Ain't Them Bodies Saints Review

“Ain’t Them Bodies Saints”--written and directed by David Lowery--is one of those movies you have to see to really appreciate. On paper, its premise doesn’t sound like anything new, and it isn’t very complex or intricately plotted. The film is purely an exercise in the craft of filmmaking; directing, editing, sound, cinematography and acting. The picture revolves around a young outlaw couple living in 1970’s Texas, (played by Rooney Mara and Casey Affleck) though before I move on I feel like I should mention that those expecting a raucous, action packed film about an outlaw couple should look elsewhere. As “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” takes a quiet, poetic and meditative look at these young outlaw’s lives.

We first meet our outlaw couple in the middle of shootout between them and the cops. The male outlaw Bob Muldoon (Affleck) decides to turn himself in and take the blame for everything that’s happened so that his wife Ruth (Mara) can raise their child—which she’s carrying at this time—in peace. Bob is sent to the slammer and Ruth given a house by an old friend Skerritt (Keith Carradine) where she takes care of her daughter Sylvie. One day, Bob escapes and sets out across Texas to reunite with Ruth, who meanwhile has befriended a shy cop named Patrick (Ben Foster). In this way “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” isn’t so much about Ruth and Bob’s lives as outlaws but about their lives after that period. They were wild, carefree outlaws once but now that they have a child it’s time for them to grow up and settle down.

As far as story goes, that’s pretty much it. Not much actually happens in the movie, in fact Lowery excludes a number of scenes and events one would usually see in an outlaw movie, Bob’s escape from prison for example. However “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” isn’t concerned with plot but with character and mood, as well as creating an atmosphere. And Lowery--along with his crew—certainly does create a wonderfully beautiful and dreamy atmosphere. The rich, soft cinematography by Bradford Young is absolutely gorgeous, giving the movie an old fashioned and glamorous look. Most of the outdoor scenes are either photographed at sunrise or sunset, giving them a slightly orange tinge. While the scenes that take place within crowded interiors have an amber glow.

Daniel Hart’s instrumental score mirrors the moods in the movie almost perfectly. Sometimes it’s calming and tranquil, and at other times it can be stirring and haunting. However, the instances when Lowery doesn’t use the music—and instead emphasizes the other non-diegetic sounds within the movie, like the wind, rain, birds, crickets or the sound of a distant train horn—are just as effective. Together these components create a feeling of comfort and nostalgia. The small town suburban neighborhood where Ruth and Sylvie live, the wide-open empty fields with deserted farmhouses and the cloudless (or nearly cloudless) orange skies evoke a simpler, bygone era. This atmosphere that Lowery creates is perhaps the best thing about the movie.

 

Although it also helps that the lead performances are strong. Mara (who has become one of the best young American actors) gives a subtle but powerful performance. Her Ruth is gentle and nurturing when it comes to taking care of her daughter but also tough and resilient. After all, she did participate in the criminal deeds along with her husband; she even shoots and injures a cop during the beginning shootout. She waits patiently for Bob to return so their family can be complete but at the same time she’s perfectly capable of raising Sylvie on her own.

Affleck is admittedly a little bland but this blandness actually works in his favor. Bob is not overly showy and arrogant and charismatic like most outlaw heroes but instead straightforward and plain. His love of Ruth and Sylvie (who he hasn’t met) seems to be the only thing motivating his actions as opposed to money or the thrill of committing crime. He’s a dreamer—when he reunites with Ruth and Sylvie he plans to take them away and build a farm somewhere—but doesn’t have a solid plan for fulfilling that dream and so he takes on each day one at a time without thinking of possible repercussions. Given the circumstances of the story Mara and Affleck only have a few moments together, but during those few delicate and intimate scenes (for example, at the beginning when they’re sitting in a pickup truck talking about their future as they wait for their criminal accomplice to show up) we’re completely convinced of their character’s relationship.

 “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” is a hard film to recommend. Most people simply won’t have the patience for it, or will feel frustrated that more doesn’t happen in it, and that’s perfectly fine. But at the same time, it’s refreshing to see something this simple and small scale but at the same time so beautiful and engaging. It goes to show that good filmmaking can elevate material that doesn’t sound all that interesting to begin with.

B+

The Spectacular Now Review

James Ponsoldt’s “The Spectacular Now” is a good little film that exists mainly to showcase two immense young acting talents: Shailene Woodley (who came to everyone’s attention when she played George Clooney’s daughter in “The Descendants”) and Miles Teller (“Rabbit Hole,” “Project X”). And they are very good indeed.  But the rest of film is admittedly slight and doesn’t leave you with much to remember.

Ponsoldt’s film is about teenage love; Teller plays high school senior Sutter, one of those talkie, life of the party guys who gives off the illusion that he’s more popular than he really is. He’s great at socializing and helping his buddies get laid but in actuality he doesn’t seem to have that many friends. On top of that he doesn’t really have long-term goals and ambitions. In other words he makes jokes and can talk a mile a minute but doesn’t “do” much of anything and he’s insecure. After his girlfriend Cassidy (Brie Larson) dumps him, he goes on an all night partying and drinking binge, where he encounters Amiee (Woodley). Amiee’s the shy, good girl who likes to read and has long-term goals and dreams. So of course Sutter’s friends think it’s a little strange that he takes a liking to her. Oh, and it’s important to mention that the two kids have baggage pertaining to their parents; Sutter is distant with his mom and doesn’t even know where his dad is; Amiee’s dad committed suicide so she has to help out her mom with work and bills.

That’s pretty much it as far as story is concerned. Like I said, this movie’s sole purpose is to showcase these young actors and without them I think it would be much much worse. Woodley, while not angst-y and rebellious as she was in “The Descendants” turns in a perfectly sweet performance as Amiee; everything from her awkward laughs to the matter of fact way she recites her lines. You believe every word of her. Teller is just as natural, the sarcastic comments flowing smoothly out of his mouth, like a teenage version of Jonah Hill. But, as the movie goes on, and the serious stuff starts happening, he’s up to the task. Watching them together is like watching two real eighteen year olds in a relationship.

If only there was more for them to do. The script by Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber (based on the novel by Tim Tharp) simply doesn’t go deep enough in growing the characters and the relationship. We do learn a little more about Sutter and his problems (he eventually tracks down his deadbeat father) but Amiee is left largely unexplored. In addition the script offers little in the way of surprises; I remember waiting anxiously on the edge of my seat for a surprise or a twist or something big to happen, like in last year’s excellent teen dramedy “Perks of Being a Wallflower” but I was sadly disappointed. The whole movie is just one big…sigh.

Ponsoldt’s previous feature was “Smashed” with Mary Elizabeth Winstead as an alcoholic teacher trying to beat the habit; “The Spectacular Now” also deals with alcoholism (Sutter likes to drink, not just at parties but also during a normal day from a flask and soon it rubs off on Amiee) but in a surprisingly subtle way. At first it just comes off as normal and casual teenage behavior, then it gradually becomes more and more noticeable and problematic. Now, obviously this is meant to give the story some serious weight and edge (otherwise the movie would be even more mundane) but Ponsoldt goes soft and so it comes off as gimmicky. Maybe he didn’t want to make it too intense since it’s about teenagers but Teller and Woodley are definitely able actors (Woodley did some pretty serious stuff in “Descendants” and Teller has been in two R-rated drinking/sex comedies).

In the end, “The Spectacular Now” earns major points because of the actors; without them people wouldn’t even be talking about the movie (it was warmly received at the 2013 Sundance film festival and has been getting mostly rave reviews since) but the movie on a whole feels too safe and trivial to make a lasting impact. As for Teller and Woodley though, they’ve got bright acting futures ahead of them.

B-

Kick Ass 2 Review

I’m conflicted when it comes to Jeff Wadlow’s “Kick Ass 2.” On just a pure entertainment level the movie is fantastic and it’s probably the most entertaining superhero movie I’ve seen in quite some time. Why? Because it’s violent and vulgar, two words that aren’t usually associated with those kinds of movies. As of late—especially with all of the Marvel superhero films, like “The Avengers,”--we’ve been subjected to one CGI, PG-13 lite superhero flick after another, and frankly it’s getting tiresome. That’s why it’s somewhat refreshing to see such a ridiculous ultra-violent one like “Kick Ass 2.” There are no blatant uses of CGI, no buildings destroyed, just good old-fashioned ass kicking.

The original “Kick Ass” from 2010 was also fairly violent and vulgar, even causing some controversy, though “Kick Ass 2” takes the violence and vulgarity to the next level. Even being someone who’s seen his fair share of super violent movies, I was a little shocked at how over-the-top it can be at times. But at the same time, considering the fact that Marvel is going to keep churning out the same kind of superhero mumbo jumbo for years to come,“Kick Ass” is a welcome alternative to that. The movie is energetic, exhilarating and it relishes its ultra violence, providing the audience with giddy pleasure.

All that said though, is that enough? Is it enough for a movie to just be purely entertaining? While watching the movie I was never bored but if all it has to offer is pure entertainment then it can never rise to the level of cinematic greatness. And this is where my conflict lies with “Kick Ass 2.” It can be massively entertaining but it does have character and story issues (specifically in the third act) and therefore doesn’t completely work.

I wasn’t as taken with the original “Kick Ass” as a lot of other people were but something I did appreciate about the movie was that it introduced a new subgenre, the Wannabe Superhero. The film’s title character Kick Ass, aka Dave (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) is your typical high school nobody. He can’t score with the girls; he hardly has any friends, and spends most of his time reading superhero comics. However, one day he decides to do something with his life. He makes a superhero outfit out of green and yellow cloth and using two regular sticks goes around town stopping (or attempting to stop) petty criminals and becomes a YouTube sensation. Character clichés aside the thing I like most about Kick Ass is that he wasn’t an actual superhero, just a regular guy (who’s maybe read too many comics) trying to make a difference. Often times Kick Ass was the one who got his ass kicked instead and would end up make a fool of himself.

Wadlow, for the most part, keeps that spirit alive in the new movie. Dave has bulked up considerably since the first outing, making him appear a little less wimpy but he still gets his ass kicked more often than not. This time he joins forces with a group of fellow wannabe superheroes. To name a few there’s Dr. Gravity, (Donald Faison) a fake physics teacher by day, wielder of a baseball bat that’s supposed to be a Gravity Pole by night, as well as Colonel Stars And Stripes (Jim Carrey, in an amusing and completely unrecognizable performance) a born again Mafia hit man. Together, along with all of the other pretend crusaders they form an Avengers/Justice League type group called group Justice Forever to do good in the city. Justice Forever and all of the scenes involving their antics is by far the best thing about “Kick Ass 2” because, again, it embodies the spirit of the original movie. Like Kick Ass the members don’t have super powers and they didn’t train for months in the Mountains of South Asia like Batman did. They’re just regular people wearing shabby homemade costumes (two of the members, a husband and wife team who lost their young son, wear matching track suits and fanny packs) trying to make a difference. Is it silly? Of course it is, it has to be. And during the first half the movie embraces that silliness, like during a scene where the wannabe’s are about to take down a gang of sex traffickers and we’re informed that one of the Justice Forever members isn’t coming along because they have “Book of Mormon tickets.” This self-awareness paired with intentionally the over-the-top violence is what makes “Kick Ass 2” immensely entertaining.

So far in this review I have yet to mention a very important piece of the “Kick Ass” universe and the main reason why the first one was so popular. That piece comes in the shape of a fifteen-year-old girl named Mindy better known as Hit Girl (Chloe Grace Moretz) who, since a very young age had been taught by her father to be a ruthless assassin. Contrary to most everyone else I didn’t care that much for Hit Girl. I wasn’t morally outraged by her character like the late critic Roger Ebert was but I didn’t think she had a lot of substance to her. When I first saw her come on screen wearing her purple leather suit and cape along with a purple wig, I thought “that’s kind of cool” but as the movie went on she failed to impress me beyond that initial “cool” moment. She’s a thirteen-year-old girl that trash talks and can effortlessly beat up and kill people, big deal. To me Hit Girl didn’t embody that Wannabe Super Hero spirit.

In “Kick Ass” 2 Wadlow (who wrote the script, based off of the comic books by Mark Millar and John Romita Jr.) tries to add more depth to her. She decides to give up the leather suit and wig and live a normal teenage life. She befriends a group of shallow popular girls at school (and these girls, by the way, are absolute monsters) and of course they end up humiliating her, so she decides to go back to her old life.

 This is where “Kick Ass 2” starts to run into problems; on the one hand this needs to be in the movie because otherwise Hit Girl would still be one note but on the other Wadlow’s handling of it all is so cliché.

This problem exposes an even bigger flaw associated with the entire “Kick Ass” premise. For how profane and violent it is, the movie still feels geared toward teenagers; after all, the main characters are adolescents themselves. And this juvenility holds it back. Dave is a typical teenage loser who’s essentially going through the same teenage loser problems we’ve seen before. As for Hit Girl? She’s fifteen years old (she’s two years older than she was in the first film) and already a mass murderer. At the end of this film she says she’s killed six people and that’s not including the people she killed in the first movie. You expect me to believe that a fifteen-year-old girl could kill all of these people and commit these acts of violence and then just be able to brush it off and continue on with a normal life? I couldn’t buy her character in the first movie and despite Wadlow’s best efforts I still couldn’t really buy her character in this one.

Now to this you may say: “but ’Kick Ass 2‘ is a ridiculous and silly movie, so what if her character is implausible and underdeveloped?” I would agree with you had this movie kept that silly tone. However in the third act the movie abruptly switches from fun and entertaining to dark and serious. It wants you to take it seriously now and realize that there are serious consequences. “This is not a comic book, people are actually going to get hurt,” Hit Girl says to Kick Ass toward the end. Ah, but Hit Girl, in spite of this sudden mood change the action scenes are still ridiculous and comic book-y. The movie wants to have it both ways but it simply doesn’t work. The movie becomes too serious for its own good, copying other dark and gritty superhero movies like “The Dark Knight”; the wannabe superheroes turn into serious action stars, essentially abandoning the thing that made “Kick Ass” refreshing in the first place.

 If anything “Kick Ass 2” provides hope that the Wannabe Superhero subgenre could be successful in the future, even though there’s still a lot of work to be done. The movie is flawed, that I can’t deny but I also can’t deny that I was entertained during most of the movie and it’s still a nice alternative to all of the Marvel and DC superhero films coming out.

B-

The Butler Review

“The Butler” tells the story of Cecil Gains (Forest Whitaker), an African American man who worked as a butler for over twenty years in the White House, serving the likes of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Ford and Reagan. I find it amusing that the marketing for the picture really emphasizes the many star cameo roles, specifically Robin Williams as Eisenhower, James Marsden as Kennedy, Liev Shreiber as Johnson, John Cusack as Nixon, Alan Rickman as Reagan and Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan. However, after seeing the actual movie, one could argue that the scenes involving them are the least compelling. With the exception of a slightly amusing scene involving Johnson on the toilet, none of the interactions between Gains and any of the presidents make a lasting impression. In other words, director Lee Daniels (“Precious”) could have cast unknowns (or relatively unknowns) and nothing would change. But, I guess then John Cusack wouldn’t be able to put “played Richard Nixon” on his resume.

In fact, all of the happenings within the White House seem to take a back seat to a much, much bigger story. Daniels’ film is more than a simple human-interest story about Gains’s life; it is a historical and political epic recounting just about every major event and milestone in the American civil rights movement, from the very early protests, to MLK, to Malcom X, to the Black Panthers and on. What we have here is a grand ol’ feel good historical drama with some great moments and a few moving performances while also being bloated and tonally inconsistent at times.

At the beginning we get a quick rundown of Cecil’s early life. He grew up on a cotton plantation, and after witnessing his father get killed he’s taught by the plantation owner Annabeth (Vanessa Redgrave, in another unnecessary star cameo role) to be a house server. Then through a serious of circumstances he gets the call he’s been waiting for and begins his tenure as a butler at the big house. In this time we also meet his family: wife Gloria (Oprah Winfrey) and two sons Charlie and Louis (played in adulthood by David Oyelowo).  Seeing the White House and all of its activity from Cecil’s angle is the most fascinating and refreshing aspect of “The Butler.” As he stays there longer and longer, working his tail off, not saying a word, having brief encounters with the presidents themselves and gaining the respect of each president, Cecil slowly but surely makes an impression.

But, as I said before the movie is much bigger. The central conflict of “The Butler” is between Cecil and Louis. Against his father’s wishes Louis becomes an active member of the Civil Rights movement; participating in the non violent protests, riding the freedom buses, being jailed numerous times and so on. I can see why Daniels decided to make this the central story. He wants to juxtapose two very different but similar acts of revolution, as well as juxtapose two people whose opinions and outlooks on life are shaped by the vastly different time periods in which they were brought up. Cecil was brought up to serve and had to keep his real feelings and opinions to himself. During Cecil’s interview for the gig his employer informs him: “politics will not be allowed in the White House.” So, naturally he’s skeptical about his son (his flesh and blood) getting wrapped up in radical (and also dangerous) acts of protest and rebellion. Whereas Louis was brought up in a time when change and efforts to get equality for all races was just starting to take place and he didn’t want to just sit on the sidelines and keep his opinions to himself.

The movie has an overwhelming sense of history (just about all of the major civil rights events are dramatically reenacted and Daniels uses real photographs and real news footage) and an even more overwhelming sense of appreciation for the subject. Unfortunately, the film has a little too much appreciation and sense of history. Daniels drives home the politics and history with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Often times the movie is just downright preachy and you feel like you’re in a classroom.

On top of that, the screenplay by Danny Strong (based in part on the article “A Butler Well Served by this Election) tries to cover too much information and include too many events, making the movie feel too rushed at times as well as too slow at others. There are abrupt tonal shifts and dramatic imbalances, quickly going from an intense moment (like when the Freedom Riders bus is destroyed by racist southern folk) to a happy, upbeat scene of the butlers serving.  The movie is two hours and twelve minutes (which is still fairly short for how big the movie is) and yet it feels longer. Daniels’ insistency to show us everything he possibly can and then some (it goes all the way up to the 2008 presidential election) is tedious. And, with all of that Daniels feels the need to include narration that—when it isn’t giving us obvious information—further adds to the moralizing didacticism

Overall, the performances in “The Butler” are solid with only a few reaching the heights of greatness. Whitaker has a face that conveys a sense of history and hardship all on its own. His presence (and face) alone commands your attention. We have no problem rooting for Cecil but Whitaker also injects him with a hint of stubbornness when it comes to his and Louis’ differing views. There are a few scenes where Cecil is outright mean to Louis. Though, the real acting surprise comes from Winfrey. Yes her name and reputation as a mega celebrity does precede her but surprisingly she turns in a genuine and moving performance. On the one hand she’s a loyal and faithful wife, always at Cecil’s side (she even shares some of the same concerns he has when it comes to Louis) but then at other times you can tell she’s unhappy; unhappy with the long hours Cecil works (when he could cut back) as well as his stubbornness and coldness towards Louis. At one point she becomes an alcoholic. Her performance is probably the biggest surprise of the film.

I have a feeling general audiences will love “The Butler.” Sure, there are some serious and intense moments but the movie stays upbeat and celebratory for the most part. And yes, I will admit that “The Butler” isn’t the sappy, Lifetime melodrama it could have been, neither is it a totally bland historical drama. There are some genuinely great moments throughout and I respect Daniels for trying to tell such a grand story. But the movie still tries to do too much and goes a little too heavy on history and politics. I wish I had more to say about the star cameos but they’re just afterthoughts. I was also a little bummed that I didn’t get to see who would play Barrack Obama; I was thinking Will Smith. Oh well.

 C+