I’d prefer a one-man play of Pacino’s Satan yelling his insights at a dark, reflected crowd. Everything else, even the plot, just get in the way.

I hadn’t seen “My Cousin Vinny” in over 20 years, and threw it on recently to satiate my daughter’s interest in courtroom procedurals. I assumed it wouldn’t age well, but found instead a super tight script with really no dead space. Each scene is a set up for laughs and it somehow avoids that comedy pre-denouement where the characters spend fifteen minutes figuring out how they really feel about each other. Instead “Vinny” resolves itself pretty quickly with a solid payoff, and then is happy to roll credits without thinking too much about what just happened. Tomei won a controversial Oscar for this one, but Pesci is no slouch in an equally fun comedic role. It was neat watching famous lines get delivered to fresh ears that hadn’t heard them before. Watching my daughter laugh at “two you’ds” and “my clock is ticking” and hearing her immediately repeat them with a mimicked accent made me realize just how well a line must be delivered by an actor for them to become such iconic catchphrases. There’s a reason we remember them still. “My Cousin Vinny” isn’t a great movie, and the plot is thin, but comedy is hard and this one definitely has its moments. With a little bit more silliness it could have tilted into a better cartoon caricature like “Legally Blonde”. Instead “Vinny” spends too much time reminding you the stakes are high and that Alabama has a death penalty. There's also a recurring gag about not being able to get a good nights rest. Nobody cares. They just want to see Tomei’s next goofy outfit and the couple to fight it out.

Colin Farrel is rumored to not like this movie and considers it “style over substance”. He’s likely right, but this is such a fun movie to watch that you have to admit, the style is enough. Sometimes you just want to see fast boats go fast, let bad guys stare really long with evil, foreboding eyes, and leave snipers on the rooftop to do their thing. It’s not as good as “Heat” or “Collateral”, but “Miami Vice” shares their DNA and hits the same beats. I watch it once every three years or so. I find that even the slow parts of “Vice” I still enjoy. What’s more ridiculous than jumping on a boat to get a mojito in Miami, only to end up in Havana because that’s where the best drinks are. The score and soundtrack are great, and it alternates between orchestral anxiety and three-minute scenes with uninterrupted covers of “In the Air Tonight”. This is a comfort movie, not high cinema, and it’s one of those flicks I can sort of turn on and not pay attention to too much to, but then find myself engrossed when I pick my head up. I like the villains, who aren’t typical movie villain dumb, and sort of know the shit smells even from the beginning. They go along with things, like the audience, because Tubbs and Crocket just seem so cool, you sort of want to see what they’ll do next.

"Wendy and Lucy" is a tough watch with a great performance by Michelle Williams, who has cornered these types of characters over the years. The cascading events of environment put upon Wendy remind me a lot of the Italian classic "Bicycle Thieves". The edged flowers around the underlined facts in Wendy's notebook let you know that her goals are a fantasy. They exist to keep her moving. Unlike Bicycle Thieves this is a woman's story, and it comes with a sense of fear and danger particular to her gender where the only respite is a gas station bathroom with a locked door. An encounter in the park with a rough looking man is made more terrifying by the symphony of grinding trains in the background. It reminded me of a horror score. There's a lot of unspoken bits in this movie above traveling alone. Wendy keeps her hair short for example. As a person that considers a dog my best friend I related to Wendy's love of her canine companion. I once read of a baseball player caught in a bad slump who quipped back to a reporter "my dog doesn't know, and he loves me all the same". The movie is only 80 minutes long, which is the right amount for this type of heartache. Any more and it would have veered past a slice of life witness and into a deeper crisis of sorrow. This is my first Rechardt watch, and I saw enough good here to know I'll likely enjoy her other films.

I remembered liking this one better, but it didn't hold up on a re-watch. The fun now is noticing how many of the actors in "Super" ended up in Gunn's "Guardians" movies a few years later. Super has some funny bits, and I appreciate the madcap violence from Page's Bolty character, but the writing feels disjointed with an ending that resolves through pretty ho-hum exposition. I think it's the tone of "Super" that doesn't really land for me. You want it to be a comedy, but the main character never really winks at the audience, which I think this movie needs to let it fall into the camp of satire. Without it, the movie ends up a poorly written drama about a sad guy with a wrench who stays sad. There are also more than a few lost threads in the story that never get answered. Nathan Fillon's TV Christ-man and Andre Royo's buddy-at-work sub-plots are briefly introduced and just as casually forgotten. Did Royo ever make it to that movie? I imagine there's answers on the editing room floor. At an hour and a half, at least it ends quickly.

Jim Cummings creates a masterfully different character with a unique manner of speech that I've never seen before. The closest performances would be the best of Jim Carey or Nicolas Cage at their most manic. At times I didn't understand Jim the Cop's perspective. Was he mentally disabled, suffering PTSD, or just socially stunted? I could make a case for any of them, but at the end of the day I saw a character who had no filter between their inner thoughts and their mouth. Watching Jim squirm in conversation was witnessing a raw nerve that twitches at the nearest touch; all the while talking in taciturn "cop cadence". For me, this movie contains multitudes and became a favorite. I wanted to instantly re-watch it, not just for the performances, but for the cinematography and small moments. Thunder Road opens with a twelve minute, uninterrupted scene. Two are three others must push the five-minute mark and have such beauty and happenstance in them, that this is not just a well crafted movie, but a very lucky one. Long shots have become a trademark of tricky film-makers showing off their technical camerawork. This movie uses them instead to feel trapped in the moment, waiting for it to end. There's darkness there, but a lot of saccharine joy as well. Thunder Road is the reason I search out movies, and it has re-awoken a love for indie cinema that I was worried had died by market-research.