Author: Darren Goodhart

American Gangster is based on a true story. In 1968, Harlem was essentially “ruled” by gangster Bumpy Johnson and with his death, his right-hand man, Frank Lucas was somewhat left to fend for himself, even though he had some small support from others. Frank figured that the only way to become his own man was to offer something that his competitors couldn’t, which was 100% pure heroin from Bangkok. And so in his own enterprising manner, Frank set out to do that, becoming even a greater source for an influx of heroin into the country than even the Mafia was. Richie Roberts was a New Jersey narcotics detective who was honest on his job to a fault, to a point that it even cost him his wife and son. Roberts was so honest, that after one particular incident, no one wanted to work with him, making him the perfect man to head up an east-coast federal narcotics division with men hand-picked by him to seek out the largest of drug transactions. Which eventually leads him to Frank Lucas…

And that’s a real nutshell compression of the story of American Gangster the latest film from director Ridley Scott and in my opinion anyway, his best film since Black Hawk Down. This almost seems like a different Ridley Scott at work here too. Scott is best known for a his visual stylings, and here he handles the material as matter-of-factly as possible, making a very fast-paced movie that owes much to the film-making style of the 70s, and in particular something like William Friedkin’s The French Connection.

American Gangster weighs in at nearly 2 hours and 40 minutes long, and it never, ever feels that long at all. This film moves like a bullet from the word “go” and there’s nary a moment of wasted film on the screen. This story is just absolutely engrossing and both of these men have such great depth, that you want to see what happens next and Scott handles it in fine fashion.

Scott certainly attracts name and great acting talent, and this movie is no exception. Denzel Washington is Frank Lucas and Russell Crowe plays Richie Roberts (the first time they’ve been on-screen together since a very fun film from back in the day called Virtuosity) and they’re both terrific here. I was remarking to a friend last night that it seems like Denzel Washington hasn’t aged a day since his time on St. Elsewhere which was now nearly 20 years ago. They’re backed up with lots of other great supporting folks here including Chiwetel Eijifor, Josh Brolin, Armand Assante, Cuba Gooding Jr., Carla Gugino and Ted Levine amongst others. Special note has to go to Josh Brolin who’s really good here as a New York narcotics officer who’s as crooked as they come, he really shines and stands out in the part.

I sort of see this movie as Scorsese-lite, basically seeming that it’s a lot like something Martin Scorsese would make, but backing away a bit from Scorsese’s style, and that’s not meant as a knock to the film at all. I think Ridley Scott, laying off of his visual stylings here is a good thing and the story that he has to work with is so good that it just serves him best to get in and tell that story without any fancy visual bells and whistles. The result is an engrossing film that moves like a bullet from start to finish. I’ve been on a pretty good streak of films lately, and yet again, with American Gangster, I’ve yet another movie that will have to be considered in my Best of 2007 list. This is absolutely a terrific film… don’t miss it.

Even after his death, and he is clearly dead at the start of the film, the legacy of the Jigsaw killer, John Kramer lives on, with more mysterious murders happening in which the victims are forced through some sort of personal mutilation to save themselves.  This becomes very personal to Rigg, the leader of the SWAT team who’s been in on the Jigsaw case from the very beginning.  Rigg, finds that he must now play Jigsaw’s game himself in order to save he woman he loves, and his way of doing so involves having to see the world the way Jigsaw does.  The mystery of the Jigsaw legacy deepens as two FBI agents become involved in the case, looking to track down whoever they believe Jigsaw’s confederate to be, including Kramer’s former wife…

Saw IV is of course the continuation of the series begun by James Wan and Leigh Whannell with Saw and this movie, like Saw 2 and Saw 3 before it is directed by returning director Darren Lynn Bousman. I, for one, enjoy these movies immensely, yeah, they’re over-the-top extreme horror, but they’re fun puzzle movies as well, all with great twist endings and Saw IV is no exception to that rule.  I actually call this the Godfather 2 of the Saw movies, because this is both a prequel and a sequel in one, telling us the story described above as well as flashing back to the origins of Jigsaw.

I give Bousman, Wan and Whannell huge credit here for turning this series into an absolute horror epic, especially with this fourth movie, which refers to events from all of the past films coming full circle here and even ready to move into new territory by it’s end.  Being a fan of this sort of extreme horror, I’m very much looking forward to the day when I can sit back and watch all four of these in a sitting.

Bousman’s direction is as stylish as it’s been from the start, and I do hope he gets the opportunity to one day ply his talents to a different movie, but it’s pretty clear to me that he’s enjoying what he’s setting up here as well.

As always, I tend to think that they get a good group of actors in these films, no big names, but solid talents who get the job done.  Returning here are actors Lyriq Bent as Rigg and Costas Mandylor as Detective Hoffman (seen in Saw 3 as well as other familiar faces from the series.  And of course, even though John Kramer is dead, veteran character actor Tobin Bell is back as Kramer in the flashback sequences and doing a fine job at that.  Special note has to be given to one of the new players here, TV actor Scott Patterson, who plays FBI agent Strahm.  He’s got a real serious Alec Baldwin type of intensity about him, and while I’m not that familiar with his TV work (the way I understand it, he’s been on Gilmore Girls and he’s done the voice of the King Faraday character on Justice League Unlimited), I definitely think the guy’s got a future in film.

I can only really recommend this film to those that have seen and enjoyed the prior three movies, it’s story is so integral to what has come before that anyone wanting to start the series with this film would be hopelessly lost trying to get caught up on all of the events, especially as they come together at the end.  But for you folks, like me, who are fans of the series, don’t hesitate for a moment… this is fun stuff, and it’ll make you want to watch everything again.

Michael Clayton is an attorney for the New York law firm of Kenner, Bach & Ledden and he’s what’s described as a “fixer” or a “janitor,” the type of guy who’s called in to handle the extremely unpleasant occurrences, he’s supposed to clean them up and keep them as quiet as possible (think of a more real world version of Winston Wolf, the character Harvey Keitel played in Pulp Fiction). A colleague of Michael’s, Arthur, does a similar job for an agricultural chemical company called UNorth, and Arthur has found himself at the end of his rope, living and breathing a class action suit against the company for the last six years, and knowing what he’s doing in defending the company when they knew there was a danger is the wrong thing to do- Arthur snaps, and Michael Clayton is brought in to handle this. Michael, of course has his own demons, and in trying to do what he can for his friend, starts to find that they weigh heavily on him as well… and of course, hijinks ensue…

That’s the basic premise to Michael Clayton the new movie from star George Clooney and director Tony Gilroy, who’s better known as a screen writer, in particular for the Jason Bourne movies. What they’ve delivered is a very taut legal thriller that also serves as a great character study. It’s also a great puzzle drama, that has you putting together the pieces as they unfold in a non-linear way. It doesn’t lead you by the hand and it certainly doesn’t ask you to turn you brain off as you’re watching it. It’s very much for mature audiences, not for anything of a violent or sexual nature, but more for it’s realistic portrayal of people who have jobs to do and having to face their consequences over those jobs.

Clooney is also a producer on the film as is his longtime collaborator Steven Soderbergh (together these two are one of my favorite teams of filmmakers working today), and that Soderbergh “feel” is certainly there in the filmmaking, right from the unobtrusive opening titles all the way up to a very bold way to end the film. Gilroy has certainly incorporated these tactics well, making a great thinking man’s film.

I think Clooney definitely wants to get an Oscar in his career and for the right reasons, delivering great performances, and he’s certainly on his game here, particularly in the film’s final moments where the ambiguity of Michael’s job starts to really weigh heavily into the film’s climax- it’s just a great, yet subtle, well rounded performance. He’s certainly backed up with some great top talent, including Tom Wilkinson as Arthur, Tilda Swinton as the lead counsel for UNorth and director and sometimes actor, Sydney Pollack as Bach, one of the partners of Kenner, Bach & Ledden. All three of them give great performances, and I wouldn’t at all be surprised to see either Wilkinson or Swinton get some sort of supporting actor nominations. Not to slight Pollack in the least, but Pollack is delivering the type of performance that he usually gives in films, he’s solid, and certainly has credibility, but it’s not the stretch that either Wilkinson or Swinton delivers.

Michael Clayton is an absolutely terrific film, and if you’re in the mood for some mature drama, it’s probably one of the best thing out there for you to see right now. Really well done and of course, highly recommended…

After a stunning opening credits sequence in which we’re presented with a simplified by-the-numbers version of the United States involvement in Arab Oil production, our scene shifts to an American community of oil workers in the Saudi city of Riyadh, where men posing as Saudi police charged with the protection of the Americans stage a devastating terrorist attack killing many of the people in the city and taking out any sort of FBI involvement present there. The FBI are charged with the protection and investigation of these sorts of American events abroad, and once word has come down, FBI forensics agent Ronald Flury and his team find their hands tied at even getting into Saudi Arabia to actually investigate what has happened. After a little political manipulation, they are allowed to send in four agents to investigate, but only at the whims of the Arabian Prince in charge. Flury and his team, and a Saudi police officer named Faris Al Ghazi, after some initial head-butting, come together to piece together what happened and who is responsible.

And with that, you have the basic premise of The Kingdom the newest movie from director (and actor- he’s in the film) Peter Berg, who amazed me with his prior efforts, The Rundown and Friday Night Lights and he amazes me again with The Kingdom delivering what I think is right up there with the very best that I’ve seen this year.

What’s amazing to me in ths film is that for once, the terrorists in the movie are actually Muslim terrorists, without any sort of secret-y, shadowy American involvement. It’s not handled in the cynical Hollywood way, which more often than not points the finger and says, “We have seen the enemy and the enemy is us” which is at this point getting to be the most tired cliche in movies now that try to say anything at all about American involvement in the Middle East. The last movie that I saw that handled this this fairly was United 93 which was definitely my favorite film of last year. Berg’s film is obviously a fictional account, but it seems well researched, and it’s more concerned with the obvious feelings of revenge that first set in after devastating events such as these occur. In other words, thank goodness, he doesn’t come in to politicize what has happened and as a result, you’ve got something here that handles this quite fairly showing all sorts of points of view. To somewhat simplify it, this sort of reminds of taking a movie like Syriana and crossing it with films like Peacemaker or Black Rain.

In some reviews that I’ve seen, this movie is sort of being indicted as the type of thing which will further an anti-Muslim resentment in the US, and I don’t think that’s so at all, because really it’s more than fair in showing the Saudi’s Prince of his region earnestness in wanting to solve this crime and even more so in it’s treatment of Faris, who becomes this character that you really give a damn about by the end of the film.

Berg has assembled as unlikely a team of actors working together in a project like this as I’ve ever seen. Jamie Foxx plays Agent Flury and he’s backed up by Chris Cooper, Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman as his team, and these four really work well together, there’s a “lived-in” quality to both their work and their personal relationships that feels honest. Jeremy Piven and Danny Huston play State department officials who more take on the cynical Hollywood side of these events, but they’re not at all force-fed to us, and their portrayals again feel right. I did not catch the name of the actor who plays Faris, but he does one hell of a job here, and his relationship with Foxx, which first starts as head-butting, and then moves to cooperation again feels just right.

Berg’s films have gotten more technically proficient with each one, and The Kingdom is no exception. He employs a handheld camera style (that of course others complain about yet again) that works here, and works dramatically well especially in later parts of the film where all sorts of chaos erupts. Danny Elfman provides a very cool more techno and drumbeat influenced score that also keeps the pace moving quite effectively.

I cannot recommend The Kingdom enough, from it’s riveting opening credits to the absolutely chilling last lines of the film, it’s one hell of a ride and one great story, superbly shown and acted out. Don’t miss this one…

In Alaska, some places undergo a natural phenomenon where they go a full month with absolutely no sunlight whatsoever, one of those places is the small town of Barrow, and right as this is about to occur, the small town is prepping for it with a full 80% of the town leaving for the period, just not being able to stand it. In the midst of this, the sheriff of the town Eben Oleson and the fire marshal, his wife, Stella, are going through their own personal crisis. But as darkness comes to Barrow, the population takes a slight increase as a group of vampires come to town, ready to feast and take full advantage of the natural phenomenon.

And that’s the basic premise to the new movie 30 Days of Night from director David Slade (who previously gave us the pedophile revenge/creepfest Hard Candy) and producer Sam Raimi, who’s obviously no stranger to horror films at all. This is adapted from the graphic novel by Steve Niles and Ben Templesmith, and as a comic reader, I’m sad to say that I’ve never read the book, so I’m really no judge about how faithful it is, but at the same time, it almost doesn’t matter to me, because what’s on-screen is one tremendous and very tense piece of horror entertainment right from the word “go.”

One thing I really admire is the approach taken with the vampires, they’re not these suave and sophisticated Euro-trash that’s all cliches (like seen in the Underworld films), though they are European, there’s still something quite different from what we’ve seen before, obviously looking like they’ve come from some refinement in their dress, their physical make-up is much more frightening, almost more of something out of Nosferatu and they speak purely in what sounds like a Slavic tongue, adding more to their intrigue.

The other thing that I really like with Slade’s very stylish film is that by it’s very set-up, it takes the vampire film and sort of crosses it with aspects of a zombie movie, with small groups of people barricading themselves and hiding from these monsters, all while trying to stick out the 30 days of terror in front of them. I tend to think that Zombie movies have a real immediacy about them that at least for me makes them really compelling to watch, and 30 Days of Night has that in spades.

There’s a good cast at work here, with Josh Hartnett and Melissa George playing Eben and Stella, and they’re solid as rocks here, being our eyes into this world of terror that’s come into their town. The always good Ben Foster (who’s chameleon abilities transform him into something different in every movie he’s in- compare him here to The Angel who he plays in X-Men 3) is suitably creepy as a drifter who becomes the key to the vampires coming into town. But special note has to go to Danny Huston, son of the great John Huston, who plays the leader of this pack of vampires, who’s just absolutely terrific in his part. Huston’s been showing up in a lot of movies lately and he’s always a great addition to any cast, but here… here he really stands out.

If you’re in the mood for a great horror movie, then really look no further than 30 Days of Night because this one is something that’s really special and just a hell of a lot of fun to watch. Here’s another one that definitely moves into consideration for my own Top 10 of 2007. Obviously, highly recommended… don’t miss it…

It’s been some time since Resident Evil: Apocalypse and now the T-Virus has spread globally, not just laying waste to humanity, but to the environment as well, leaving much of the planet a dusty, desert wasteland. Small pockets of humanity continue to survive, but always on the move. The Umbrella Corporation is attempting a cure with clone after clone being made of Alice, the woman that holds the key to survival with her paranormal abilities. Alice, is on the run on her own, having abandoned her comrades after their escape in Apocalypse because she is the one being tracked, not them. Carlos has hooked up with a caravan of survivors being led by Claire Redfield. And as things stand, paths are about to cross again, in a battle for survival as the Umbrella Corporation tightens their pursuit of the original Alice.

And in a nutshell, that’s the premise to Resident Evil: Extinction the third in the Resident Evil series of films and I’ve got to say, if you’ve seen the first two movies, this is some pretty cool entertainment. Very much well done work from director Russell Mulcahy (best known for his work on the first Highlander film) delivering a science fiction/horror adventure that plays out like a cross between The Road Warrior and Romero’s Dead films.

This is fun to watch right from the start, playing with all sorts of little facets from the first film and working in facets of the second, it’s a natural progression of events, very well-paced and well-acted (and keep in mind when I’m saying this, this isn’t trying to be any sort of Oscar-winner here)

Milla Jovavich is back as Alice, and as always, she’s just terrific, she looks fantastic and she pulls off the action quite well, with some of the moves happening so fast, one wonders if she’s the one at work in them, but it sure looks like her. Other cast members include Oded Fehr, returning as Carlos and Heroes’ Ali Larter as Claire Redfield, and all sorts of other good folks around, none of them household names by any means, but all of them convicted to their parts (unfortunately I cannot remember the name of the actor who plays the lead scientist for the Umbrella Corporation and our villain of the piece, but he is quite good).

If you like these films, and I most certainly do (though I have to admit, it took me a couple of viewings of Apocalypse to appreciate it more than I did on the first viewing), then really, you’re probably already planning to see Resident Evil: Extinction and more than likely, you’re going to have a great time with it, I know I did and I definitely look forward to owning this one down the road. Very much recommended, and especially to fans of the series…

In London, a young Russian girl goes into a pharmacy looking for help. She’s clearly disturbed and pregnant and soon falls unconscious, due to a disturbance in her pregnancy. Once taken to a hospital, she falls under the care of a midwife named Anna, and unfortunately the mother dies, but her daughter lives. Anna discovers a diary from the young woman and she’s wants to find out more about this young girl, to see if she has any other family or else her newborn baby might become lost within London’s system. Anna’s investigation leads her to the Russian mob operating in London, where she intrigues the owner of a Russian restaurant with her predicament and catches the eye of a driver named Nikolai…

And that’s the starting premise of David Cronenberg’s newest movie, which is unfortunately a godawful title for this film, sounding more like some sort of subtle flavored tea or a new scented douche as opposed to even remotely conveying much of anything that this film is about. Now that’s not saying it’s a bad movie, it’s not that by any means and in fact out of all of Cronenberg’s films, this one might be his most straightforward and mainstream piece yet.

This all plays out well, but a little too much by the book, and Cronenberg’s style has always been one of detachment (i.e. it’s a little hard to feel too much sympathy for a lot of his characters because they tend to have an almost clinical removal from conventional emotions) and while this does play out well, considering how mainstream this is, maybe Cronenberg should’ve tried for a little more emotional connection than usual.

An attachment does come, but it’s almost too little and too late (happening after the most violent scene in the movie, a vicious fight in a bath house that is probably the most violent thing I’ve seen in a movie all year). It still doesn’t mean that this isn’t a good movie, it is… but it could’ve been quite a bit better had Cronenberg changed up his style a bit. Another change that would’ve worked would’ve been to have upped the pace as well, this is a cautious and deliberate piece which is par for the course for Cronenberg, and it could’ve used a little more of him just taking a chance here or there.

He’s got a tremendous cast at work here, but unfortunately for them, these are all parts that aren’t any real challenge to them, they’ve all played these “types” before. The cast includes Viggo Mortenson as Nikolai (who looks to me more and more like a young Kirk Douglas all the time), Naomi Watts as Anna, Vincent Cassel as Kirill the slightly unbalanced son of the mob boss played by Armin Muehler-Stahl. Again, all are very solid in their roles, without any huge surprises (although to give credit, there is something that happens with one of them that I did not see coming, but it’s not as jolting as it could be).

It’s well made, well crafted, extremely well-acted and yet it misses some sort of punch or “oomph” or something that could’ve raised it up even more. Cronenberg does a fine job with Eastern Promises but it’s almost too safe for him, and it’s a shame, because he can deliver films with a punch, it’s just that most of those have always been in the horror genre. I still recommend this, but for a more patient viewer, if you’re demanding something new every other minute, then this probably won’t be your thing.

Based on Korean Legend, every five hundred years, fierce dragons and evil mystic warriors appear to keep a legend from being fulfilled, with it’s last attempt at fulfillment being thwarted in the year 1507, consigning the planet to again experience these creatures again, now in the year 2007. Two of these Korean guardians, now reincarnated as a young TV reporter and an antiques dealer, now do what they can to fulfill the legend, even as these creates begin to lay waste to the city of Los Angeles.

And believe me, D-War: Dragon Wars is even more convoluted than what I described above, it’s based on Korean legend anyway, and translated into modern times and in an American environment, it comes off as pretty silly, but with that said I still thought this was a fun movie, if even part of the fun was sitting back and enjoying the film in a Mystery Science Theatre 3000 fashion.

The real saving grace of the film is this absolutely incredible battle that goes on between American military forces and these mystic warriors and dragons across the streets of Los Angeles, it’s just fun as hell to watch and probably some of the very best special effects I’ve seen in a movie all year… and the timing of this is right in the film, because up to this point, this was all almost too silly to buy into before this goes down.

But as one of my friends said after we saw the film, “If I was 10 or 11 years old, this would be the coolest movie I’d ever seen” and he’s absolutely right, for a younger audience, this whole thing is probably pretty cool stuff and they wouldn’t be looking at the stuff I found laughable like Jason Behr playing this “seasoned” TV reporter who’s also an angst-ridden twenty-something cliche. Most of what I saw as the silly stuff of the film is in the American characters, and mostly then around Behr and the actress who’s playing Sarah, another reincarnated character important to the legend. Other American actors filling out the cast include Robert Forster, Chris Mulkey, Elizabeth Pena and Billy Gardell, and to give the Korean filmmakers credit, they don’t do anything to these characters that would make them seem stupid. Billy Gardell has the most comedic moments in the film and they’re totally fitting in with the events, and not done as any sort of audience pandering (like say Anthony Anderson in Transformers).

It’s fun stuff overall, but don’t go into this expecting it to be this serious genre film by any means. It’s got some brilliant effects, but at it’s core, it’s B-movie entertainment and there’s certainly nothing wrong with that at all. Go into it thinking that, and I’d expect most adult audiences will have a pretty good time, if you’ve got a small child though, they just might think it’s the coolest thing they’ve ever seen…

It’s the old west, after the Civil War. Dan Evans is a struggling rancher who’s lost his leg in the war (and now wears a prosthetic) and is losing the respect of his sons and his wife as he’s watching his ranch being taken from him over a debt he owes. Ben Wade is the leader of a vicious gang of killers who as we see them are attempting the robbery of a Pinkerton delivered money run. Their paths intersect as Dan is taking his sons into the town of Bisbee to try to settle what has happened to him. Dan and his sons see the outcome of the Pinkerton robbery and luckily get away from Wade and his gang only at Wade’s mercy. As the Wade mob moves into Bisbee, they send the sheriff there on a wild goose chase as to where their really at and then split their money and part ways. Again, Dan Evans comes back into contact with Wade, helping to ambush him, and have him captured. One of Wade’s mob sees this happen and rides off to get the rest of the gang to free Wade, and Dan signs on to with the remaining Pinkertons to deliver Ben Wade to justice by getting him on the 3:10 to Yuma train in the town of Contention.

And that’s the basic start of the new film from director James Mangold, 3:10 To Yuma, a remake of a western that I’ve never seen before, so this is new to me anyway. Though the way I understand it, this new movie, in the eyes of most critics is far better than the original and about a half hour longer too. For the most part, I think this is a pretty terrific film, but in it’s final moments it falls apart for me anyway, but I’ll get to that shortly in a spoiler section.

Mangold, who also gave us the excellent Cop Land is sort of on familiar ground again with this story. And he does a great job of setting things up, in particular with Dan Evans and his family. I think starting with Ben Wade, he does a nice job of setting him up as this undoubtedly dastardly rogue who uses his own charisma to get into the heads of his captors, but at it’s end, Wade takes a turn that at least to me doesn’t seem right, and as such didn’t sit well with me. But I’ll tell you, from what I could tell, with four of us there to see this together, I was the only one that it didn’t sit well with, and you may very well feel differently about it.

SPOILERS AHEAD

Where it doesn’t work for me is an alliance made between Dan and Ben at the very end to get Ben on the train. Although Ben’s gang gets into Contention, going through their own travails on the road to get there, and they’re ready to free him, Ben has taken a turn to want to give in to Dan’s desires to make himself a hero for his family, and let him turn him in, even saying that he will escape from Yuma, as he’s done so in the past. Dan gets shot down by Ben’s gang, right as he gets him on the train and then immediately Ben turns on his own gang, who has followed him in to rescue him and shoots them all down in cold blood, all in front of the eyes of Dan’s oldest son. There’s a point where Dan’s son has a gun right on Ben at the end, and has the opportunity to take him right out (which is what I think should’ve happened), but instead, Ben still turns himself in, gets on the train, and as the train departs, Ben gives out a whistle for his horse to come following, as though this sadistic killer will escape within minutes of the train leaving. I honestly thought that this man should’ve had to pay for his crimes by the end, because we are lead to believe that he’s committed some pretty horrible ones, but instead, through this one rancher, in all of these crimes, he’s now found “honor” of a sorts, and that makes it all right- again, your own mileage may vary with this- it didn’t work for me, but I’m a definite minority when it comes to that as well.

END SPOILERS

Mangold’s got a hell of a cast here, Christian Bale is Dan Evans and Russell Crowe is Ben Wade, and both do a great job with the material that in front of them (I just don’t agree with the end of that material). they’re backed up with some great supporting talent including Peter Fonda, Alan Tudyk, Gretchen Mol, and Ben Foster (Foster’s really good here as Charlie Prince, Wade’s second in his gang– Foster’s one of these guys who’s fun to watch in everything he does, and he’s a far cry away here from the character that he played in The X-Men, The Angel).

Mangold’s movie does look great though (and we saw it in digital projection), it sounds great and as I said, building towards it’s end, it’s a terrific film. I just don’t agree with it’s ending, but then that’s me too, and I’m in a definite minority with that opinion. You very well may enjoy it, and I certainly well give this a second look down the road on DVD…