Lawless (2012)

If anyone thought Nick Cave would be adding a lighter side of life to his screenplays than his music: Look no further. This script is so bleak it might turn your stomach at times. The violence is absolutely grueling and the callousness absolute. It's been a while since I saw a film with such total disregard for human life and emotions. So good times then!

Though the script's main story isn't particularly original, it flows nicely, letting the story itself as well as the characters develop naturally. It also has nice internal logic. I like that. Furthermore there is no lollygagging and guys in pajamas whirling about with fancy weapons. Only mean men with fists, (rather dull) knives and guns. The end game reflects perfectly on that as a group of men stand in cover, fire every now and then, and die every now and then. It might not be mesmerizing in its effects but it is realistic and it adds perfectly to this film.

Why oh why... In a film where Tom Hardy is absolutely fantastic with his stoic calm, underplaying his
characters viciously violent tendencies, and Jason Clarke is so solid as his aggressive shortsighted brother. Where Guy Pearce is so evil you seriously can't believe he once was a four-eyed wimp begging Russel Crowe to stop pounding him. Pearce simply displays an utter disdain for the rednecks surrounding him and takes gleeful joy in hurting them in very sadistic manners. Where Mia Wasikowska shows she can be so much better than as Alice and where Gary Oldman, Noah Taylor and Jessica Chastain so aptly adds a little to almost every scene they're in. Why? Why would you add the absolutely, positively untalented Shia LaBeouf to that mix? He only has a single expression he can do perfectly: Dumbfounded. And he only needs it once. LaBeouf has been running around looking stressed and cowardly in three different Transformers installations, and despite all the dames he has probably nailed as a consequence of his fame and wealth, he still can't act to save a fish from... Hm. Whatever a fish needs saving from. Bigger fish I suppose. There's hardly a single scene that he brings anything to and quite frankly I'm amazed that the other actors are able to get anything from the scenes he's in (most of them).

As for scenes, there is a little standout-moment between Hardy and Chastain. A quiet, short scene of realization and great anguish for both. It really is a slight streak of genius from director Hillcoat, and I thank him for it.

A small deduction will have to be made for the character of Floyd Banner. Though crucial to the storyline, he drowns a bit and it seems strange that he needs to be there at all. I have to bring it up again, though. Tom Hardy is astonishing here and makes the film worth it all alone. So calm before the storm, without any buildup whatsoever before he dishes out the most brutal of punishments, well beyond what is necessary. But they cast LaBeouf  in the biggest part and that sinks this movie in many aspects. That and the stupid and extremely unnecessary voiceover in the last ten minutes.

Too bad. This could have been a truly great little western.

6/10

Red Heat (1988)

Nothing makes me miss the late, great John Belushi more than seeing his younger brother, James, on the big screen.

Oh well. This movie wants to show off the Governator in his prime. So what's more natural than starting off with a Turkish bath with a lot of nude body-builders (and for some absurd reason, petite women) and Arnie flexing his biceps over a stone from the oven before kicking the crap out of the only two fat-guys in the place out in the snow. The awesomeness has been established, and so they can move on to the directness with a mean streak. In a bar of course, tables breaking everywhere as Arnold demonstrates just how cool it is to be a Russian cop, rather than an American (The Miranda rights are - no kidding - a reoccurring joke in this flick).

Speaking of jokes: Some of the jokes are most amusing, if you have the right amount of testosterone. And by right, I mean a lot. So I laughed. Sue me. Even more peculiar: Arnie is the funniest guy in this flick.

There are a few riddles to solve, but it's done mostly with violence or very simple deductions. There is plenty of action, most of it made to fit Arnie's lack of martial arts and Belushi's general lack of fitness. So they shoot each other or slug it out. And the chicken-part, that I'll get back to shortly

For a film with very little brain, there is actually a lot of talent here. Not including the leads. No, seriously. I don't count those two. But Laurence Fishburne and the brilliant Peter Boyle is here. As is Brion James and Gina Gershon. Both better in other flicks.

Other than that, it follows the same buddy-cop pattern most of these flicks do: Very different cops meet. Very different cops hate each other's guts. Then very different cops are forced to work together. And towards the end very different cops are friends. In addition there is the early screw up, the yelling from the bosses and the cultural jokes. And most people hate cops, it would appear. The difference is though, that in this case, Arnie is really doing all the work. Belushi is his cop sidekick, contributing very little to the apprehension of our Georgian baddie. Or the film for that matter.

And to play chicken with buses as an endgame. Not at all a bad way to go.

It's not bad, it has entertainment. But the leads are not really good enough (Belushi in particular) and Walter Hill never was the director to demand a great script. Hence; mediocrity.


5/10

Sneakers (1992)

I do like a smart film, and Phil Alden Robinson's "Sneakers" is surely that.

This film actually has an (at the time) original story, with some cool characters. Hell, they did such a good job with the characters that Dan Aykroyd seems a plausible choice in a thriller, albeit a mostly lighthearted one.

In many ways, this is a predecessor to movies like "Oceans Twelve" (and it's sub-par sequels). It's a big heist, the good guys are of somewhat questionable moral fibre, there are many things going on on many levels, and it's light-hearted and cool in nature. Oh. And the casting is by ensemble. Redford, Aykroyd, Strathairn, River Phoenix, Sidney Poitier and Mary McDonnell head the cast and are fantastically flanked by Stephen Tobolowsky, Timothy Busfield, Eddie Jones and the late runners Ben Kingsley and James Earl Jones. They all fit the bill here and deliver apt performance to add depth and set up the humor.

The humor here is great, and the actors possess wonderful comedic timing for the most. An absolute necessity when you're trying to make something slick and cool.

As tech-thrillers go, this is a clever example, combining logics and panache with what was at the time a futuristic technology and some really cool gadgets. They create small and large challenges along the way and allow the viewer to see the process towards solution. Exciting and gratifying! The trip towards making Redford an "honorary blind person" is absolute genius.

James Horner has a tendency to build all his scores around a single theme. In this film he varies more on themes and less on instruments, but with great luck. The choral arrangements remind of Elfman, but other than that it is worth a listen on its own as well as laying a fine musical carpet for the film.

Alden Robinson does stretch the brutality a couple of times, considering the light tone of the film. The same goes for the seriousness of Kosmo's plan. But it's just inside the borders of what the film can take and adds a little extra. Ironically mostly humor. Kudos to Eddie Jones!

So next time you consider Clooney and Pitt on re-run; remember that this cast is much more credible and the movie as a whole simply better.

8/10

In the Line of Fire (1993)

This is a perfect example of thorough workmanship. It doesn't excel, it's not particularly innovative or original. It's just very well made in most aspects. A most underrated Eastwood-film.

Let's start with some correlation: The script is well written, allowing the characters to develop just the right amount, with room for thought and dialogue in between the suspense and the little action there is. With director Frankenheimer trusting his script and actors, he will invite the viewer to take that opportunity, making the film a better experience.

Fun Fact: At the time this film was made, it was considered somewhat of a feature to be able to work an old image of Eastwood into a film with John F. Kennedy. How things change.

Eastwood is great here, playing to his strengths, showing a bit more self-irony and warmth than his usual cops (perhaps due to the fact that he's not directing here). This is necessary for the great interplay with Rene Russo. This really is the kind of part she was made for and she makes Eastwood much more believable. Malkovich is absolutely outstanding, portraying the assassin with an underplayed serenity. His calm demeanor when killing a couple of hunter is absolutely terrifying, as is his tete-a-tete with Eastwood. Malkovich is intense both when he's in control, and in the short scene where Eastwood gets the better of him. In a brilliantly clever turn, the next phonecall between the two main characters is utterly reversed as the bereaved Eastwood reacts with fury to the smugness of the would-be assassin.

But as this films strength is the craftsmanship, it's the thoroughness of the casting that gets to you. The smaller part are cast with such taste and thought, you feel a bit sad for the films that pick 2 great leads and leave it at that. Gary Cole, Tobin Bell, John Heard and Fred D. Thompson never were big stars (small exception for Heard), but they add credibility to their scenes and allow Eastwood and Russo to shine.

Though Morricone's score is uninteresting when simply listened to, it serves the meticulousness of Malkovich well, adding suspense at scenes that could be considered stale otherwise. The same goes for the romantic scenes between Russo and Eastwood.

The suspense in this film is more in the tension than action, set-pieces and chasing and it serves the whole of the film well. Due to the quality of the actors, the script and the directing it's most unnerving. A smart tension beats a noisy one every time. Even the end game follows that formula. Two men in a dark elevator, trying to get that one split seconds advantage over the other to turn the game.

This film in no way revolutionized Hollywood or its genre, it's just a very good example of how you can make a thriller.

8/10

Ronin (1998)

I like the intro here. Small, seemingly insignificant actions, mistrust without words, facial expressions and a general feeling that something serious is about to happen. The "spy" feeling. I'm not so certain about the necessity of showing off all five headliners in the first 5 minutes though. One misses the feeling of keen intrigue. But that's nitpicking. The first fifteen minutes are brilliant, deNiro playing against a very strong cast, quietly trying to get an edge over the others in terms of information.

deNiro really is feisty here. Using just enough force and aggression (mostly verbal) to get his way almost every time. He even talks his newfound partner through a surgery of himself. Most macho, and a very good scene, with a smirk of a finish.

Now the rest of the cast. Well, one can not complain with regard to quantity. Not all deliver though. McElhone's Irish accent is not quite... well, Irish. And speaking of Irish. Sean Bean is a nervous whimpering wreck amongst some of the biggest pro's in the business. Daft! Skarsgard is good though, and extra credit goes to Michael Lonsdale. Useless as a Bond-villain, but most underrated for character-parts.

Then there's a long car chase. Not bad, but still enough to kill a bit of the feeling that this is a smart spy-flick. And why, oh WHY must all car-chases have a market where they knock over food? Seriously, it's been done, done and overdone. There's another later. Fine scenes, but one is enough for me. The bonus is that it reminds me of The French Connection. To be inspired by greatness can be quite productive.

It would appear to take the spy thing a bit too far at times. Sure, there's supposed to be a doubt as to who actually has the upper hand, but if everyone keeps turning the tables on everybody, it's just tedious.

This flick is at times suspenseful and smart with decent action when it chooses that direction, but it lacks a bit in flow and it begs belief that deNiro's character risks screwing up multiple times for the Irish broad. There is simply very little in the story to support those choices. Furthermore, the ending seems a bit forced and quite low on credibility.

Not bad, but certainly unworthy of deNiro's efforts. And nowhere near following up the intriguing start.

6/10