Cameron Diaz hasn’t had much luck at the box office over the past decade. Sure, there are the Shrek films, but those are animated and rely on a popular character among children. Other than these financial successes, there have been a string of moderate wins: What Happens in Vegas, Knight & Day (and overlooked absolute gem, no doubt hurt by the public’s unsure feelings towards the always terrific Tom Cruise), and The Green Hornet. There have also been some low faring pictures in which she was outstanding: the criminally overlooked In Her Shoes ( a perfect performance and film that didn’t hit with moviegoers) and ones where she was the weaker half: The Holiday (one of Nancy Myers best) . And then there have been the total bombs: My Sister’s Keeper, and the horrendous The Box. In fact, Diaz’s last legitimate financial hit was the concept film Charlie’s Angels in 2000, and Scorsese’s Gangs of New York in 2002 had prestige.

So, all in all, Cam needed a hit.

Well, she got one. This past weekend, Bad Teacher opened to $31.6 million and showed that the raunchy female comedy is what people want to see these days. They have tired of the romantic female – driven films that I have defended and still appreciate. What is interesting about Bad Teacher is that even though people are giving Bridesmaids credit for moving this genre forward, it was actually Cameron Diaz who, thirteen years ago, was the first woman to prove that people like to see their chicks get down and dirty in There’s Something About Mary. We have come full circle and ultimately, this is Cameron’s trademark, not Kristen Wiig’s.

In Bad Teacher, Diaz plays a woman who would do anything for money and riches. When her fiance’s mother prevents him from marrying Diaz’s Elizabeth Halsey, she has no choice to go back to work as a teacher. For her, this means showing the kids movies day in and day out, smoking weed during breaks, and mainlining the occasional airplane shot with her back turned to the class. She doesn’t participate in her commitments and shows a general lack of anything resembling human emotion practically the whole movie. When watch heir Scott Delacorte (Justin Timberlake) comes to teach, she turns on the charm in hopes of lassoing another sugar daddy. She sees that his ex-girlfriend had an enormous rack, so she sets her new mission on raising money through school activities to get a boob job.

While all of this is happening, another suitor comes into view, Russell Gettis (Jason Segel), the school gym teacher. Elizabeth obviously blows him off time and time again because she considers his profession unacceptable. This love triangle becomes a love quad when Elizabeth’s school nemesis Amy Squirrel (the ingratiatingly obnoxious Lucy Punch) catches Scott’s attention and then it’s on. Histrionics ensue, sabotage occurs, and we get a hilarious sexy car wash scene straight out of a Whitesnake video.

Diaz gets her flirt on

Diaz charms the audience to death, even though we could care less if she will end up happy. Elizabeth is not a human character, she is a caricature whose main purpose is to see how far it can push the audience into enjoyable submission. Timberlake tries, but his characters is just so unlikeable, not even given any funny lines, only one uncomfortably long dry-humping scene. The likeable lunk here is Segel, who always brings his likeability and Eeyore-esque charm to everything he does. It’s also interesting to see no onscreen chemistry exists between one time real-life paramours Diaz and Timberlake, but it is there between her and Segel.

There is also a hilarious sequence involving scene stealer Thomas Lennon, who plays a school official who Elizabeth tries to seduce to get a copy of the state test in order to have the highest scoring class in exchange for a cash prize. Every film Lennon is in, he is a stand out, and this remains the case here.

Go see Bad Teacher for the fun of it. Here is a film that doesn’t take itself too seriously – a film where there is no reality, there are no boundaries, and you have Eric Stonestreet playing a Harley dude.

Filed under: Bad Ass Heroine, Comedy, Raunch Com, silver screen by admin
Tags: « Bad Teacher - Cameron Diaz - Eric Stonestreet - Jason Segel - Justin Timberlake - Raunchy Comedy - There's Something About Mary - Thomas Lennon - Tom Cruise »
No Comments »

Awhile back, I wrote about what was wrong with the face of the romantic comedy in my post, The RomCom Conundrum. Part of what I said in the article was the fact that there are less and less likeable actors these days that make you even want to watch them have fun and get laughs in comedies. Part of this is due to the fact that the internet makes every star so accessible, that we start to see what narcissistic jerks most of them are. Yea, it’s true. The other part of what makes the romantic comedy less than enjoyable to watch these days is how incredibly insipid a lot of them are. Take The Ugly Truth, for instance. Holy Hot Mess.

But while brainless RomComs run abound, there are plenty that are enjoyable and endearing. Critics, though, fail these days to make the distinction between a breezy and fun RomCom and a terrible one. They look at the names on the marquee, and it seems that if it lists Kate Hudson, Katherine Heigl (okay, Killers was awful, too), or even Drew Barrymore, they automatically decide to give the film a horrendous review before it is even screened. The last RomCom I can recall that got a rave review was 500 Days of Summer. And guess what? It wasn’t that great. But since it has indie names above the marquee, the critics decided it was “deep” and “took a fresh perspective.” But Zooey Deschanel’s character was flat out unlikeable. So were many parts of the movie.

So I am here today to defend the likes of No Strings, Life As We Know It, Going the Distance, He’s Just Not That Into You, etc… and most recently, Something Borrowed. Something Borrowed is at 16% approval on Rotten Tomatoes and it’s absolutely ridiculous. Granted, the film has a couple of pacing problems and some of the plot points are not quite fleshed out (for example, what does Kate Hudson’s character, Darcy, do professionally?), but overall it was a good film.

Hudson makes the "bitch" one to love

Kate Hudson stars as Darcy Rhone who is engaged to her best friend, Rachel’s (Ginnifer Goodwin) friend from law school, Dex (Colin Egglesfield). Little does she know that Rachel has harbored feelings for Dex even before Darcy crashed their bar “date” one night and took Dex away from Rachel. Throw in the always fabulous John Krasinski as Rachel’s friend and conscience, Ethan, and you have a nice set up for a story. The movie kicks off with Rachel and Dex hooking up at the beginning, and then we follow Rachel on her ethical journey of what to do and what not to do.

What actually makes this a story worth watching are the questions and dilemmas the film raises. There is not necessarily a right or wrong answer as to the what the characters should do. All of them are likeable, though Rachel does get a tab needy and weepy from time to time. What makes the film really good is the impressively dynamic performance from Kate Hudson. She completely steals the movie away from Goodwin and Egglesfield. Her selfish and narcissistic Darcy is a wonder to behold and she manages to make a complete bitch of a friend likeable, almost loveable. The only one onscreen that can compete with here, almost, is Krasinski. His comic timing is absolutely impeccable. When is HE going to get his starring role? (License to Wed doesn’t count).

This is a story that people really can relate to on so many levels – not just if you have ever deceived a best friend. It’s a film that makes you appreciate your own friends and confidants in your life and explores how something, at any moment, can be a game changer. People you thought you would be close to forever can be gone in a minute due to any trivial matter. And then people you never thought you would hold in such a close regard are by your side for the long haul.

Click to watch

All in all, my point is this: Critics, quit killing the RomCom genre. Not all of them are bad. Just because an actor or actress chooses to reroute their career and pick films that appeal to them that may be lighter in fare does not make them a shallow actor. Many strong performances in RomComs as of late have been fantastic. Josh Duhamel was hilarious in Life As We Know It as well as he and Heigl having great chemistry, Ashton Kutcher gave a strong lovelorn performance in No Strings, and Drew Barrymore and Justin Long gave engaging performances in Going The Distance. Just because they don’t “stretch” and try to become a “masterpiece” doesn’t mean they aren’t worthy. They have lessons and pose questions and make you actually be able to relate the movie to instances in your own life.

And that is worth a whole lot more sometimes. That, and a good girly dance scene.

Filed under: Comedy, Kate Hudson, Opinion, Relationships, Romantic Comedy, silver screen, Taking Critics to Task by admin
Tags: « Colin Egglesfield - Drew Barrymore - Ginnifer Goodwin - John Krasinski - Kate Hudson - Katherine Heigl - Romantic Comedy - RomCom »
No Comments »

With Elizabeth Taylor’s passing today, I have poured over countless blog entries, tributes, and role recaps. What has surprised me and through all of these, I have not come across one that points out the fact that she was one of the last of the true legends that was still alive. If you check out AFI’s list of top screen icons of all time, Dame Elizabeth is listed at number seven. If you look over both genders of the list, and start to think about it – one realizes that there are now only four remaining: Kirk Douglas, Sidney Poitier, Lauren Bacall, and Sophia Loren.

One would argue that Elizabeth Taylor was obviously the most high profile of all of these legends, and that is to take nothing away from their individual accomplishments. It is merely to point out that in the day in age of the film industry, though we have been without these icons on the screen, there still remained some comfort when they showed up for various memorable appearances, such as Kirk Douglas’ hilarious bit at the Oscars this year. As an audience, we found this reassurance that Hollywood royalty was still present and we got goosebumps when we were awarded these glorious moments.

Now, with Elizabeth Taylor’s passing, we are reminded that it coming closer and closer to the time when none of the Hollywood legends we hold close and dear will be around. They will, then, live solely in those films that we own – in those still frames that we can can still view when we want to revisit what Hollywood hopefully will be once again.

Going forward, as it has been for some time now, it remains unclear when Hollywood will ever regain the integrity of film making it held in the Golden Age. Yes, one would argue that I’m being nostalgic and everything is wonderful in hindsight. What I say in response is take out your – or rent a – copy of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof or Gone With the Wind. I dare you not to get caught up in the intensity of those worlds that were created by the masters. Now we have junk like Due Date and The Romantics getting scripts passed and greenlit. When will the return of the true movie star be upon us? Right now, We’ll have to settle for the current “greats” like Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet.

And while we see a glimpse of glamour and excitement in current stars from time to time, I’ll be waiting around until the Oscars next year, hoping Ms. Bacall comes down the stage and lays some of her famous biting sarcasm and makes my goosebumps rise.

Elizabeth Taylor – thanks for always reminding us how to hold our heads up high. Cheers.

Filed under: Commentary, Legends, Opinion by admin
Tags: « American Film Institute - Elizabeth Taylor - Screen Legend - silver screen »
No Comments »

I can’t believe I’m saying it. But I’m going to. The Social Network is, in fact, one of the best films of the year. It might even be one of the best films of the decade. And hey, I only joined the actual website a couple years ago and made fun of this film when I first heard about it. “They’re making a movie about Facebook? Are you f—ing kidding me?”

But here it is, folks. And it is here to deliver and knock you upside the heads. This is a film that is truly fascinating. And the most fascinating aspect of this movie is that what takes our breath away is not the “hot” actors in the movie. It is not the “action” that is to die for, since there is none. It’s not the amazing “CGI.” It is, pure and simple, the beautiful and engaging dynamics of the characters and their interactions and motivations. It is the dialogue, written by Aaron Sorkin, that completely takes over your mind and enthralls you. It is a wonder to behold. This is a picture where we listen. We process. We engage. We watch. We consider. Can you think of the last time this has happened?

What many people are focusing on about this film is whether or not Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg (Jess Eisenberg is revelatory in this iconic role) is actually “this bad.” Guess what? That’s not the point. We know from the outset that the initial premise of his girlfriend dumping him in a restaurant is fiction and that Sorkin wrote this in part to give the audience something to latch onto for why Zuckerberg’s supposed desire  to fit in to his elitist and pompous surroundings at Harvard University grew into a disease to control our social outlook in the new age of technology.

Over the course of the film, the audience is given the opportunity to weigh for themselves whether Zuckerberg screwed over two different entities: his best friend Eduardo Saverin (played by an excellent Andrew Garfield) and the Winklevoss twins (both portrayed by a bland and uninteresting Armie Hammer with the help of a little bit of CGI – hey what movie doesn’t have it these days?). Personally, I found myself 80% on Zuckerberg’s side. I mean, hey, after all, this was the guy who actually programmed the site and all three of the adversarial characters, especially Saverin, make some truly idiotic decisions regarding their financial security in terms of the situation. It becomes truly baffling when you take into account their majors and where they are studying!

Garfield is sympathetic in his turn as Eduardo Saverin

Three performances stand out in this film. The first one is Jesse Eisenberg’s. His turn as Mark Zuckerberg is swaggering, appalling, and heroic. I say heroic because even though Sorkin does is darndest to portray him as the villain, his wit and intelligence are so captivating that he schools every opponent he comes across in a game of verbal warfare that is absolutely stimulating. Garfield, who we will see don Spidey’s suit soon, is sympathetic and endearing. He starts out with a swagger that does not match Eisenberg’s but is soon taken down so many pegs, we cannot help but rush to his side in his defeat. And as sly opportunist Sean Parker, co-founder of Napster, Justin Timberlake finally accomplishes the charisma of which he has attempted in many a film before, but has never mastered until now. He is electric. You do not even recognize him when he first appears on screen. He doesn’t alter his appearance at all, he just sinks so deep into character that he embodies the sleaze and pathos. Bravo (I wonder if Jess Biel is jealous somewhere because she has never mustered a performance like this in her numerous years of practice in her “craft”).

Eisenberg and Timberlake are breathtaking to watch

The Social Network is a film about ethics. How far would you go to secure your invention? Is it your invention? Is anything truly ever an invention? Or does it always draw a bit from those that have gone before? Look at the film industry. In an age where sequels and remakes rule, it doesn’t seem as though anything is absolutely brand new and an entity of its own. Well guess what? The Social Network actually is. This is a movie that encapsulates the age of the internet (something the above average and underrated 2008 film August with Josh Hartnett attempted to do, and only halfway succeeded) like no other film has done.

This is a landmark picture. I’m not one to condone social networking, as I think that it ultimately drives us away from one another. We don’t talk on the phone anymore, we see less of each other, talk less, write email and text more. But its importance cannot be thrown aside. In years to come this will be the film that will define an era. And that era is now. So go actually talk to someone before it’s too late and Zuckerberg has found a way to actually take over the world.

Filed under: Career Revelation, Killer Dialogue, Oscars, silver screen by admin
Tags: « Aaron Sorkin - Andrew Garfield - Jesse Eisenberg - Justin Timberlake - The Social Network »
3 Comments »

The Town is a movie where you immediately are enthralled. Your senses and self awareness are sucked into a vacuum that belongs to Ben Affleck and the thrill ride that he has put on the screen for you to enjoy. No, for you to invest in. Because invested you become. Boy, do you. You care about these thieves. You care about their back story. Whether it be one of pain, one of remorse, or one of regret and immediacy, you are a captive audience from the get go.

Ben Affleck continues to impress in his second directorial effort

Ben Affleck plays Doug Macray, a bank robber by day, and gravel scraper also by day when he isn’t robbing banks. Jeremy Renner is Jem, his “best friend and brother,” though we quickly learn that these terms do not mean the same thing in our world as they do in Charlestown, MA, where these characters reside. Blake Lively is Jem’s sister Krista, a floozy and addict that used to be involved with Doug for most of her life (the age difference is surprisingly easy to suspend here) and she is perhaps the central cornerstone to represent the town these characters pledge their loyalty to. Except, at this point for Macray. He wants to get out. He wants to start anew. And we believe him.

After a bank heist goes mostly to plan, one minor trip of the silent alarm causes Jem to snatch the bank manager, Claire (Rebecca Hall), for an insurance policy during their getaway. What blossoms from this glitch is a romance between Doug and Claire while he is tailing her in order to ensure that she knows nothing and is not giving the F.B.I. investigator Frawley (a surprisingly weak Jon Hamm) any information. The romance is convincing and the chemistry Hall and Affleck develop is genuine and warm.

Of course, the truth comes to light along the way and everything must be pledged out in the open. Jem makes his stance known, revealing the secret of why he was in prison for nine years. Doug makes his devotion towards Claire absolute, while Krista makes a last desperate plea for Doug’s affection. Frawley’s motives are arbitrary from the beginning.

The Town borrows largely from the atmosphere Heat set up about fifteen years ago (can you believe it’s been that long!!!) and the movie benefits from this serious and anticipatory tone. The dialogue is spot on and the interaction between the characters is emotional. Whether these dynamics be between the team of felons, or the romantic angles, the audience is waiting for what is to follow. What repercussions we are to wade through?

Affleck should be more than pleased than what he has done with the script, which was written solely by him. He should be even more impressed with his direction. The tightness of shots and the authenticity he brings to realizing this setting are breathtaking. His use of extras that actually come from Charlestown and the familiarity which he obviously should bring to this film are all key elements for bringing the viewers staunchly into this setting. He mutes the sound during sections of key scenes. This is a very effective ploy to engage the audience and get their adrenaline pumping. Here, in The Town, he is a focused director. More invested than he was in Gone Baby Gone, Affleck shows a true spirit in his work and a love for this project. His authenticity takes off in The Town and truly makes one excited for where he will go from here. (One tip – next film move away from this setting and explore somewhere else just as complex and destructive. No need to get pigeonholed in your career as a director like you did as an actor, something you are finally now managing to escape because of your creation of parts for you to play).

Lively is a thrill to watch

In the end, The Town draws a superb performance from Affleck. Here is where he has stepped back into the leading man’s shoes. Of course, he also coaxes intense turns from Hall, Renner, and most surprisingly, from Lively. Blake Lively has been tremendously horrendous for three years on the television show “Gossip Girl” as well as the simpy Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants movies. But here, Lively demonstrates a truly thrilling and exciting transformation into a woman who has nothing to live for and knows it. Her dedication to the part is inspiring as she is only on screen for maybe a total of fifteen minutes. But in that quarter hour, she shows that she knows her way around a role and leaves us chomping at the bit for what is in store for her career in this town.

Filed under: Action, Action Baby, Bad Ass Leading Men, Career Revelation, silver screen by admin
Tags: « Action Baby - Ben Affleck - Blake Lively - Jon Hamm - Rebecca Hall - The Town »
1 Comment »

Takers is one of those rare movies: pretty trite, but takes itself seriously enough so that the audience jumps into the car and goes along for the ride. There are obvious references to a plethora of films. These include True Romance, Heat, The Italian Job, Out of Sight, and Point Break among others. The fact that this film rips these movies off is not necessarily bad-it simply adds to the joyride. It shows us that this is a self-aware movie of the best kind. It just wants us to have fun and get engrossed in the testosterone. And let me tell you, it’s a blast.

Takers has about six main characters and is surprisingly able to give them all enough screen time to allow us to get familiar with each one. Matt Dillon plays the typical good cop with anger issues; his marriage has ended and his relationship with his daughter is not so strong. In one scene, he turns their day of bonding into a car chase with a suspect. Then there is the group of “Takers.” Idris Elba, always a soothing and masculine presence, is solid here, as a thief who also has the baggage of taking care of his drug addict sister. Hayden Christensen turns in an unexpectedly charismatic performance as the caustic and protective explosives expert. His performance here is the second best of his career; only his in Life as a House outshines this.

Others include Michael Ealy, who proves here why we should be on the lookout for him as a leading man in the future. And Paul Walker. Oh Paul Walker. I love the fact that he has made a solid career out of playing the same character in all of his movies. Yet, he is always engaging and enjoyable when implementing his bad ass factor. And Tip ‘T.I.’ Harris, here in his third film, proves a lively force, though his acting becomes parody in the final act.

The plot centers around Harris’ character getting out of jail after taking the fall for all the guys six years ago for a job gone wrong. He was left in a stairwell, shot, while the rest of the men got away. But because the code of crime holds strong for him, he does not give up anyone and serves his full sentence. Now he is back and ready to exact revenge. Without giving any huge plot points away, he sets up a complicated web to use everyone for his own gain. The way that this plays out is interesting and exciting, and we care about the characters the whole way through.

As is typical most times of these types of crime movies, we want the “bad” guys to get away with it and outsmart the cops. In this particular case, the reason we root for them to get away with it is because the story with the cops does not obtain the emotional investment of the audience the way the others’ stories do.

It really doesn’t matter because the core of the film is the way that these men navigate their own lives, and exist in the world of thievery. We get to hear their philosophies on how much time they take between jobs, how they go about conducting said jobs, and their sense of camaraderie. And the action.

The real key in the enjoyment of Takers, though, is the fact that the action sequences are phenomenal. There is a sequence in which Chris Brown’s character is chased by the cops and the stunts and action involved is unparalleled by anything I have seen in a very, very long time. The scene is intense and exhilarating. And, as I mentioned before, the scene where Paul Walker lays his bad-assery down, a la, Fast and Furious proportions is pretty great. The direction of the movie is solid and some of the shots evoke one’s sense to join these men in the ride.

All in all, this is a movie that is worth seeing. And I will also give it sincere props for not following the typical endings usually bestowed upon films like these. We usually think that we have everything figured out. But not so, in this case. This is a film that takes a typical premise where it rips off other films that have gone before and does the crime  genre proud due to great direction, phenomenal action, and charismatic performances. This is a movie that proves once again, why action films thrive and proves why more and more women are running from the schlocky romantic comedy genre and into the arms of “Guys Movies.” Right now, they are much more entertaining and empathetic than junk such as Eat, Pray, Love.

Filed under: Action, Bad Ass Leading Men, silver screen by admin
Tags: « Action - Bad Ass - Chris Brown - Hayden Christensen - Idris Elba - Michael Ealy - Paul Walker - Takers »
No Comments »