sept. 21 movie reviews

The Raw and the Uncensored (Printable Version , E-mail to a Friend )
It’s film fest time, and as Hollwood becomes more predicable and tame, expect just the opposite with the indys

Fall, in addition to having the best weather of the year, also is festival time—Scottish, Greek, German, etc. Film, too.
 
Film fests are a welcome change from the typical Hollywood fare. If for no other reason than festival films are often short. Ha. Okay, no really. If you are a film buff, you should attend, if for no other reason than to expand your expectations of film as a storytelling medium. There’s more than “pulp” cinema, more than the new release of the week.
 
An example of this is next weekend’s Tulsa Uncensored Film Festival. The fourth iteration of the festival takes place Sept. 30 at the Tulsa Little Theatre. The projector starts running at 6pm. Advance tickets are $7 and at the door, they’re $10.
 
According to Jason Connell, Tulsa native and the festival’s founder, the “uncensored” in the title doesn’t mean distasteful films. It simply means every film is given equal consideration during the selection process. TUFF features films from local filmmakers, as well as selections from around the country.
 
Connell, who now lives in Los Angeles and recently finished his first feature film Strictly Background. He’s also got his hands full with the first Los Angeles Uncensored Film Festival. Apparently, the buzz was strong enough about TUFF Connell decided to create a sister festival out west.
 
Man’s got his hands full. It’s a good festival. Mark next Saturday on your calendar and call the Tulsa Little Theatre for tickets.
 
We’ve got some other interesting stuff coming up. First, the midnight movie at the Circle this month is Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.
 
And then there’s this--it’s not set in stone yet, so don’t send me or The Circle hate mail if, in fact, it doesn’t happen. George A. Romero, zombie film master, might be coming to town next month. If he does come to town, the Circle will host a Zombie Film Festival, which’ll include all four of Romero’s zombie films for one price and feature talks from the man himself.
 
Sounds kick ass, doesn’t it? Especially with Halloween coming up. I hope it happens. But like I said, it’s not a done deal yet. Stay tuned.
 
So that’s that. Let’s get on with this week’s reviews.
 
Of Noir and Black
 
Last week, I complained about Hollywoodland for a number of reasons, but first and foremost was that it just wasn’t very good. I blamed that on it trying to hard to fit into the noir mold. I have some of the same criticisms about The Black Dahlia.
 
The last two weeks, I’ve sat through two noir flicks that were allegedly ”Oscar” caliber. What a load of crap. I wonder where in the hell I heard that from? That’s what I get from listening to the hype.
 
Then again, I wasn’t expecting much. Like it or not, because of the business I’m in, I go into movies with a chip on my shoulder. I dare them to be good. Some kinds of movies more than others.
 
These new noir films? They’re the worst. It’s like everyone’s trying to make Chinatown over and over again. L.A. Confidential wasn’t too bad, but . . . it maybe had a better acting roster than The Black Dahlia did.
 
But that’s not my point. My point is these films seem too tired, too cliché. It’s all fedoras and cigarettes, women of shady character and tough guys, gangsters and crooked cops. It’s all the same. Then again, that same argument could be leveraged against any of the film genres. Problem is most of the other film genres have other interesting stuff going on for them. All noir films have is the clichés and the plot twists.
 
The trick to overcoming genre clichés is to have compelling characters. For that matter, that’s pretty much the trick to every genre. If you have compelling enough characters and a competent plot, you’ll have a good film, no matter the backdrop. It’s why they can movie Shakespeare plays from setting to setting.
 
Movies that are all style and no substance don’t work. That’s definitely the case with The Black Dahlia. In fact, it’s difficult to even try to sum up for a review. Not because it’s complicated. Because it’s dumb and barely makes sense. You begin to wonder about the book—was it any good?
 
For a film that’s supposed to be about a vicious murder of a Hollywood starlet, we don’t even get to the discovery of the body until about half an hour in.
 
Instead, The Black Dahlia opens with a half hour about how detective Dwight "Bucky" Bleichert (Josh Hartnett) and detective Leland "Lee" Blanchard (Aaron Eckhart) become partners. How they become L.A. media darlings, blah, blah, blah.
 
I assume they do this so they can show the “love triangle” between Bucky, Lee and Kay (Scarlett Johansson), Lee’s girl. There’s a backstory between Lee and Kay that doesn’t come out until later in the film and probably has something to do with Lee’s nature in the book, but just comes off as tangential and excessive.
 
Anyway, eventually the story gets to the point where Bucky and Lee are on a stakeout of a child killer. Someone notices them and shooting starts. The bad guys all end up dead.
 
Coincidentially, a block away, the dismembered body of an actress is discovered. She’s been cut in half, her internal organs removed, face cut. Lee is all over it. He wants the case, and you can’t tell if it’s because he wants the notoriety or there’s something else going on. Bucky wants to stay on the child killer case, but acquiesces. He agrees to one week on the case.
 
The “plot” begins to open up when Bucky encounters Madeleine Linscott (Hilary Swank), a woman who has a passing resemblance to the deceased.
 
Things get dumber from there.
 
There is only the most tenuous thread tying the disparate elements of the story together. And the detectives only stumble upon the “truth” by accident. In the most basic sense, the story barely works. I’ve seen better in TV movies of the week.
 
Then there’s the tone of the thing. Half the film is hardboiled. Both of the “heroes” are pugilists. There are gunfights and boxing matches. And then three-quarters of the way through the film, you get this goofy ass dinner scene. And by goofy I mean just that. The scene takes place at Madeleine’s house and her mother is sauced. It’s completely out of alignment with the rest of the film. As it turns out, it foreshadows the film’s denouement, which is also stupid.
 
Sure, the film looks cool. But then Brian De Palma has never been accused of lack of style. I tend to think the director is overrated, but what do I know? He’s made some good films in the past. I would say the record is spotty.
 
Here’s the bottom line: as soon as the credits rolled, Steph booed. I couldn’t say it any better than that so . . . The Black Dahlia: booooo.
 
 
Fortunately, the other film I watched last weekend did not induce booing, which was surprising. Sorta. I’ve gotten to the point where I expect sports films to be, at the very least, entertaining, if not pretty good. Not Oscar good, but good. I don’t buy these kinds of things for the home collection, but I don’t come out of them frothing at the mouth and looking to get my money back from the studio. There’s something to be said for having your expectations met, after all.
 
Then again, I’m still not sure what to make of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. I like the guy. I don’t think you can help but like the guy. Whatever movie stars need to have, he has. He’s funny. He’s got presence. And he can do action. He’s figuring out that acting thing, which is more than Stallone and Schwarzenegger ever did.
 
He does, however, have a spotty record in choosing film projects. Pretty much the only good movie he’s made so far is The Rundown. His part in Be Cool wasn’t bad, but the movie sucked. Walking Tall, The Scorpion King, The Mummy Returns, Doom--all suck.
 
This seemed like a fairly safe choice. First, it’s a paint-by-numbers feel-good sports movie. Can’t fault him for making it. Respectable actors like Denzel Washington make these kinds of films.
 
It works out well for the big guy. It’s not a bad flick. Simple story, competently told. Nothing surprising. Nothing you haven’t seen before, but nothing inherently wrong with it.
 
Sean Porter (The Rock) works at Camp Hamilton, a juvenile detention center outside of L.A. The place is packed to the rafters with all kinds of troubled youth. Most of the kids--75 percent--return to the center, go to prison, or die before they turn 21.
 
One of the kids jumps another one who’s sleeping. Sean throws the aggressor in solitary and asks him what he’s going to do to change his life. He tells the kid that if something doesn’t change, he’ll be dead.
 
A couple days later, the kid’s dead. And his best friend, Willie (Jade Yorker), goes out to even the score, fails, and then ends up shooting his mother’s boyfriend. He’s shipped out to Camp Hamilton.
 
After watching another fist fight, Sean comes up with an idea to change the kids’ way of thinking. He’ll start a football team. He’ll teach lifetime losers to be winners and all that other coachspeak about how being on a competitive team changes lives.
 
Pretty much from there, it’s paint-by-numbers. Unlike the Disney feel-good sports films, this one looks gritty and doesn’t tone down the violence that surrounds the lives of the kids in Camp Hamilton. The kids aren’t likeable and you actually sort of believe the change in their demeanors.
 
Bah. I’m talking about a feel-good sports movie. It’s pretty good stuff. The Rock can act. Xhibit is funny (yeah, he’s in here). I have nothing bad to say, really. I enjoyed it. I won’t be putting it on the shelf when it drops on DVD, but not a bad afternoon at the movies.