I Finally Saw GLADIATOR So I Could Be Properly Disappointed By GLADIATOR II

GLADIATOR II (Dir. Ridley Scott, 2024)

Nearly a quarter of a century after Ridley Scott’s historical epic GLADIATOR ruled the box office, and swept the Oscars, comes this highly anticipated sequel, opening everywhere today. But it wasn’t highly anticipated by me as, despite all the hoopla, I never got around to seeing the original until earlier this week. When I got an invite to an advance screening of GLADIATOR II, I decided it was time to catch up. I found it on a streaming platform (Paramount Plus), and finally got to see what all the fuss was about.

 

I can’t say that the 2000 GLADIATOR will make any dent in any of my mental lists of greatest movies, but I could see why it was an award-winning crowd pleaser. Highly enjoyable was its intense turn by Russell Crowe coming up against Joaquin Phoenix in another break-through performance in a richly shot ancient Roman revenge adventure enhanced by a stunning Hans Zimmer score. It didn’t matter that it was a pretentious presentation with weak dialogue, and obvious plotting, it worked as overblown epic entertainment, and I’m glad to have now caught up with it. 

 

Sadly, all the elements that made the first film so successful are sorely lacking in Scott’s GLADIATOR II, which opens with an animated sequence laying out the basic story points of the original, which, because of the many call-backs, I’ll call GI for the rest of the review. I really don’t think it’s a spoiler to say the sequel concerns the son of Russell Crowe’s Maximus, but an actor I was previously unfamiliar with, Paul Mescal plays the lead, Lucius, who was played as a kid in GI by Spencer Treat Clark. The only folks from GI to reprise their roles are Connie Nielsen as Lucius’ mother, Lucilla; and Sir Derek Jacobi as a much more minor Senator character, Senator Something.

 

As the film follows the story beats of GI – big opening battle, hero’s wife gets killed, slave becomes lauded gladiator, colossal Colosseum fights, family drama, and final showdown – we get the new characters, Marcus Acacius (Pedro Pascal), a Roman general who is married to Lucilla, and appears to be inwardly tortured; and, more interestingly, Macrinus (Denzel Washington), who at first, seems to be simply rehashing the blustery former slave turned wealthy merchant part Oliver Reed played in GI, but he turns out to be the film’s central baddie here.

 

Since sequels are programmed to attempt to top the original’s highlights, the Colosseum set pieces are even more over the top with scary CGI baboon, rhinos, and most ridiculously sharks when they fill the venue with water to re-stage a naval battle with two warships facing off. Now historical record does show that the Romans did have outlandish events like this, but that the water in the Colosseum wasn’t deep enough for sharks. Since this was one of the movie’s most engrossing scenes, I’m going to let it go. It's hard to complain about unnecessary CGI sharks when the entire affair is unnecessary.

 

Anyway, as the lead Lucius, Mescal just doesn’t have anywhere near the gravitas or the charisma of Crowe’s Maximus; and as the antagonist, Washington has swagger aplenty, but his role is underwritten, giving the audience little to grab onto. Same could be said for Pascal, who brings what he can to his worried warrior persona, but again, like every other player here, doesn’t have much pull. 

 

Despite that it shares the same cinematographer with GI, John Mathieson, the look of GII is far less spectacular. Gone is the crisp panoramic imagery, replaced by a washed out less engrossing landscape for which us to go through a lesser telling of the same story. GI had memorable movie moments – Maximus yelling “Are you not entertained?” at the crowd, Phoenix’s Commodus sneering, “It vexes me. I’m terribly vexed” -  but I can’t remember a single line from GII just two days after seeing it. And unlike Zimmer’s work on GI, I can’t recall any of Harry Gregson-Williams’ score either!

 

So this uninspired sequel is director Scott’s third collaboration with screenwriter David Scarpa after the mixed bags that were ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD (2017), and NAPOLEON (2023), and apparently the third time isn’t the charm. I doubt GII will leave much a mark on pop culture after it gets chewed up and spitted out this weekend, but since I’ve been wrong about the masses not wanting big, flashy empty machismo before, I won’t be surprised if it hits big. 

More later...

Another THOR-Mulaic Marvel Movie, But That’s Okay, I Guess

Opening tonight at every multiplex in the multiverse:

THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER

(Dir. Taika Waititi, 2022)

This fourth THOR film, the 29th movie in the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe), checks off all the expected boxes with its air-borne battles, callbacks, cameos, catchphrases, and spectacle-filled set-pieces. It’s the Marvel movie that fans know they’re going to get from before they ever saw the trailer. It’s the big summer superhero blockbuster we all feel like we’ve seen a million times. But I’ve come here to appraise the return of Chris Evans’ Norse god, not just toss off a jaded dismissal, so I’ll say that the film pops with enough laughs, and likable character activity for me to be okay with it.

Director and co-writer Taika Waititi, who also appears via motion capture as the Thing-like Korg, follows his previous turn, THOR: RAGNAROK, with a less weightier story about Thor saving the children of New Asgard from Gorr the God Butcher, intensely portrayed by a Nosferatu-esque Christin Bale (easily the most compelling thing on screen in the entire film). That’s the THUNDER.

The LOVE in the title comes from the rekindled romance with Natalie Portman reprising her role as Dr. Jane Foster, who wasn’t in the third film. Deemed worthy by the Mjoinir Hammer (whatever), Portman’s Dr. Foster joins the action as her own version of Thor dressed in likewise garb (Evans: “And that’s my look”), but her real fight is with cancer, an element that Waititi and co-screenwriter, Jennifer Kaytin Robinson, fail to give much emotional power.

Still, Evans and Portman do conjure up some cute charm together, and, after such performances in the strained sci-fi of ANNIHILATION and LUCY IN THE SKY, it’s nice to be reminded that Portman can be an effective comic actress.

Alongside Thor and Mrs. Thor (She-Thor? Lady-Thor? I’m not looking it up), we’ve got the always welcome Tessa Thompson as Asgardian warrior, Valkyrie; Jamie Alexander as Lady Sif, the aforementioned Waititi’s soft-spoken Korg, and a glorified cameo by the Guardians of the Galaxy (Chris Pratt, Dave Bautista, Karen Gillan, Vin Diesel, and Bradley Cooper), who aren’t given much to do – they aren’t even accompanied by some ‘70s K-Tel hit on the soundtrack.

One amusing factor is that the premise is packaged in a Guns N Roses theme with several of the band’s ‘80s anthems and power ballads blaring throughout, and even a character who wants to be called Axl. GNR’s tuneage even flows through Michael Giacchino’s orchestral score – I still have the instrumental strains of “Sweet Child o’ Mine” bouncing around in my head hole days later.

What’s both good and bad about THOR’s fourth can be summed up in the centerpiece sequence of the film, which features Thor ‘n friends traveling to Ominpresent City (whatever) to seek out the help of Russell Crowe (appearing have a blast as the chubby, smarmy deity) as the god, Zeus, in his lavish gold palace. It plays out as an attempt to merge the movie’s mythology with Mel Brooks by way of dick jokes, and that results in a bunch of hit or miss back and forth one-liner.

Working better are such running gags as Portman’s brain-storming of catchphrases, Matt Damon, Sam Neill, and Luke Hemsworth reprising their roles from RAGNAROK as Asgardian acting troupe versions of Loki, Odin and Thor; and a pair of giant screaming goats, Toothgnasher and Toothgrinder. Hey, these gags do actually work better than they sound, but I’m not claiming it’s all primo material.

As summer sequels go, THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER is a typical offering that should basically satisfy superhero fans or just folks looking for a couple hours of air-conditioned entertainment. These movies feel more and more disposable the more they make, but it feels so futile and useless to be cynical about them.

So if you like Marvel movies, Evans, Bale, Waititi, Portman, GNR, and/or screaming goats, you’ll most likely go for this round of more THOR. If you don’t care for those things, I’m not sure why you read this far.

More later...

The Dark Universe Franchise Kicks Off With THE MUMMY, Which Isn't Even Matinee Worthy

Now playing at a multiplex near everybody:

THE MUMMY (Dir. Alex Kurtzman, 2017)

Until recently, I was unaware that there is a new cinematic franchise in the works involving rebooting the Universal Monsters. A massive interlocking series featuring movies starring Dracula, The Invisible Man, Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, The Mummy, and the Creature from the Black Lagoon is planned under the name “Dark Universe,” as in, ‘look out, Marvel! Dark Universe is coming to overshadow you big-time!’

Not so fast, DU, as your inaugural release, THE MUMMY is a dud on arrival. Without a single scare, it fails at horror; without any genuine thrills or excitement, it fails at suspense; without any charm or depth, it fails at romance and drama; and with very few laughs, it fails at comedy too. There’s no genre it succeeds in! Even its visual imagery, which looks washed out and flat (and I saw it in 3D), is dreary, with no oomph.

I kept wishing that Tom Cruise had just made another MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie instead, as just about everything he does in this film – death defying airplane acrobatics, outrunning sand storms, dodging gunfire through chaotic chase sequences – he’s done so much better in that series.

So this film, which is so not connected to the Brendan Fraser MUMMY franchise (R.I.P. 1999-2008), concerns an Egyptian goddess named Ahmanet (Sofia Boutella, giving it her all but still not very scary) cursing Cruise as a brash graverobber, who along with his army buddy Jake Johnson, just happened to come across her tomb in modern day Iraq. After his wise-cracking role in JURASSIC WORLD and now this, maybe Johnson’s forte will be to be the comic relief on the sidelines in big ass fantasy action movies.

The cast is rounded out by Annabelle Wallis as an exposition-spouting archeologist, and possible love interest for Cruise, and, more importantly, a low key Russell Crowe as Dr. Jekyll, who my friend Fonvielle of Filmvielle told me will be like the Nick Fury character in the Marvel movies – the connective tissue between all the projected entries.

Thing is, Marvel built their cinematic universe bit by bit, movie by movie, before branding itself so blatantly. Samuel L. Jackson’s Fury appeared for the first time in an after credits scene (something that Marvel might as well trademark) to hint at a future framework involving the Avengers, etc, but THE MUMMY begins with a “Dark Universe” title that hasn’t been earned. They’re trying too hard to make an all-new Universal Monsters series immediately happen, but it’s way too soon for it to really be “a thing” yet.

Especially as I predict that WONDER WOMAN, in its second week of release, is going to kick its ass. Hell, the much buzzed about horror indie IT COMES AT NIGHT might even trounce it. I bet that one has legitimate scares in it too.

So, in conclusion – Dark Universe, keep your pants on! You’re getting way ahead of yourself says this lowly blogger. And Cruise – make another MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, EDGE OF TOMORROW, or even a JACK REACHER movie instead of getting aboard this silly franchise wannabe. Even the TOP GUN sequel that he’s talked about recently is a more appealing prospect than another entry in this convoluted mess of monster movies that Universal is cooking up (or re-heating).

THE MUMMY isn’t even worth the price of a matinee or the admission for a second run screening. Wait for it to come to Redbox or Netflix, then skip it there too.

More later...

THE NICE GUYS: A Shane Black Blast That Smartly Knows How To Be Dumb

Now playing at a multiplex near you:

THE NICE GUYS (Dir. Shane Black, 2016)

Writer/director Shane Black follows up the biggest hit of his career, IRON MAN 3, by steering back into his hard R-rated rude, crude action comedy comfort zone in THE NICE GUYS, a buddy detective film that’s up there with his funniest work.

It scores with the inspired casting of two guys not normally known for making audiences laugh: Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling, who respectively play grizzled enforcer-for-hire Jackson Healy and scruffy private eye Holland March.

Set in 1977 Los Angeles, the film follows Healy and March as they are thrown together to solve a case involving the apparent suicide of porn star Misty Mountains (Murielle Telio), a missing girl named Ameila (Margaret Qualley), who’s mistaken for the dead X-rated actress, and the possibly corrupt head of the Department of Justice (Kim Basinger), who’s Amelia’s mother.

Despite March’s protests, the duo are joined by Angourie Rice as the private dick’s precocious daughter Holly, who is much smarter than her incredibly clumsy, constantly drunk father, so while she’s putting leads together, he’s falling off balconies.

Winding through the prerequisite fist fights, car chases, and shoot-outs, is Black and co-writer Anthony Bagarozzi’s deftly hilarious dialogue which I bet will help make this be as quoted as Black’s LETHAL WEAPON, KISS KISS BANG BANG and even THE LAST BOY SCOUT scripts in the anals of film geek fandom.

While highly comical, the film boasts a serious action villain in the dapper, cold as ice, mafia hitman John Boy (Matt Bomer) who arrives on the scene with a trunk full of automatic guns targeting Healy and March.

At times it seems like Black wanted to make his version of an pre-THE BIG SHORT Adam McKay movie, replacing Will Farrell and whatever co-star (John C. Reilly? Mark Whalberg?) with Crowe and Gosling, retaining the ‘70s-era satire, albeit in a much lesser surreal vein, of the ANCHORMAN movies but operating from a much grittier level.

Actually maybe it’s more like the 1974 buddy comedy FREEBIE AND THE BEAN, in which Alan Arkin and James Caan play mismatched detectives who get entangled with the mob – that vibe is pretty strong too.

The attention to period detail from the smog-filled sky to the roster on the marquee of LA’s famous marquee The Comedy Store, coupled with a soundtrack full of primo ‘70s rock and R&B, effectively sets the mood and tone even despite the fact that every song – from “Papa Was a Rollin’ Stone” to “A Horse With No Name” has been used countless times in movies before. The same could be said for the soundtrack to GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY but that doesn’t stop it from being awesome.

THE NICE GUYS is a Shane Black blast with the funniest performances of both Crowe and Gosling’s career. Crowe’s weathered, jaded persona contrasts hilariously with Gosling’s haphazard demeanor in scene after scene, and with the talented 14-year old Rice added to the mix, the film overflows with comic chemistry.

The only slight misstep here is the overly restated shading of political commentary dealing with the intertwined conspiracy involving the Big Three Detroit automakers. This also has an Adam McKay-ish ring to it. No matter though really, THE NICE GUYS is smart enough to know how to be dumb and that transcends that bit of heavy handiness.

More later...

SUPERMAN: The New Nolan-ized Reboot

Now playing at mulitplexes from here to the Phantom Zone:

MAN OF STEEL (Dir. Zack Snyder, 2013)

The time is as good as any for a new take on the most powerful comic book superhero ever, but Zack Snyder’s (300, WATCHMEN, SUCKER PUNCH) reconstruction of the Superman movie mythos is a big bombastic bore.

A great cast has been assembled, including Henry Cavill as the caped crusader, Russell Crowe as Superman’s Kryptonian father, Kevin Costner as his Earth dad, Amy Adams as Daily Planet reporter/love-interest Lois Lane, Lawrence Fishburne as her editor/boss Perry White, Richarh Schiff (The West Wing) as some sort of all-knowing scientist, and, best of all, Michael Shannon as the evil bent-on-revenge General Zod, but Snyder working from a screenplay by DARK KNIGHT co-writer David S. Goyer, overcrowds the storyline with spectacle, repetitive dialogue, and needless convolutions making it difficult to connect with anything on screen.

You know the drill – before Krypton explodes, Papa Crowe (probably the actor who brings the most gravitas to the film) puts his new born baby (touted this time as the planet’s first natural birth in centuries) in a spaceship to Earth, where he’s found by a kindly middle-aged couple (Costner and Diane Lane) living on a farm in Kansas, who name him Clark Kent.

As the boy grows up he recognizes that he has great powers, learns of his origin, and heeding the advice of his step-dad Costner to conceal what he can do, he goes on the road anonymously going from town to town working different jobs until his powers get in the way and he has to move on just like David Banner (Bill Bixby) did on the old Incredible Hulk show.

Huh? Wait a second, that’s not really part of the classic Superman story is it? Sure doesn’t feel like it should be here, but whatever. In this version, Lois Lane figures out that Clark Kent has powers before he even puts on the suit; she never knows Clark and Superman as 2 different people. I’m fine with that – it would be too much to ask for an ace investigative reporter (one that’s won the Pulitzer Prize, mind you) to be fooled by a pair of glasses, so they don’t introduce the element of our hero working at the newspaper until the end. Makes me miss the comically over-sized glasses that Christopher Reeve wore as Clark back in the original ‘70s-‘80s SUPERMAN movies, but, oh well.

Also unlike that run of movies, that got progressively worse (the first two were great, the third and fourth ones, not so much), there’s no Fortress of Solitude made out of new age crystals, no Lex Luthor, and barely any humor.

Shannon is perfectly cast as General Zod (stepping into the mighty shoes worn by Terrence Stamp in SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE and SUPERMAN II), but it’s an exposition-heavy role, with the actor looking like he’s in a permanent bad mood (resembling grumpy cat at times), but it’s still one of the more successful elements on display in MAN OF STEEL, because of how invested Shannon is in it.

Zod and his minions attack Metropolis, with tons of buildings getting destroyed (we don’t seeing many people dying but from what we see it’s impossible that there wasn’t a large death toll) and start taking over Earth so that they can make it New Krypton or something. The cityscape alien attack sequence was much better done in THE AVENGERS (not to mention SUPERMAN II), and the climatic one-on-one battle between Superman and Zod just has them pummeling each other from one set-piece to another with no excitement (they punch each other through buildings over and over).

Meanwhile Fishburne and a few other Daily Planet folks are running through the rubble, for some reason they’re some of the only survivors of the attack, but the film never took anytime to establish them as characters to care about.

The British-born Cavill makes for a fine Superman aesthetically, and he’s got the American accent down, but his is also a blank slate of a character that I had trouble forming any connection to. The charisma that Reeve had in the iconic role, and that Bryan Singer tried to capture with Reeve clone Brandon Routh in 2006’s SUPERMAN RETURNS is sorely missing, but that fault lies more with the writers/filmmakers than with the man in the cape.

One thread that really didn’t work for me had to do with the scrambled narrative that jumps around, and way too often to flashbacks of Earth dad Costner saying that the world isn’t ready for a man of incredible powers yet. They draw this out too long, when you know that the world is as ready as it’s ever going to be, and Costner’s death in a tornado, which his son could’ve saved him from, doesn’t make any sense.

In SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE, Glenn Ford as our hero’s adoptive father died much more poignantly from a heart attack – something Superman could never have saved him from (well, unless he spun the world back in time), and it had a richer meaning to his maturation; here the man’s death doesn’t teach any lesson except that he’s wrong and his son should’ve revealed himself much earlier. I really don’t get what they’re waiting for. The movie doesn’t give any discernible reason except to stretch out Superman’s angsty development and Costner’s part.

The dark gritty approach to the material, which undoubtedly came from Executive Producer Christopher Nolan, who shares a “story by” credit with Goyer, isn’t right for this area of the D.C. Comics universe. I’m not saying Superman should be nothing but sunny warmth, but there’s no triumphant thrill to seeing our hero save the day here – he doesn’t even show concern for the many who undoubtedly died in the huge devastation on Metropolis.

MAN OF STEEL is a by-the-numbers summer blockbuster wannabe that forgot to have any fun with its source material. Ultimately, it's a ginormously fussy film pulled in so many directions that it's un-engaging and dull. 

Technically, with its well chosen cast and vast array of nonstop visual effects, Snyder and crew have made a serviceable popcorn picture, but next time out (and with all the money that it has already made, there certainly will be a next time) I’m hoping they’ll remember to add more heart, humor, and actual heroism to this not quite re-booted franchise.

More later...

STATE OF PLAY: The Film Babble Blog Review

Taking a break from the heat on my Vegas vacation I found a theater (United Artists Showcase 8) not too far from my hotel and decided to take in: STATE OF PLAY (Dir. Kevin McDonald, 2009) Literally hitting the ground running with a foot chase through a rain drenched Washington DC night resulting in multiple murder, this adaptation of the six part 2003 British miniseries never lets up from its riveting opening. In the cold light of the next day we are introduced to a scruffy haggard looking Russell Crowe as a ace old school reporter (the type who brags about using a 16 year old computer) who buys coffee to get info from the police and makes jaded quips like: "I'll need to read a few blogs in order to form an opinion." A nice timely touch is to then pair him up with a blogger (Rachel McAdams) for his newspaper's online division. Crowe's long time buddy, a congressman played surprisingly solidly by Ben Affleck, is exposed as having had an affair with one of the previous night's victims (Maria Thayer - only seen in photos and cellphone footage) and, of course, something sinister lies in the shadows with an evil corporation possibly pulling the strings. Yes, it's a conspiracy movie with a "trust nobody" vibe that has many allusions to one of the all time greats, ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN with its Washington DC backdrop, intense walks and talks, doors slammed in journalist's faces, and even a shadowy parking garage sequence. The Watergate hotel gets more than just a visual shout out too. Crowe gets many terse tongue lashes from his English editor played beautifully by Helen Mirren in the cluttered newsroom of the fictional "The Washington Globe" (same typeface as The Washington Post in case one misses the connection) while he and McAdams go from lead to lead. For the up to par supporting cast we've got Robin Wright Penn as Affleck's estranged wife, Jeff Daniels as a smarmy Senior Representative, Viola Davis (DOUBT) as a no nonsense pathologist, and a stand-out Jason Bateman as a bisexual fetish club promoter addicted to OxyContin. There are contrivances and clichés galore but the movie moves so fast with such entertaining zeal that none of that matters. Crowe puts in a cantakerously crafted performance that's strong enough to conceal that we are given virtually nothing of backstory of his character, while McAdams appealingly works those "dewey eyed cub reporter's eyes" (as Mirren sneeringly calls them at one point) uping the ante from her previous one note roles like the love interest in WEDDING CRASHERS. There is spare but weighty commentary on the fate of print media in the era of the internets - particularly the likening of bloggers to bloodsuckers (ouch!). Through this all the supreme structure of the film is what really makes it tick. It's played straight with a tightened pace that doesn't ever fall out of focus. Maybe it's not quite in the league of the classic 70's political thrillers it pays ample homage to, but STATE OF PLAY is a worthy addition to the conspiracy cinema canon. More later...

AMERICAN GANGSTER #1 - Take that, BEE MOVIE!

Nice to see this country gets something right for a change. Ignoring the gigantic marketing blitz for BEE MOVIE moviegoers instead chose a gritty violent crime drama and I doubt there are many regrets for it. So let's take a look at that choice:

AMERICAN GANGSTER (Dir. Ridley Scott, 2007) In this fictionalized account of real events Denzel Washington portrays Frank Lucas, a real life Harlem heroin kingpin in the late 60's to mid 70's who was originally from my home-state (he was born in Washington, North Carolina and there are scenes set in Greensboro). Lucas rules the streets by smuggling drugs from Vietnam in soldier's caskets therefore eliminating the middleman and turning a huge profit. Detective Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe - not as good as in 3:10 TO YUMA but solid nonetheless) is hot on Lucas's trail and desperately trying to keep his "honest cop" status afloat in a sea of corruption. Rounding out the cast is one such corrupt cop played by a slicker than sin Josh Brolin, Chiwetel Ejiofor as Lucas's brother, Cuba Gooding Jr. in a juicy bit-part, and Ruby Dee as Mama Lucas. Being that it's Ridley Scott you've got to expect at least one shining rain drenched street at night and it's there in a effective drive-by shooting scene.

There has been criticism of Crowe's character being given too large a part just so that he could function for audiences as a white counter point to Washington but I think that's too cynical. Roberts is a necessary real-life figure and he provides us with a lot of the inner-working background while relieving us of an entire movie dominated by Lucas's scary presence. Not that that would be so bad - Denzel Washington is excellent as ever; all polite power and laid-back cunning confidence but to be honest it's the kind of performance he could do in his sleep. AMERICAN GANGSTER is getting a lot of unfair comparisons to other mob movie classics such as THE GODFATHER, SCARFACE, and even Blaxploitation touchstone SUPER FLY (the New York Magazine article that the film was based in part on was entitled "The Return Of Superfly"). But these are easy cheap shots though I'll say as those films go this is more along the lines of DONNIE BRASCO than GOODFELLAS. I don't predict any Oscar nominations for this film and it most likely won't make my top ten films of 2007 (there's too much strong competition) but it's well crafted, extremely well acted, and offers lots to sink one's teeth into. So forget that silly Seinfeld-voiced animated bee flick and join your fellow Americans at the multiplex.

More later...

Westerns, Lovers In Paris And Media Circuses Are Doing Fine Thank You

"I feel like Dorothy - everything just turned to color."
- Don Draper (Jon Hamm) Mad Men (AMC Original Series 2007)

Got some recent moviegoing to babble 'bout so let's get at it :

3:10 TO YUMA (Dir. James Mangold, 2007) I don’t want to spend much of this review addressing the state of the modern Western – I’ll just say that it’s a genre that will never die (see Deadwood and the upcoming THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES). Those prematurely eulogizing it are discounting the allure of that period of history - tales with a backdrop of a lawless land that stretches to infinity will always be told. The tale told in James Mangold’s (WALK THE LINE) 3:10 TO YUMA is told very well – especially for a remake. I haven’t seen the original so I can’t compare but reasonably I am very skeptical about remakes so I was pleasantly surprised at how strong a movie this was. Christian Bale plays a down on his luck rancher who takes on the daunting task of transporting a villainous fast drawing outlaw (Russell Crowe) across country. The film’s title is their destination – a scheduled train with a prison car that will supposedly take Crowe to be tried and hung.

Obstacles aplenty surround Bale and his posse (including a wonderfully grizzled Peter Fonda) – Crowe’s murderous gang close behind set on freeing him, dangerous Indian territory, and the conniving overly confident Crowe himself. As Ben Wade –you’ll know him from the trail of the dead – Crowe does a career best performance. He perfects the kind of evil man who laughs through bloody teeth when being punched in the face, quotes ominous Bible passages, and never flickers for an instant in any hostile predicament. As an actor though he’s surely met his match with Christian Bale. Adding another sharp intense performance to an incredibly impressive roster, Bale really shines and should be rewarded come Oscar time. Far more than a genre exercise or a modernized re-imagining – 3:10 TO YUMA is one of the best films of the year. So forget about all the “death of the Western” diatribes and just savor the scenery.

2 DAYS IN PARIS (Dir. Julie Delphy, 2007) Looks at a distance like another BEFORE SUNRISE/SUNSET love story travelogue but a closer look reveals that Delphy's directorial debut is fairly removed from those chatfests. Of course there is considerable Richard Linklater influence in the dialogue and use of tracking shots but there is an offbeat dynamic that is all Delphy. The premise is simple - a couple (Delphy, Adam Goldberg) spend a few days in the city of love during what appears to be a rough patch in their 2 year old relationship. She's a photographer; he's an interior decorator though during this trip he's the one taking pictures - a lot of pictures. They seem to run into a former lover of Delphy's at every turn which makes the already extremely neurotic Goldberg's heavily tatooed skin crawl. Goldberg's Woody Allenesque asides provide the humor throughout especially in one of the best scenes - a dinner with Delphy's real-life parents (Albert Delphy & Marie Pillet). Some funny affecting moments but maybe would've worked better as a short film - even at 96 minutes it feels a bit drawn out. Better yet - condense the best moments from 2 DAYS IN PARIS into a montage and it would've made a kick ass segment of PARIS JE T'AIME! Nah, I'm just blogging out of my ass - Delphy's film may be only fair but as a first time effort it's on the good end of fair.

FILM BABBLE DVD PICK OF THE MONTH
ACE IN THE HOLE * (Dir. Billy Wilder, 1951) It's amazing that Wilder's follow-up to the inarguable classic SUNSET BLVD. has been missing in action (never available on home video until now) and undocumented for so many years. I've picked up movie guides from the last decade that didn't have a listing for it (not even in Wilder's filmography!) and when I've mentioned it to my other film buff friends it got no recognition. Well, this spiffy new Criterion collection edition should change all that. Kirk Douglas stars as a wild-eyed hard drinking newspaper man who arrives in Albuquerque, New Mexico to revive his troubled career. Stopping at a trading post on the way to a rattlesnake hunt he hears of a man (Paul Benedict) trapped in a mine because of a cave collapse. He milks the story for all its worth even delaying the man's rescue and it becomes the definition - possibly where the phrase came from - of a media circus. With Douglas at his most intensely vicious and Wilder's gloriously cynical but insightful script - it's so nice that this film comes back to bite us on the ass and show us how little has changed. After watching it I turned off the DVD player to see pundit after pundit espouse about the latest O.J. caper on cable. Hard to look at that pointless blather the same way again after seeing ACE IN THE HOLE. You can't get a higher film babble recommendation than this.

* After its original poorly received release the film was re-titled THE BIG CARNIVAL and re-released. Apparently this didn't help - the film was still deemed too dark and it failed to gain an audience. Until now...

More later...