Scoop (2006) * * *

Directed by:  Woody Allen

Starring:  Woody Allen, Scarlett Johansson, Hugh Jackman, Charles Dance, Ian McShane

Within the soul of Woody Allen must lie a love for murder mysteries.    He has made several films involving "the perfect murder" and others in which an unlikely suspect is accused of being a murderer.    Scoop is a little of both.     In Scoop, Allen and Johansson are on the trail of a dashing, wealthy son of a British lord who surely doesn't fit the profile of a serial killer.     But recently deceased reporter Joe Strombel (McShane) materializes from the dead during the magic act of Splendini aka Sid Waterman (Allen) and informs him that this man Peter Lyman (Jackman) is indeed the notorious "Tarot Card Killer".    Determined to gain one last byline from beyond the grave, Strombel also materializes to a college student journalist named Sondra Pransky (Johansson) to deliver his scoop.    Sondra meets up with Sid and the two ingratiate themselves with Lyman to find out what's what. 

At first, Sid believes Peter to be innocent while Sondra doubts his innocence.   In a major lapse of journalistic ethics, Sondra sleeps with Peter and falls for him.    He is rich, handsome, cultured, and charming, so this is natural.     Once Sondra falls for Peter, the roles are reversed, with Sid believing in Peter's guilt while Sondra thinks he is innocent.     There are strange goings-on that either link Peter to the crimes or could be easily explained away as coincidence.     In a deft piece of acting by Jackman, who plays Wolverine so often it takes a moment to get used to him out of the costume, he doesn't tip his hand either way and either upholds or confounds expectations, depending on whether you think he's the murderer.

Allen and Johansson make an odd comic couple, but they have an easy chemistry despite their ages.    Johansson previously starred in Allen's Match Point (2005) and would again in 2008's Vicky Cristina Barcelona and fits quite nicely into Allen's world of insecurity, paranoia, and quirky insights into human nature.    She almost adapts Allen's witty verbal style.   Allen has the knack for finding actors who can inhabit his own screen persona almost as well as he does.    Allen has a few gems of his own while working the room at one of Lyman's parties.   ("Did you hear about the Polish carpool?   They meet at work,")

Sid and Sondra are not the greatest sleuths in the world, but stumble upon the truth anyway, which includes a nice payoff stemming from Peter saving Sondra from drowning in a swimming pool.    Scoop isn't deep, but light as a feather.    It isn't among the greatest Allen comedies, but even Allen's mid-range stuff is more intricate and funnier than some other director's best efforts.     We go along with a story that may seem pedestrian on the surface, but is weaved in a way only Allen can tell it.  

Coming to America (1988) * * * *

 

Directed by:  John Landis

 

Starring:  Eddie Murphy, John Amos, Arsenio Hall, Erik La Salle, Louie Anderson, James Earl Jones,

Shari Headley

 

Coming to America is a warm romantic comedy which maintains its laughs with ease throughout.    When it focuses on the laughs, it is really funny and really inspired.    When it is focusing on its love story, it remains fresh even if the story itself is by its nature predictable.     Coming to America and Bowfinger are the Eddie Murphy movies which showcase his tremendous talents to the fullest.    He plays a mere dual role in Bowfinger, while tackling four roles in Coming to America and even more in The Nutty Professor movies.     Maybe by the time he made Bowfinger he was just plain worn out. 

 

In Coming to America, Murphy is Akeem, a prince in the fictional African country of Zamunda in which elephants freely roam the palatial grounds and he is bestowed a life of such luxury that by the time he turns 21, he still had never tied his own shoes before.     His father, King Joffa (Jones) says, "I tied my shoes once.   It was an overrated experience."     Akeem is bored with his life of privilege and even more with his future bride prospects, whom are trained to follow his every command.    Akeem seeks a bride whom he can love and loves him for himself, so he travels with his manservant Semmi (Hall) to America to search for his bride.    Where to search when in America?    Why Queens of course.    While there, he hides his true identity while wooing the daughter of a fast-food franchise operator (Amos).    To get closer to Lisa (Headley), Akeem and Semmi take menial jobs at the restaurant,  which disgusts Semmi.   ("I haven't had a manicure since we left Zamunda.")

 

Hall is no slouch in the roles department, playing four distinct roles himself here.     What is so fun about this is how much Murphy and Hall makes these people into unique characters, all of which are funny themselves.     The multiple roles never seem like a stunt and they are weaved seamlessly into the story.    Murphy's innate charm is in full effect as Akeem, who takes satisfaction in working for his money and even more satisfaction in winning the affections of Lisa.     Lisa has a boyfriend, the insufferable Darryl (La Salle), who is the heir to the Soul Glo Jheri curl fortune and isn't far from his own collection of activators.     As night follows day, Darryl will be dumped and Lisa will fall for Akeem, while believing he is a fast food employee and not a wealthy prince.    It also follows that Lisa will learn of the deceit, which is the type of roadblock a potential couple will overcome in comedies such as this one.    Although, let's be honest, learning to accept Akeem as a wealthy prince wouldn't exactly be considered a roadblock by most women.    

 

There are numerous laughs in Coming to America, including one which ties into Murphy's Trading Places (1983) that comes as a hilarious surprise.     These days, movies are so inundated with in-jokes that in-jokes themselves are no longer jokes or surprising.     You almost wait for one to appear.    But, Coming to America uses its laughs wisely.    It isn't a free-for-all.    All of this has a consistent tone and, to my recollection, there are no bodily functions or fluids flying around, unless the count the milkshake Darryl flippantly throws to Akeem.  

 

And when the happy ending arrives, it is well-earned even though we expect it because the movies works so well in making us laugh and then care.  

 

 

 

 

Hollywood Ending (2002) * * *

 

Directed by:  Woody Allen

 

Starring:  Woody Allen, Tea Leoni, Mark Rydell, Treat Williams, George Hamilton, Tiffani Thiessen, Debra Messing, Jodie Markell, Mark Webber

 

Val Waxman (Allen) is a movie director assumed to be long past his prime.    He needs a hit desperately to keep working, so his producer ex-wife Ellie (Leoni) finds a modestly budgeted commercial project for him to direct.    Val is not the studio head's (Williams) first, second, or even fifth choice to direct the movie, but he is engaged to Ellie and wants to please her.    There is soon a twist, which is most always the case in a Woody Allen film.    Val is soon stricken with psychosomatic blindness.    It's tough to direct a movie you can't see.  Val, knowing this is his last shot, fakes his way through a hectic set with executives, gossip columnists, and a Japanese cameraman who can't speak English and has no clue what Val's "vision" for the film is, all lurking around. 

 

Hollywood Ending is not a Woody Allen film with deep meaning or deep insights.    It is mostly fun and satirically works its way through some Hollywood targets.    Allen has a lot of material to work with.    Is the movie significant with a greater view into a director's soul?    No.  It is a story of an aging director trying to make a film with a serious handicap.   There is a love angle.  Val is still in love with Ellie, who is exasperated by her kvetching ex-husband but may still have feelings for him.   Hollywood Ending was made in a period of Woody Allen films in which his leading lady was about thirty years younger than him and we somehow buy the romances anyway.     Like Helen Hunt in Curse of the Jade Scorpion and Tracey Ullman in Small Time Crooks, Tea Leoni is plucky and not a pushover, but ultimately has a sweet spot for Allen and his myriad insecurities.

 

With help of Val's eternally optimistic agent Al (Rydell-a fine movie director in his own right) and a helpful translator, Val is able to almost go through work each day with his secret undetected.    No one seems to find it odd that Val doesn't look people in the eye and is led around by Al, the translator, or Ellie herself eventually like well...a blind man.     The dailies are never shown to us, but others who manage to see them are aghast.    Allen is wise not to belabor this point by showing us the terrible finished product, which would cause the movie to lapse into slapstick.     Leave that stuff to Ed Wood.    

 

I've never made it a secret that Woody Allen is my favorite director and screenwriter.    I've never witnessed an artist move so comfortably between genres and create such a vast array of unique entertainments.     Allen makes you feel, laugh, and think.     He has a knack for finding a germ of an idea and expanding it to its fullest comic possibilities.     A lesser director would have shown Allen tripping over things and bumping into walls.     A lesser writer would have taken the easy way out.    Allen prefers to play the situation intelligently, which makes it all the more satisfying. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Lost City of Z (2017) * * *

Directed by:  James Gray

Starring:   Charlie Hunnam, Robert Pattinson, Sienna Miller, Tom Holland, Angus MacFadyen

Walking into The Lost City of Z, I expected an action adventure reminiscent of an Indiana Jones movie.    The title all but promises that.     What the movie delivered was a thoughtful depiction of a career British military officer's obsession with finding a lost civilization in the early 20th century South American jungles.     It is easier to project outward conflicts than inner ones, but The Lost City of Z presents the inner conflicts of Col. Percy Fawcett (Hunnam) with more conviction than the battles with his family which he must leave for sometimes years at a time in his quest. 

We sense Col. Fawcett's biological clock ticking in the film's opening moments, in which he tells his wife Nina (Miller) how is the only major in the British Army without any medals on his lapel.    He feels unaccomplished despite his successful military career.    Fawcett wants to be remembered for something and stumbles upon it during a surveying expedition through the Amazon jungle.    Accompanied by veteran aide Henry Costin (Pattinson), his crew is ravaged by malaria, fatigue, and locals who rain arrows down on them as they helplessly travel the Amazon.    And let's not forget piranhas.  

Fawcett accidentally happens upon artifacts which suggest a lost civilization that once occupied the Amazon.     Is there enough evidence to convince his government to finance further expeditions?    Is there really even a lost city to be found?     Does Fawcett even care?     He digs in like a tick to raise money to return to the jungle, which results in more illness, death, and no discoveries.     Soon, his obsessive quests are put on hold for World War I, in which Fawcett is blinded temporarily by chlorine gas attacks during the battles in the trenches.

Throughout the twenty plus years in which Fawcett puts his desire to find Z (as he calls his lost city), he alienates his children and at times his more than understanding wife.     She suggests going with him to South America, but the jungle is no place for a woman.    Heck, there is little evidence that the jungle is any place for a man either.     Sickness and death do not discriminate.     Sienna Miller played a similar role (which has been pointed out in every review I've read for this film-so why not one more time?) in 2014's American Sniper.    In that film and here, she pleads with her husband to stay home once in a while and be with the kids.    It is one note, but she plays it effectively.    

Charlie Hunnam taps into a universal desire to do something special and then goes further to show us the depth of that desire.     We see a man torn between his destiny and his love for his family, which usually comes in second to the former.    We also see a forward thinker who doesn't see the jungle natives as savages, but as valuable resources in his discovery.   Hunnam presents a strong, multi-faceted Fawcett forever at war with himself and the elements, while Pattinson continues his run with offbeat supporting roles which stretch his talent far beyond his Twilight days.    I admire Pattinson's decision not to rest on his laurels and take on challenging work.    

Those who watch The Lost City of Z expecting another Raiders of the Lost Ark action bonanza will be disappointed.     But, don't dismiss the film just yet.     You may miss out on a movie which is still a very worthwhile journey into hell on Earth and the hell of one's soul.  

Snatched (2017) * *

 

Directed by:  Jonathan Levine

 

Starring:  Amy Schumer, Goldie Hawn, Ike Barinholtz, Christopher Meloni, Wanda Sykes, Joan Cusack, Tom Bateman, Oscar Jaenada, Bashir Salahuddin

 

Snatched presents us with a more tolerable Amy Schumer than showcased in 2015's Trainwreck.    That Amy Schumer sank the movie.    Here, we see someone more likable and more insecure who isn't too cool for the room.     She engages our sympathies.    So much so that I wished she had a different script to work with, one which doesn't ungainly squeeze a kidnapping subplot into a movie about a mother and daughter who don't get along as they should.    

 

The first ten minutes or so of Snatched sets up rich comic possibilities which the movie abandons once it hits South America.     Emily Middleton (Schumer) is fired from her job in a clothing store, is dumped by her wannabe rock star boyfriend and is thus without a companion for her impending vacation to Ecuador.     Desperate and stuck with a non-refundable trip, she begs her prudish mother Linda (Hawn) to go with her and not necessarily because she loves her mother's company.

 

Linda prefers to read a book in her hotel room, while Emily hooks up with a hunky British guy (Bateman) who sweeps her off her feet.    But the courtship is simply a ruse to lure Emily and Linda from the confines of the resort and kidnap them.    The leader of the kidnappers is the slimy Morgado (Jaenada), who demands $100,000 from Emily's agoraphobic brother Jeffrey (Barinholtz-in a funny performance).     Jeffrey responds by contacting a very unhelpful State Department employee (Salahuddin) whose utter unwillingness to do anything also results in laughs.  

 

Schumer and Hawn have an unforced chemistry, although Hawn's face moves considerably less than it did when we last saw her in 2002's The Banger Sisters.     I also liked Christopher Meloni as a rugged, intense American adventurer who helps the ladies while channeling his inner Michael Douglas a la Romancing the Stone.     He walks, talks, and sounds like a guy who has seen too many adventure movies.

 

The laughs aren't frequent, however, and there are long stretches when we wonder where this kidnapping movie came from.    The earlier scenes worked better.    It would have been fun to watch Emily's and Linda's relationship evolve from awkwardness to understanding without bogging itself down with the kidnapping plot that feels like a movie hedging its bets.     I didn't hate Snatched as much as I felt it could have been more.   

 

 

The Family Man (2000) * * * 1/2

Directed by:  Brett Ratner

Starring:  Nicolas Cage, Tea Leoni, Jeremy Piven, Harve Presnell, Saul Rubinek, Josef Summer, McKenzie Vega, Don Cheadle

Jack Campbell (Cage) is about to board a plane to London to undertake a business internship.   His college sweetheart Kate Reynolds (Leoni) begs him not to go and instead start their life together.   Jack assures Kate that he will return in one year and everything will be okay.    Fast forward to thirteen years later, Jack is a wealthy investment broker closing a multi-billion dollar merger on Christmas Eve.    He and Kate had long since broken up, but Jack has a sexy girlfriend, lives in a sleek Manhattan apartment, and figures he doesn't need anything more out of life.    He learns over the course of The Family Man that he is wrong.  

Jack encounters a guardian angel named Cash (Cheadle) on Christmas Eve, who in return for Jack's assistance in a confrontation at a convenience store, offers him a glimpse into the life he forsook when he boarded the plane to London thirteen years earlier.    Jack wakes up the following morning not in his apartment, but in a suburban New Jersey home with two children and married for many years to Kate.    Jack remembers his former life also and he needs plenty of adjustment to his new surroundings.    He longs to return to his life as a wealthy broker, but instead is relegated to being a sales manager at his father-in-law's tire store.    He sees a bottle of scotch in his desk drawer and says, "You must have needed this every day of your life,"    He settles into his new life kicking and screaming at first, but soon finds he realizes how empty his life was.  

The Family Man sounds predictable and trite with the usual payoffs you can see coming a mile away, but the movie is sweeter and more moving than that.    It is chock full of touching moments as Jack fills in the blanks as to how he arrived at this alternative reality.    For Kate and everyone else, life proceeds happily and modestly.    For Jack, such modesty takes acceptance and understanding.   ( "I work eight hours a day selling tires at retail.   Retail, Kate," )    Yet, he falls in love with Kate all over again and his kids for the first time.    In an interesting twist, the oldest daughter Annie (Vega) realizes that this Jack is not really her father, but someone just occupying his father's body.     Instead of underlining this development to death, Annie quietly assists Jack in adjusting to his surroundings.

Cage excels here as a man who undergoes true changes.    The movie never handles things in a sitcom manner.     It reveals small truths and doesn't end neatly and tidily, but with a glimmer of hope that Jack may still get to experience this life with Kate.    Leoni is grounded, fiesty, and convincingly steadfast in her love for Jack and her life.    Her performance is the glue that keeps the movie from splintering off into silliness.   The only quibble I would have is how the ending isn't tidy, but I guess it isn't meant to be.  

Watching the film again recently, I understood just how many powerful moments the movie contains. The one that choked me up the most was the scene in which Jack understands that, in his new reality, he returned home from London the very next day and began his life with Kate.     Judging by the coziness and warmth we feel for the Campbell family, we are glad he did.  

WarGames (1983) * * *

Directed by:  John Badham

Starring:  Matthew Broderick, Ally Sheedy, Dabney Coleman, Barry Corbin, John Wood

WarGames was released in 1983, when the home computer was not common and the threat of nuclear war was still very common.     The movie is like a time capsule, but yet remains timely.     WarGames is about paranoia and the fear of computer glitches threatening our personal and national security.     David Lightman (Broderick) is a computer genius who underachieves at school, but that's ok, he can hack into the school's mainframe and change his grades.   (Broderick's Ferris Bueller did the same thing in 1986, only he changed his number of absences).    

One day he sees an ad in a magazine for a video game company and uses his telephone modem to hack into the company's system to find "the really good games".    There is one:  Global Thermonuclear War, which he plays and chooses to be the Soviets since they seemed to have a larger nuclear weapon collection.     However, this causes David to somehow accidentally link up to the nation's central nuclear defense computers, and the possibility of starting an actual nuclear war becomes very real.     The game seizes control of the defense computers and within 72 hours will be able to figure out the top secret launch codes to our country's nuclear missiles.    

The feds soon track down David and bring him to NORAD to determine if he is indeed a Soviet spy or a kid who stumbled across an unintended glitch in the system.    How and why the nation's central computer defense systems are linked to a video game company advertising on the back of a magazine is never explained fully, but that's okay too.     The events for a well-crafted, suspenseful thriller are in motion.     When I first saw the film in 1983, it presented one further scary possibility in which we found ourselves in a nuclear war with the Soviets.     Watching the film again recently, the fears of computers being used to enable identity theft and threaten privacy still remain.     Even with the focus on North Korea's nuclear program in the news, the possibility of a nuclear war remains remote, if not extinct. 

WarGames leads to a simplistic, yet relevant conclusion which captured the Cold War sentiments of both the Soviets and the United States.     Nuclear wars have no winners because everything will be destroyed and the remaining population which survived the blasts will soon die of radiation poisoning anyway.    No one benefits.    But both sides knew this, but kept the scant likelihood of nuclear attacks in the nation's subconscious until the threat of such attacks became like crying wolf.     Within a few years, both sides reduced their nuclear arsenals and by 1991, the Soviet empire collapsed, thus ending the Cold War.  

As far as WarGames itself, it remains implausibly entertaining and thoughtful.    The Soviets are unseen, but just the idea that they are out there gives the film a villain.    NORAD's top brass, led by John McKittrick (Coleman) are not malevolent.    They just want to find out what happened and why.    The fact that they suspect innocent David of something more devious makes us root for David to escape and find out the truth for himself.      WarGames manages to hold up fairly well for a movie made only 34 years ago considering the huge leaps in technology and a shifts in ideology which define our society today. 

Norman: The Moderate Rise and Tragic Fall of a New York Fixer (2017) * * *

Directed by:  Joseph Cedar

Starring:  Richard Gere, Dan Stevens, Charlotte Gainsbourg, Harris Yulin, Steve Buscemi, Lior Ashkenazi, Hank Azaria, Michael Sheen

It is difficult to determine what Norman Oppenheimer (Gere) actually does for a living.    He has a business card, he wheels and deals, he schmoozes politicians and powerful businessmen while promising lucrative "can't miss" deals which they would be insane to pass up.    But, who is he and how does he benefit from all of his hard work?    We see nothing of his home life.    He doesn't seem to sleep and throughout most of the movie seems to be wearing the same clothes and speaking loudly into his phone with ear buds dangling from his ears.    He probably hasn't heard of Bluetooth, or he is simply too busy to buy one.

The mystery of Norman the person is why Norman the movie keeps us compelled.    What does he get out of establishing political connections with an Israeli bureaucrat (Ashkenazi) who soon is elected prime minister and includes Norman briefly into his inner circle?    Does Norman love the idea of having a small amount of power and influence?    Does he get a thrill from being so close to powerful people?    Does the sense of purpose of always looking for the next deal keep him content?    Norman reminds me of the shark who, if he slows down and stops moving forward, will wither away and die.

We witness Norman go through great pains and move mountains, but we don't witness the reward he receives.    When he is not walking the streets endlessly in the New York winter talking on the phone, he is in a synagogue.    Does he live there?    Does he have a home?    A family?    Friends outside of his business associates?    What type of business is he actually in?

These are questions the movie answers, yet doesn't answer as the prime minister's close advisers hire an investigator (Gainsbourg) to look into Norman's past.    They are leery of this do-gooder who is so supportive of the prime minister and has the prime minister's ear, that they suspect he must have an angle.  Norman buys the guy a pair of thousand dollar shoes in hopes he would accompany him to a private business dinner, which involves buying up tax debt and selling it off for a profit.  The actual deals themselves are not important.  They just provide us with a chance to see Norman work his magic in getting it all together.

We are used to seeing Richard Gere wheel and deal and manipulate others for personal gain in many roles over his long career.     He is at home playing a slick suit or a selfish professional who coldly works to get ahead and steps on others in the process.    This is the heart of some of his most famous roles.    Norman Oppenheimer is a huge departure for Gere, who is playing a guy not looking to get ahead, but just to stay in the game...whatever game that happens to be.    He seems to be selfless as he puts himself through huge personal pains to stay relevant to people he admires.     He may attract a "finder's fee" for the deals he puts together, but the money doesn't drive him.     He is a genuine mensch, who remains loyal to the prime minister despite the personal and professional hits he will take to his reputation.  

I found myself fascinated by Norman and how Gere completely immerses himself in him.    We don't recognize this Richard Gere.    I saw him the previous week in The Dinner, in which he plays a politician trying to navigate a personal dilemma while trying to save his political career.     While he was good in it, the character wasn't much of a stretch.    But Norman is not only a stretch for Gere, it allows us to see a side of the actor we haven't previously seen.     It is refreshing to see Gere evolve, even at age 67, and willing to challenge himself and the audience.     Norman is not a wholly satisfying movie because there is no real dramatic payoff to all of the events.     The movie isn't about the payoff.     It is about the process Norman puts himself through to feel important for at least one more day. 

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) * * *

Directed by:  James Gunn

Starring:  Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Karen Gillan, Michael Rooker, Sylvester Stallone, (voice of) Bradley Cooper, (voice of) Vin Diesel, Kurt Russell, Pom Klementieff, Elizabeth Debicki

Paraphrasing my final sentence of my two and a half star review of the original Guardians of the Galaxy (2014). I wrote that it would be fun to see these characters in a movie with a better plot.    That is what I got in Vol. 2, which is goofy fun, visually inventive, inspired, and has a heart.     Vol. 2 establishes the arrival of the Guardians as Marvel characters to be reckoned with on the level of The Avengers and surely more so than X-Men.    And it has a coherent plot. 

The Guardians battle an intergalactic octopus while Baby Groot dances through the opening credits.    The movie opens in the middle of the action instead of building up to it.    The Guardians defeat the creature and return stolen batteries to a gold-painted princess named Ayesha (Debicki).    Rocket Raccoon (Cooper), who is consistently referred to as either a fox or a puppy, steals the batteries back in hopes of selling them on the black market.     This angers Ayesha, who sends her spaceships after the Guardians and sets everything in motion.

Along the way, Star Lord (Pratt) meets his long-lost father, an alien being named Ego (Russell), a name which should make your spidey senses tingle (to quote Spider-Man, another member of the Marvel Universe).    Ego takes the Guardians to his home planet, which he actually created himself, a la God creating Earth.    Ego doesn't say whether it took him 6 days or longer.     He promises Star Lord this will all be his someday, although the peculiar Mantis (Klementieff), Ego's companion, seems frightened to tell the Guardians that something may be amiss. 

The Guardians interact with easy familiarity with each other.    There is plenty of fun chemistry in their byplay, which includes bickering, insults, and ultimately loyalty.    Pratt dials down on the snark this time and is a credible leader of the Guardians who may or may not be in love with Gamora (Saldana), who in turn may or may not be in love with him.     It is also fun to watch Drax (Bautista) do a complete character about-face in Vol. 2.    In the first one, he was angry and brooding.    In Vol. 2, he is a hulk with a sense of humor and a hearty laugh.    And then there is Rocket, who has his own issues, but we all know has a tender spot underneath his gruff exterior.     As tender a spot as a raccoon could have anyway. 

Also along for the ride is Yandu (Rooker), who is blue and looks like a refugee from Avatar who nonetheless provides the soul of the movie.    We learn about who he is and the role he played in Star Lord's life.     Why did he choose to draft Star Lord into his band of thieves at a young age instead of reuniting him with his father?     The answers aren't as simple as you may think.    But, we see Yandu grow into what he truly is...Star Lord's father figure in the absence of the dubious Ego.  

While Star Wars and even Star Trek take place mostly upon sterile spaceships populated with inventive creatures and people who speak rigidly, Guardians has creatures in it that are just plain unpleasant looking, like intergalactic pirates, but the grime and grit of the sets provides a unique spirit.    The Guardians of the Galaxy is lower rent Star Wars and proud to be so.     They don't getting down and dirty.  

Cinderella Man (2005) * * *

Directed by:  Ron Howard

Starring:  Russell Crowe, Renee Zellweger, Paul Giamatti, Craig Bierko, Bruce McGill, Paddy Considine

I've seen enough boxing movies to know I really don't need to see any more.  They end with the "big fight".  Most of these fights are well-choreographed, but unrealistically action-packed.   More punches are thrown in the first round of a Rocky fight than entire twelve-round heavyweight title fights.  Also, some rounds are over with in thirty seconds, while the final round lasts five minutes.    The last boxing movie I saw was Southpaw, which was such an absorbing story about a boxer trying to reclaim his life after his wife's death, that I didn't even want to see a final match.   (Spoiler alert:  He wins the title back. Whoop-dee-doo).  

Cinderella Man is an above-average boxing film about Depression-era heavyweight Jim Braddock (Crowe), who stages an unlikely comeback into the fight game years after breaking his hand and losing his boxing license.   He works unsteadily at the local docks which actually aids him in regaining his punching strength by lifting heavy crates and boxes.  His family lives in poverty while barely managing to keep the electricity from being shut off and avoiding eviction.   Along with his manager Joe Gould (Giamatti), Braddock wins his comeback fights over some top contenders and becomes a folk hero as he is granted a title shot against the fearsome champion Max Baer (Bierko), who is very tall, very powerful, and very nasty.   He killed two fighters in the ring, which causes understandable concern for Jim's loving wife Mae (Zellweger), who has never seen any of Jim's fights or even heard them on the radio because she fears the pounding he will take.

Director Howard reteams with A Beautiful Mind (2001) star Crowe and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman to bring us the untold story of the boxer who had the misfortune of competing in an era alongside legends like Max Schmeling, Joe Louis, and Baer.   Their stories have been told time and again through biopics and documentaries.   Braddock's is every bit as intriguing, but mostly unheralded until the release of this film in 2005.   Since Howard is a top-notch director, he can maneuver his way around this story without falling into traps or clichés.   The final fight is very well done, focusing more on realism and strategy than two guys tirelessly pounding the tar out of one another. 

We have a rooting interest in Braddock because Crowe plays him not as a savage, but a man humbled by life, struggling day-to-day to feed his family, while fearing disappointing his loyal wife by wanting to box again.     His reasons are easy to identify with and understand.     He can make a lot more dough punching people (and being punched) than showing up at the docks where gainful employment is a daily crapshoot.     Zellweger gives us a supportive, caring Mae whose best moment occurs when she tracks down Gould to his New York apartment and gives him the what for about persuading Jim to return to boxing.    She thinks Gould is trying to simply enrich himself at the expense of Jim's health.  What she discovers about Gould's living situation provides the most powerful moment in the film, in which we learn the sacrifices he himself has made in standing by Braddock.   Giamatti was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for this tricky role.  He doesn't show us all the cards because he needs to keep up appearances as a wheeling-dealing manager who knows a thing or two about boxing.

Max Baer, Jr. wasn't thrilled with how the movie presented his father as a villain with little regard for killing someone in the ring.   I agree with this.    The movie didn't need to present Baer as a cartoonish Rocky villain whose clock needs to be cleaned by Braddock.     Bierko is an imposing physical presence, but the movie would've been better served if he didn't play such an obvious pro wrestling type of heel.     Cinderella Man engages our desire to see Braddock come out on top, not because the movie manipulates us into rooting for him, but because we witness a good man who fell on hard times who receives a second chance to simply provide for his family the best way he knows how. 

The Dinner (2017) *

Directed by:  Oren Moverman

Starring:  Richard Gere, Laura Linney, Steve Coogan, Rebecca Hall, Chloe Sevigny, Charlie Plummer, Michael Chernus, Seamus Davey-Fitzpatrick,

The Dinner spends more time interrupting itself and straying off course than it does sticking to its story, which resembles Roman Polanski's Carnage (2011) in its premise of two sets of parents discussing how to handle a violent situation regarding their respective children.    The actors are ones I've admired before and will admire again, but here they are adrift in a thankless story that meanders along in no hurry to go anywhere in particular.

Richard Gere and Rebecca Hall play Stan Lohman, a Congressman running for governor and his wife Katelyn, who meet with Stan's brother Paul (Coogan) and his wife Claire (Linney) for dinner at a high-end restaurant where the maitre d' has the unenviable task of describing the food they are about to eat with each course.    They all should have just agreed to get a burger somewhere.   It doesn't matter much anyway because before they can get down to business, one or all members of the party are pulled away from the table throughout dinner with either urgent phone calls or an occasional fit of anger, resentment, etc.    The group spends more time away from the table than actually eating.

The real reason the group meets for dinner is because Stan's son Rick (Davey-Fitzpatrick) and Paul's son Charlie (Plummer) commit a horrific crime against a homeless woman sleeping in the ATM vestibule the drunken teens stumble upon one cold winter night.    They verbally abuse her, throw objects at her, and then throw lit matches at her which ultimately burn the woman to death.    The event is caught on camera, while the boys sadistically record the death with their cell phones.    But, there are many, many other subplots which the movie delves into with interminable flashbacks.   Such as Paul's mental illness, Claire's enabling and her battle with cancer, Stan's attempts to help his resentful brother by taking him on a tour of Gettysburg which seems to last as long as the battle itself, and Stan's attempts to pass a bill which cause him to scurry for last-minute votes and interruptions from his campaign manager.

There is much more which only adds up to nothingness.    The group only seriously begins talking about the real issue with about twenty minutes left in the movie.    Each has his or her own moral quandaries to battle while trying to determine the best way to deal with these rotten kids.    The teens are unsympathetic a-holes whom Claire describes as "good kids,":   After witnessing what they do to the homeless woman, I would hate to see what lengths these teens would have to go to dissuade her opinion.     If The Dinner had taken the route previously traveled by Carnage, this would have been a tighter, shorter, and possibly more satisfying film.    But, as it is the film keeps getting in its own way and getting in our way of enjoying it.    Everyone's back story leaves us with a big "So what?" since these don't have any legitimate impact on the main story.   

The Dinner then has the gall to leave us with a cliffhanger at the end, as if we were somehow going to clamor for The Dinner, Part 2.    We spent entirely too much time with these people already.    The ending doesn't necessarily have to be satisfying, since nothing in the movie is anyhow, but at least give us some sort of payoff for our patience, which was taxed well before the main course was served.

The Zookeeper's Wife (2017) * * *

Directed by:  Niki Caro

Starring:  Jessica Chastain, Daniel Bruhl, Johan Heldenburgh

Director Niki Caro's previous films include Whale Rider (2003) and North Country (2005), two movies with strong female leads who take on a male-dominated culture and succeed in staking their claim.     The Zookeeper's Wife also possesses a strong female lead, who along with her husband, hides hundreds of Jewish fugitives from the Warsaw ghetto during World War II.    Along with Schindler's List and The Pianist, Warsaw is ground zero for depictions of the worst Nazi atrocities against humanity.     Stories like The Zookeeper's Wife have intrinsic suspense and drama.    This one does not have the emotional power of Schindler's List and The Pianist (few movies do), but it is still an absorbing example of ordinary people attempting to outwit and outmaneuver the Nazi war machine.

The Zookeeper's Wife opens in the summer of 1939, in which we witness a daily example of the idyllic lives of the Warsaw Zoo's keeper Jan Zabinski (Heldenburgh) and his Russian-born wife Antonina (Chastain).   Antonina is such an animal lover, she sleeps with cubs and even a skunk.    She connects with the zoo's animals, including an ostrich who accompanies her on her morning rounds.   The Germans invaded Poland on September 1, 1939 and ended the Zabinskis' blissful existence.     German zoologist Lutz Heck (Bruhl) soon assumes control of the zoo while blindly carrying out the Fuhrer's wishes for the animals. 

Jan witnesses the treatment, rounding up, and execution of Jews in Warsaw and decides they must do something.    He decides to hide Jewish children in the garbage which he picks up in the ghetto to feed his animals.     Soon, a sympathetic Jewish administrator catches on to the plot and assists with fake work permits which allows Jan to move freely about the ghetto and rescue the Jews in plain sight.     Antonina hides the refugees in her basement and in some cases smuggles them outside the zoo to an Underground Railroad while Nazi guards roam the area.    She feigns romantic interest in Heck to keep him occupied, which makes Jan jealous after a while.    But, such emotions must take a back seat to the bigger picture, which is saving lives.     Jan soon takes a more direct approach to battling Nazis by enlisting in the Polish underground movement.

I admit I was first distracted by Chastain's accent, but since the rest of the actors have accents, it would've been odd for her not to have one.    It reminds me of JFK, in which Kevin Costner adopted a New Awlins accent even though Jim Garrison hailed from Iowa and didn't speak with a Southern drawl in order to maintain continuity.     Chastain shows indefatigable sweetness and strength in the title role, but in reality Jan takes on possibly a greater risk than even his wife.     But since the movie (and the novel on which it is based) is called The Zookeeper's Wife, we see the events from Antonina's view and that is that.

Daniel Bruhl is beginning to corner the market on playing weasel bureaucrats who can easily be duped because he has the hots for a woman.    He played in eerily similar role in Inglourious Basterds (2009), in which he played a Nazi war hero whose lust for a movie theater owner spells doom for the Nazis.     Bruhl plays the role well, since we do hope Antonina is able to fool him long enough to avoid discovery.    It is amazing to learn the Zabinskis were able to keep this façade up for the duration of the war.  

The Zookeeper's Wife relies on its built-in historical perspective to maintain our interest.    We know the Nazis are pure evil and we relish the opportunity to see them denied some of potential victims.    Six million Jews alone were exterminated in World War II.     If not for the actions of the Zabinskis or an Oskar Schindler, plus countless other unsung heroes, that number would have been considerably higher. 

How to be a Latin Lover (2017) * * *

Directed by:  Ken Marino

Starring:  Eugenio Derbez, Salma Hayek, Rob Lowe, Raquel Welch, Linda Lavin, Rob Riggle, Kristen Bell, Renee Taylor, Michael Cera, Raphael Alejandro, McKenna Grace, Rob Corddry

How to be a Latin Lover is a comedy about a gold digger (Derbez) which has a heart too.    It is not an ungainly a fit as you would think.    The movie also understands how ridiculous the playboy Maximo is, but also finds a way to not make him irredeemable.    There are a lot of moving parts here, but How to be a Latin Lover has enough charm to pull through.  

We learn the origins of Maximo, who witnesses his father drive a truck through the family home as a child because he is tired and overworked.    The crash doesn't end well, and Maximo decides to become a professional trophy husband so he can be rich while not working.    As a twenty-something guy who trolls pools attended by lonely, rich women, he seduces them in hopes of marrying one so he will live the good life forever.     He meets a fiftyish wealthy woman whom he seduces after exiting a swimming pool in a yellow speedo and then fast forward to 25 years later.    Maximo is now married to the now 80-year-old woman (Taylor), whom he checks every morning to see if she is still breathing and is disappointed when she is.     Maximo lives the good life, even buying his wife an anniversary Porsche (with her money of course), and instructing servants to flip him as he sunbathes.  

But, Maximo's wife soon dumps him for a younger man.    He thinks he is entitled to half of her money, but he signed a prenuptial agreement and is now flat broke.   "No, I didn't sign a prenuptial agreement.  I signed a prenup," he protests, not having enough wherewithal to realize it is the same thing.    In desperation, Maximo visits his estranged sister Sara (Hayek) and 10-year old nephew Hugo (Alejandro).    It has been so long since he has seen Sara that he forgot not only how old Hugo is, but that he is also a boy.    Hugo goes to a private school and has a crush on Arden (Grace), whose grandmother is wealthy and thus Maximo's hopeful ticket back to the good life.    Maximo teaches Hugo how to pick up women, including mastering a confident strut, but we all know Hugo and Arden are simply an in for Maximo to make his move.  

How to be a Latin Lover never strays too far into bad taste.    There are some funny payoffs to Maximo's efforts and some fringe characters whom Maximo encounters including two brothers he stiffs on a business deal and want their money back, plus a yogurt store cashier (Bell) who is two cats away from being the youngest crazy cat lady ever, and a rival himbo (Lowe) whose wife has an insatiable sexual appetite.    Despite Maximo's maneuverings, he grows to love his nephew and reconnect with his sister.    Note to filmmakers:   Please stop having characters reconnect over all-night drinking binges which involve dancing (and in other movies clubbing).    Or smoking weed.    It is a tired cliché which grinds a movie to a halt.

Derbez, who played the Patch Adams-like  Dr. Nurko in Miracles from Heaven (2016), is a likable comic actor who is not afraid to be the butt of the joke.    Maximo is appropriately clueless as to how the real world works, which leads to some funny moments.    But, the movie also has its touching moments as Maximo realizes he loves his family after all.    You would think How to be a Latin Lover would be the last movie which could effectively tug on the heartstrings, but it does.  

The Circle (2017) * *

Directed by:  James Ponsoldt

Starring:  Emma Watson, Tom Hanks, John Boyega, Patton Oswalt, Bill Paxton, Glenne Headley, Karen Gillan, Ellar Coltrane

The idea of technology invading privacy and robbing people of their lives is not a new idea.     The Circle updates it for today's times and some of the technological breakthroughs introduced here may seem farfetched today, but tomorrow may be reality.    In that sense, The Circle is like Network (1976), in which a struggling TV network takes drastic measures to improve ratings, measures which actually became reality a short time later.     Was that movie satire or a harbinger?     A little of both.    The Circle is the same way, although that is where the similarities between this movie and Network end.    

The Circle is all buildup and no payoff.    Well, at least no satisfactory payoff.     The plot's absurdities simply outweigh the thought-provoking moments at long last.     The movie ends with such haste that I wondered what was left out in the editing.     The villains get their comeuppance, I suppose, but if these guys were really the next-level thinkers the movie professes them to be, then what happens to them is something they should have foreseen and taken appropriate steps to avoid.    You almost see the uh-oh on their faces, but seriously, did they not think that this development wasn't at least a possibility?    

Emma Watson stars as Mae (as in Aunt Mae from the Spider-Man series), who is hired by The Circle, a San Francisco-based technology company with some new innovations up its sleeve.    Its CEO, Eamon Bailey (Hanks), gives weekly Steve Jobs-esque speeches in front of worshipful crowds pumping up the latest technology being introduced as the next big thing.    In this case, Bailey introduces a camera so tiny it can be placed anywhere while circumventing those pesky privacy laws you hear so much about.     He espouses, "Knowing is good.   Knowing everything is better,"   The employees' mouths are agape.    This is clearly the most fascinating thing they've heard since the invention of the latest iPhone.    The Circle sells scary products which keep data on various metrics which The Circle can use to, of course, enrich them and wield untold power over governments and citizens.   

Hanks plays Bailey as a seemingly kind, charismatic man who is part snake oil salesman and part Svengali.    Hanks' natural charisma is on full display and he can sell snow to Eskimos, which is vital as he takes Mae under his wing and manipulates her into wearing one of these cameras full time for all of the world to see.     Think EdTv or The Truman Show, only with no film crews.     Every moment, with the exception of sleeping and bathroom breaks, are streamed for the world to see and post comments on in real time.    Think reality television, only with no film crews.     Media outlets and production studios would salivate at the chance to use these cameras.    Imagine all of the overhead they could eliminate.  

The Circle itself is a cultish compound with dorms, parties, and "non-mandatory" activities for which Mae is chided by co-workers for not attending.     She has her own baggage, including a sick father with MS (Paxton), a friend/co-worker whose relationship with Mae goes on the skids as Mae's celebrity rises, and a male friend who would like to be something more if Mae would stop wearing that damn camera on her lapel.     The Circle's more effective moments involve the creepy atmosphere of The Circle itself, in which Big Brother is always watching...until certain convenient points in the plot when it isn't.     There is also the inexplicable Ty Lafitte (Boyega), who created the programs on which much of The Circle's technology is based, but has "gone off the grid", but not so much that isn't clearly visible playing with his phone and schmoozing Mae at company parties. 

Ty laments that The Circle is using his programs for which they were not intended.    He believes, as we do, that there shouldn't be a metric for everything.     Not every piece of someone's life needs to be analyzed and measured.     There should be room for privacy.     Ty is more of a plot device acting as the movie's conscience.     Fair enough.     What I don't understand is how a website can post headlines such as "Where is Ty Lafitte?" when anyone can just look around The Circle's campus and one of Bailey's pow-wows and see him standing right there.     And if he supposedly had a falling out with Bailey and COO Tom Stenton (Oswalt), then why is allowed to roam around The Circle unabated?  

Watson gives a grounded performance amidst the mounting silliness.     I also enjoyed Oswalt's chilling turn which is very, very far removed from the comedian's previous film and TV appearances.     Hanks is Hanks, but it is painful to watch him become a dupe when he is clearly much smarter than that.     Boyega's brief appearances get the job done, even though we don't know how he is so easily able to make such appearances.    There is a plot development which I won't reveal here which surely would cause someone's family to sue the pants off of The Circle and acts as the catalyst for Mae to realize that all of this technology could potentially suck.    But all of this wraps up in a way which is tidy, hasty, and ultimately unconvincing.      The examination of how rapidly innovative technology is both a positive and a negative has been explored before in other films, and considerably better.