Reviews by PvtCaboose91

More or less another tired take on the old Odd Couple formula, Uptown Girls is an uneven, clichéd, saccharine-coated blend of comedy and drama. Ostensibly aimed at a teenage female audience, Uptown Girls is a sterling example of Hollywood craftsmanship gone wrong. Both critics and audiences have perceived this fluffy filmic creation to be among 2003's worst movies, and, frankly, you'll be hard-pressed to feel to the contrary. A host of continuity problems, lack of proper direction, sloppy screenwriting and stereotypical characters aside, the picture is simply tedious. Saturated in corny cuteness by the committee of screenwriters (Julia Dahl, Mo Ogrodnik and Lisa Davidowitz) and glossily directed by Boaz Yakin, it's a cotton-candy confection that's far too superficial and mannered. Can't say you weren't warned, though, as the picture is named after a Billy Joel song...a song which is never even featured on the film's soundtrack!

As for the plot: Molly Gunn (Murphy), the free-spirited daughter of a deceased rock star legend, has lived a carefree, frivolous life without responsibility. Using the multi-million dollar inheritance left to her by her parents, Molly has never been required to hold down a job, and has successfully delayed the onset of adulthood. When her late father's financial advisor flees with the remainder of Molly's fortune, she's left bankrupt, heavy in debt and evicted. With no alternatives, the rock star princess sets out to find a job. Molly is hired to serve as a babysitter for precocious, obnoxious spoiled brat Ray (Fanning). Predictably, Molly and Ray's interaction is life-changing for both souls. Honestly, who didn't see that coming? More importantly, who cares?

Unevenly pitched between scatterbrained humour and transparent tugs on the heartstrings, Uptown Girls is fundamentally a silly fairytale set in a real-world setting. While the performances are fairly appealing and the filmmaking is adequate, the screenplay is woeful. The central criticism of this abysmal screenplay is simple: it seems to faithfully adhere to the formula of 2002's About a Boy, to the extent that About a Girl is probably a more appropriate title, and this movie was in all likelihood green-lit to capitalise on the success of the aforementioned British gem. Both movies feature immature adults and intelligent but maladjusted children who all come of age through their interactions with each other. They both even have the same climax; a child performing in front of a crowd, which apparently solves everything.

Duplicity - this incredibly witty, intelligent comical crime caper concerning two professional spies with pronounced mutual trust issues - is the second directorial outing of acclaimed screenwriter Tony Gilroy (the man who also scripted the Jason Bourne films). Merging the cold corporate intrigue of Michael Clayton (the writer's Oscar-nominated debut as a director) with the suave, globetrotting antics of the Ocean's trilogy, this effervescent, meticulously plotted heist thriller is dazzling entertainment for a mature audience. The title of Duplicity (meaning deceitfulness) is extremely appropriate for such a twisty motion picture. Rest assured that with Gilroy serving as both writer and director, plot twists are frequent and (similar to Michael Clayton) concessions are rare for those who refuse to pay close attention. Luckily, Gilroy's film is an ultra-slick cinematic creation bursting with intrigue and visual elegance, not to mention it also features an outstanding cast...we're hooked from the very beginning.

The grim depredations of the corporate world may lie at the centre of Gilroy's film once again, but he manages to have loads of fun with them this time. Gilroy establishes the comical tone brilliantly with a slap-happy opening credits sequence featuring two titans of industry (Wilkinson and Giamatti) battling one another (in exaggerated slow motion) on an airport tarmac before their respective private jets as their aghast entourages observe the situation.

The less you know about the plot, the more enjoyable your viewing experience. In a nutshell: the story follows two lovers - CIA agent Claire Stenwick (Roberts) and MI6 agent Ray Koval - who become caught up in a feud between two multinational pharmaceutical companies which threatens to tip over into outright war. With one cosmetics company on the verge of announcing a lucrative, earth-shattering new product that will give them an edge in this battle, Claire and Ray spot an opportunity to strike it rich. They quit their jobs and plan to infiltrate the two organisations with the intention of obtaining the special formula for this new product.
Naturally, not everything goes to plan (it would be less interesting if everything ran perfectly), which amplifies the suspense tenfold in the lead-up to the climax. Viewers will be constantly kept on edge of their seats as the central relationship wavers, and alliances change (as do plans). Who is playing who?

Hollywood's confidence in D-Tox (also known as Detox and Eye See You) was clearly lower than Ed Wood's Oscar possibilities. Filmed and completed in 1999, Universal abruptly decided to cancel the distribution a few months before the intended release and shelve the project. Three years passed, and Universal began to tire of the film - ultimately choosing to sell it and disown it (Oscar-winning producer Brian Grazer even removed his name from the credits, and Universal removed their logo from the finished product as well). The 2002 international theatrical run for D-Tox was shorter than the average life-span of a housefly. In the US it bypassed theatres and instead debuted on DVD. Typically, endless delays are an indication of an extremely poor movie. But thankfully, this isn't the case...as a matter of fact, D-Tox is a surprisingly watchable and serviceable Sylvester Stallone vehicle. Directed by Jim Gillespie, this hybrid of Se7en, The Thing and (Gillespie's own) I Know What You Did Last Summer rises above the usual standard for fluffy slasher flicks, and features Stallone in an astonishingly decent performance. It's frankly bewildering that this decent slasher affair struggled for a release while other dirge is constantly rushed into cinemas.

The story tracks FBI agent Jake Malloy (Stallone), who - upon the film's commencement - is on the trail of a sadistic serial killer exclusively targeting police officers. This murderer instigates an intense cat-and-mouse game with Malloy, eventually upping the stakes by making things personal. Grief sends Malloy off the deep end when he witnesses a personally-affecting crime scene, and his life spirals downwards into a profound depression where solace can only be found in the bottom of a bottle. To recover from these intense psychological effects, one of Malloy's colleagues (Dutton) sends Malloy to a remote detox clinic (hence the title) located in snow-covered Wyoming that specialises in rehabilitating cops. Unfortunately for the group of patients (and the crew of the facility, for that matter), Malloy barely has time to unpack his bags before the patients begin dying under suspicious circumstances. Things soon become perfectly clear to Malloy: the murderer whose actions have haunted him for months has somehow found his way into the facility, and one of the patients may not be who they claim to be. Completely isolated by an extreme blizzard, the group have no-where to run. As their numbers begin to dwindle even further, it becomes clear that in order to survive they must go on the offensive and flush out the traitor lurking amongst them...

At the pinnacle of his screenwriting career, Shane Black was the highest paid scribe in Hollywood, with films like Lethal Weapon and The Last Boy Scout to his name. His scripts spawned enjoyable, commercially successful films for the most part, but Black has long stated that directors alter his original ideas, causing a great deal of frustration on his part. Black vanished for the better part of a decade, but stages his triumphant comeback with 2005's Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. Inspired by James Bond, Pauline Kael, Raymond Chandler novels, and everything in between, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang could be Black's greatest creation to date, even exploiting his time-honoured love of Christmas that has provided a backdrop for all of his thrillers. In order to avoid frustration in the translation from page to screen, Black directed the film himself, and the product shows no evidence that Black is a first-time filmmaker.

In the midst of L.A.'s holiday rush, small-time thief Harry Lockhart (Downey Jr.) inadvertently stumbles into an audition while trying to evade the police following an unsuccessful robbery. Harry's performance amazes the casting agents, and he's subsequently thrust into the spotlight as he's flown to Hollywood for a screen test. Propelled into the cut-throat world of L.A.'s pros, cons, losers and wannabes, Harry is partnered with tough private eye "Gay" Perry (Kilmer) who'll prepare him for his screen test. For experience, Perry allows Harry to help with his latest assignment. Harry is also reunited with his childhood crush - Harmony Faith Lane (Monaghan) - who has become an actress. However, when the mysterious suicide of Harmony's sister intersects with the seemingly unrelated case Harry and Perry are investigating, the duo find themselves embroiled in a real murder mystery.

Got that? Good. Now don't worry about it.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is an unabashed exercise in style and wit, with its plot serving as a rack on which to hang wildly entertaining vignettes. It works marvellously, as Black's script is populated with terrific characters dispersing witty dialogue. The sharp exchanges and one-liners are never-ending, with pop-culture pisstakes (a head-to-toe soaked Downey at one stage proclaims himself to be "wetter than Drew Barrymore at a grunge club") and sneering subversions of hard-boiled posturing (Perry uses the word 'pluperfect' at a rather odd time), not to mention sly satire of the film industry. Without a doubt, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is one of the most quotable films in history, and it remains hilarious upon repeat viewings. The story is convoluted and you'll be hard-pressed to nail it, but this is a massive positive - critics often complain that stories are too straightforward and by-the-numbers, hence Black subverted this stereotypical pitfall. Furthermore, there's more to latch onto and absorb with each new viewing.

Black's script is (in part) based on the novel Bodies Are Where You Find Them by Brett Halliday. In adapting Halliday's novel, the writer-director added his own satiric slant on the story and inserted elements of Raymond Chandler novels to ultimately produce something unique. Constant references the old masters of film noir are scattered throughout the flick - chapter headings are sourced from Chandler novel titles, for instance. Visually, the film is a hodgepodge of quick edits, pans, zooms, fades, dissolves and crosscuts, combined with flashy colour alterations. However, none of these (usually irritating) gimmicks are damaging at all due to Black's limitless elegance as a director. Moreover, his exaggerated cinematic style is fitting for this incisive Hollywood satire. Poking fun at everything from storytelling clichés to the way filmmakers manipulate their "assets", Black has created a top-notch picture that is simultaneously an engaging noir-style mystery and a hilarious observation of the film industry.

Black treats his audience as peers, and never takes them as fools. The man clearly understands that very film-savvy audiences exist, and they're every bit as cynical about Hollywood conventions as he is. At one stage, through the voice of Harry the narrator, he remarks "Don't worry, I saw the last Lord of the Rings. I'm not going to have the movie end like 17 times". Throughout the course of the film, Harry also chastises himself for leaving out important details, or for making seemingly pointless observations. Sometimes, scripts like these are too consciously clever for their own good, but Black's work is well-judged. Naturally, witty dialogue wasn't enough for the writer-director, as Black felt the urge to include a number of action sequences for good measure. Fortunately, such scenes are dazzling, intense and splendidly choreographed. It's all the more amazing that the film was produced for a slight $15 million.

At the centre of the film is a top-notch cast. The chemistry between Robert Downey Jr. and Val Kilmer is killer - they're the most downright entertaining screen pair since Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta in Pulp Fiction. Downey is in top form here, showing a real sense of comic timing. He's an endearing narrator, too, introducing himself by saying "My name's Harry Lockhart, I'll be your narrator", which establishes the film's non-serious tone. Meanwhile, as the ambiguously homosexual cynic, Kilmer steals every frame, delivering some of the best one-liners in recent memory with graceful confidence. The beautiful Michelle Monaghan also appears as Harry's former flame. Monaghan has the perfect look for the part, and the actress oozes sexiness when she wears tight dresses, including a Santa's Helper outfit. Not to mention, she has great chemistry with Downey. Outside of the three protagonists, there's an amusing Larry Miller as the producer who plans to screen test Harry, and Rockmond Dunbar and Dash Mihok appear as a duo involved in the whole murder mystery. You know that actors have done their jobs correctly if you crave more time with their characters once the credits begin to roll.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is not only one of the best films of 2005, but it's also one the most overlooked. The Phoenix Film Critics Society even voted it "Overlooked Film of the Year". Okay, so no-one knows who the hell the Phoenix Film Critics Society is, but they have a point. One should also bear in mind that the film received a standing ovation when it premiered at the Cannes Film Festival. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is a delightful return for Shane Black, showing us that he was gone for far too long and that he deserves to continue in this business for a long time to come.

9.2/10

Remember life as a little kid, when you feared the monsters living in your closet or under your bed? Remember your parents assuring you that monsters don't exist? Monsters, Inc. verifies what every child really knows - the things that go bump in the night are more genuine than adults truly realise. Brought to the big screen by Disney & Pixar, Monsters, Inc. - the fourth offspring of this marriage (following Toy Story, A Bug's Life and Toy Story 2) - is a triumph of animated cinema. Co-directed by Pete Docter, David Silverman and Lee Unkrich (with Pixar guru John Lasseter serving as executive producer), this lively and endearing slice of animation is everything we come to expect from a product of the Disney/Pixar axis - it has an enchanting, imaginative premise as well as sumptuous computer animation, brilliant gags for every age, and a mouth-watering voice cast. Yet, this motion picture is a fresh and unique beast. Instead of taking place in the real world, Monsters, Inc. introduces an entirely new universe in which the marvellously-rendered CGI characters can live and flourish.

Behold Monstropolis - a thriving city populated by monsters of all shapes and sizes. Instead of coal or nuclear power, Monstropolis' power supply is derived from the screams of children. This means the scariest (and bravest) denizens of the city are employed by Monsters, Inc. (the largest scream processing factory in Monstropolis) to venture through closet doorways and elicit screams by scaring children all over the globe (these screams are then converted into electricity). However - as children are becoming more sophisticated and consequently more difficult to frighten - severe power problems are affecting the city, with "rolling blackouts" predicted throughout this serious scream shortage. The responsibility of harnessing sufficient electricity falls on the broad shoulders of the leading scream producer - a big blue monster known as Sulley (Goodman), ably assisted by his wisecracking pal Mike (Crystal). It's business as usual for Sulley & Mike until a young, curious human child (Gibbs) boldly goes where no human has gone before...into a closet, and onward into the monster universe. In this world, however, it's the monsters who are afraid of the children (believing them to be toxic and deadly). Pandemonium ensues as Sulley & Mike work to return the child home, in the process uncovering a sinister plot to rid Monstropolis of its power issues...

As Idiocracy commences, we're presented with a fairly convincing theory regarding the future of the human species. For centuries, science fiction stories have usually portrayed a future world as a crisp utopia of science and advanced learning with flying cars and phenomenal technology. The future has also been illustrated as a desolate post-apocalyptic wasteland. These are perfectly believable theories. However, Idiocracy - a film helmed by Mike Judge, a man also responsible for Beavis and Butt-Head and 1999's Office Space - tosses these theories in the toilet and offers an alternate vision of where mankind is headed. According to Judge, in the future humans may have a lower IQ than a muffin.

Judge's theory may appear outlandish, but think about it... the Jackass flicks are able to reach #1 at the box office while intelligent, provocative movies such as Michael Clayton and Children of Men perish at the box office (still earning a modest profit, but very slowly). One factor Idiocracy brings to the fore is that destitute, dim-witted families screw and breed like rodents while smart, well-off families restrict themselves to one or two offspring. Hence, the smart population may develop into an endangered species before ultimately becoming extinct. Judge's savage attack on American idiocy (which went through many title changes, originally being known as 3001 and Amerikwa) takes the form of an eye-wateringly hilarious hybrid of sci-fi and comedy. Judge's script is pervaded with endless wit and creativity, never becoming preachy in its depiction of the future but ensuring it'd be quite possible to ponder Judge's message about modern man. Mike Judge is simply the perfect guy to produce a movie about a future overrun by morons, as his entire career is built on mining the stupidity of North America for laughs. Idiocracy is loaded with a frighteningly realistic concept...but it's in an amusing wrapper.

Twenty-three years in the making, director Zack Snyder's ambitious and audacious cinematic rendering of the acclaimed Watchmen graphic novel (by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons) is a dense and visceral exercise in the liberation of the conventional superhero movie. Moore's original 1986 effort was a nihilistic satire which deconstructed and intensely studied super heroes in a real world setting, begetting an adult sensibility and a mature approach to what had (up until then) been commonly dismissed as a medium aimed at kids. Loyal almost to a fault, director Zack Snyder's Watchmen grasps Moore's subversive magnum opus of comicdom and brings it to the big screen in a visually astounding, multi-layered filmic experiment guaranteed to divide audiences. Never straying too far from the material, Snyder's compelling motion picture is infused with sound and images combined to generate a unique visual experience that commendably evokes the atmosphere of a graphic novel. Watchmen is a bold, bizarre and breathtaking slice of cinema arguably for both newcomers and fans alike.

In a masterfully implemented opening credits sequence (set to Bob Dylan's The Times They Are A-Changing), the complete history of masked vigilantism is displayed - from its quaint beginnings in the forties to its eventual outlawing in the seventies. This title sequence introduces a viewer to the world in which the proceedings will transpire. The execution is simply faultless; mind-blowing tableaus and short scenes are rendered perfectly to convey the story so far. It's simply one of the greatest title sequences this reviewer has ever beheld.

Watchmen takes place in an alternate reality in which superheroes have become part of the fabric of everyday society. However, these costumed vigilantes have been outlawed, and those still in operation are working for the government. It's 1985, and Richard Nixon is serving his fifth term as President of the United States. The Vietnam War was won by America, and now they're on the brink of nuclear war with Russia.
In his high-rise apartment building, an amoral former superhero known as The Comedian (Morgan) is brutally murdered. This triggers an investigation by washed-up, mentally unstable vigilante Rorschach (Haley) who becomes convinced the crime was not random, and that someone may be bumping off the last of the costumed crime fighters. As Rorschach's investigation intensifies, it grows clear that a far more diabolical plot is poised for execution...a plot which could mean cataclysmic consequences for the entire world. With this at stake, Rorschach reunites with his former colleagues - Nite Owl (Wilson) and Silk Spectre II (Akerman) - who don their costumes once again and leap into action.

The type of gritty, ruthless thriller that could only emerge during the '70s, Joseph Sargent's classic subway suspenser The Taking of Pelham One Two Three is a total hardboiled treat! This culturally influential production (Quentin Tarantino used the concept of colours as codenames for Reservoir Dogs) mixes tense action, cat & mouse mind-games, sly political satire and New York atmosphere, spawning a competent genre movie that never forgoes respect for the intelligence of its viewers. Screenwriter Peter Stone (basing his script on John Godey's novel of the same name) has penned a terrific gem of an action movie - it's intelligent, credible and exciting, and (best of all) it gets right down to business. When the movie opens we're thrust directly into the intense hostage-taking situation without a great deal of explication preceding it. The true genius of this riveting picture is that the characters are developed adequately as the story quickly progresses.

Pelham 123 - a New York City subway train - becomes the focal point of an audacious terrorist attack. A tense situation unfolds when four armed men step aboard this train and hijack it, taking hostage the eighteen passengers from the first carriage (plonking said carriage halfway between stations). The established leader of the group - an ex-mercenary known only as Mr. Blue (Shaw) - demands a million dollars for the release of the hostages, allowing precisely one hour for the money to be delivered...and a hostage will be shot for each minute the money is late. The Transit Authority, the NYC Police Department, as well as the Mayor and his colleagues are sent into a frenzied but coordinated action, rushing to meet the rapidly-approaching deadline...
Lieutenant Zachary Garber (Matthau) undertakes negotiations with the cold, calculating Mr. Blue.

Written by Helen Childress and helmed by Ben Stiller (his directorial debut), Reality Bites focuses on Generation X and effectively encapsulates the era of the early nineties. From the word go it was clear this nostalgic romp would cart a viewer down a dull river of Gen-X blues, concentrating on the depressing career and lifestyle choices confronted by these specific youths. Stiller's first effort as a director is a straightforward, independent-style movie about a love triangle that seems keen to impart a strong message: life is dismal and tough when you're young. The picture emphasises this message, but with such a bleak tenor it doesn't even offer a glimmer of hope. Time has been surprisingly good to Reality Bites; its themes still potent and music still beguiling (at least in my eyes). At the end of the day, however, stripped away of its hyped relevance the film possesses little to make it superior to your average, generic rom-com. Interestingly, the title of Reality Bites is irritatingly ambiguous: does it imply that life bites or does it purport that small bites of reality are presented within?

Reality Bites primarily concentrates on four Gen-X youths fresh out of college (three graduating, one not). Lelaina (Ryder), more or less the main character, is a disillusioned young girl in the process of making a pseudo-documentary on the lives of her friends that focuses on post-college life. She acts as an intern for the insufferable host of a Good Morning programme, but her aspirations are far higher. Troy (Hawke), a grungy, unemployed slacker who failed to graduate from college, is her best friend who moves into her apartment after being fired from his latest job. Also living with Lelaina is Vickie (Garofalo); a woman who has disregarded her morals and has become manager of The Gap, but who's also paranoid she might have AIDS. Then there's Sammy (Zahn) who's confused about his sexuality.
Lelaina meets a tense young studio executive named Michael (Stiller) who takes an immediate shine to her. But Troy doesn't approve of this relationship as he harbours unspoken feelings for Lelaina underneath his slacker veneer. As a love triangle forms, Lelaina must choose which she values the most - an affluent life of materialism with Michael, or a possibly unstable life of philosophical musings with Troy.

By its conclusion, Reality Bites is unsuccessful in demonstrating any positive outcome one can experience in life, even if it means one has to place their ego aside momentarily. Michael offers Lelaina a wonderful opportunity, and I personally feel she should have accepted it. But no - the ending is instead a big dud.

Director Stiller and screenwriter Helen Childress (who was 19 when she completed the script) endeavoured to capture the lives of Gen-X youths with brutal honesty in this film, and they succeed. The lives of these young people are actually quite mundane, however. Granted, Gen-X youths lived mundane lives, but these characters are feebly written. The four friends living together speak in confusing, poetic riddles. Some lines are quotable ("There's no point to any of this. It's all just a random lottery of meaningless tragedy and a series of near escapes"), other instances are unnecessary and ultimately seem forced ("You've reached the winter of our discontent"). In addition, the characters are very poorly delineated. The heroine comes across as whiney and full of contradictions (she's valedictorian of her college class, yet isn't able to continue her speech with palm-cards missing, not to mention she's curiously inarticulate and embarrassingly coy on dates). Troy is the ultimate definition of a lay-about loser (he didn't even graduate from college!), but he spouts wisdom incessantly. Despite a charismatic portrayal courtesy of Ethan Hawke, he appears to be the character we're supposed to hate. On the other hand, the guy we're supposed to hate (Ben Stiller as Michael) is the only likable guy in the film! By the film's end, Steve Zahn's Sammy and Janeane Garofalo's Vickie also seem merely perfunctory and redundant.