Draft Day Review

This image perfectly captures the "drama" and Costners character in "Draft Day." 

“Draft Day” is an odd movie; not because it’s thought provoking or unique but because I’m not exactly sure why it was made in the first place. It’s clearly a love letter to the NFL but specifically a love letter to the Cleveland Browns. The story revolves around the 2014 NFL draft and the Browns are trying to transform themselves into a better team.

 So O.K, am I supposed to care about whether the Cleveland Browns turn themselves around? I’ll admit I’m not really an NFL fan but will non Cleveland Browns fans care whether they transform themselves? And anyway, if the movie is done well enough, if the story is engaging and the characters compelling then it shouldn’t make a difference if I’m an NFL fan or not. The trouble is, “Draft Day” isn’t done well, it’s not awful by any means but it’s rather bland and tells a predictable, slightly corny story that’s ultimately about going with your gut.

Kevin Costner stars as Browns’ General Manager Sonny Weaver Jr. The NFL draft is drawing near and he finds himself under a lot of pressure. If he doesn’t make the right decisions then he could be fired. One day he gets a call--I’d say about 80% of the movie is phone calls-- from the GM for the Seattle Seahawks, which have the first pick of the draft at the moment, offering to make a deal: Sonny can have the first pick and the projected number one draft pick Bo Callahan (Josh Pence) in exchange for relinquishing future first draft picks.

It’s a tough decision but Sonny goes for it because it could mean improvement for the team. But does Sonny really think Callahan is the best pick? Or should he go with other aspiring NFL players like Vontane Mack (Chadwick Bosman)? And so goes “Draft Day,” a movie full of, heated exchanges between Sonny and other members of the Browns’ staff like the owner played by Frank Langella, and last minute deals with other teams and second guessing. Oh so much second-guessing! Practically all of Costner’s performance is giving in to peer pressure and flipping back and forth between decisions.

As I said before, “Draft Day” isn’t terrible and it sheds light on an aspect of football that we don’t normally see in football movies. There’s clearly a lot of stress and strategy involved in the NFL draft but the movie doesn’t really give the audience much reason to care about any of it. The screenplay by Rajiv Joseph and Scott Rothman gets bogged down in a lot of dry facts and stats concerning college players.  “Moneyball” gave us a reason to care about how baseball players were selected and traded by depicting a fascinating and entertaining tension between the old-timer scouts who believed in picking players using their gut and the younger fellows who wanted to use computer programs to select players. “Draft Day” doesn’t have much tension, as it really just comes down to what Sonny thinks is the best move. If you know how a draft works than it’s not very exciting stuff and if you don’t know how a draft works than it’s even less exciting.

And for all of the last minute deals that are made and the various attempts at drama, “Draft Day” offers very few surprises. The story progresses exactly how you’d expect it to and you can see Sonny’s final decision coming from a mile away.

Costner gives a perfectly average performance, again not bad but also not all that captivating. In fact that’s a good way to describe the entire movie.  The picture seems to be lacking in energy, with everyone involved not giving you much reason to care about what’s happening. As directed by veteran comedy director Ivan Reitman (“Ghostbusters”) the film contains a few chuckle worthy moments but overall the attempts at humor feel restrained, probably due to the film’s PG-13 rating. Even when actors like Ellen Burstyn—as Sonny’s feisty mother—and Dennis Leary—as the Browns’ jerk head coach who’s at odds with Sonny for practically the entire film—show up they seem like they’re holding back. Only once near the end when Costner calls the Seahawks GM a “pancake eating motherf---er“ does the movie and Costner’s performance breathe any kind of real life.

Ultimately I’m still not sure whom “Draft Day” is for. Non football fans won’t like it and I have a hard time believing hardcore football fans would want to see a watered down dramatization of the NFL draft, especially if they’re not Cleveland fans, or even Seahawk fans. “Draft Day” isn’t very compelling, exciting or funny, it just sort of sits there, frozen in movie purgatory, lacking in purpose.

C-

Captain America: The Winter Soldier Review

Note: There is a spoiler in the ninth paragraph, but I included it to make a point

 For the most part, I’m willing to accept most things in the silly, cartoon-y world that “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”—the sequel to the 2011 movie—and all the rest of these Marvel Avenger movies inhabit.

I’m willing to accept the seemingly infinite number of secret (sometimes underground) hideouts and safe houses the characters take refuge in and I’m willing to accept the plethora of cool convenient gadgets--such as a digitized version of the “Mission Impossible” face disguise—which the characters pull out at the last minute.

But what I have trouble accepting is that after Joss Whedon’s “The Avengers” in 2012—in which Captain America, Iron Man, The Hulk, Thor and others finally joined forces to become an established superhero team in the cinematic universe—there would be another individual “Captain America” movie. I find it so amusing that for a film that’s mainly about teamwork Captain America doesn’t have his newfound teammates to rely on. This also goes for the other individual superhero movies that have come after “The Avengers,” like “Iron Man 3” and “Thor: The Dark World.” And so, “Captain America: Winter Soldier” is a passable piece of superhero entertainment but not much else. For what it’s worth, the movie is better than “Thor 2,” while also being deeper and not quite as hurried as the first “Captain America.”

I realize the source material is inherently patriotic and pro American but the tone of “Winter Soldier” feels especially patriotic and chiefly pro military. The movie actually gets off to a pretty good start, addressing the theme of reintegrating—on the part of veterans— back into society, something that can be difficult to do. In the case of our red white and blue shield throwing super soldier Steve Rogers (aka, Captain America, played by Chris Evans) it’s extremely difficult. You’ve heard of movie soldiers who don’t have a country—John Rambo—well, Rogers is a soldier without a time period. As you will remember from the 2011 film, he became the Captain during World War 2and after defeating an evil Nazi guy, he became frozen in the ice and unthawed in the present day so he could fight with the other Avengers in Whedon’s movie.

That’s got to be pretty tough, not being able to live your life in your own time period, having to adjust to a brand new one and in “Winter Soldier” Roger’s hasn’t been able to fully shake his past. There’s an endearing scene between him and his now elderly love interest from the first movie and another scene where he goes to a Captain America exhibit at a museum. There’s nothing left of his old life except for a museum exhibit.  Again this is all interesting stuff to address and a natural way to deepen this character. Though, it would work even better had this movie come before “The Avengers.”

But before too long Rogers gets double-crossed by the government organization S.H.E.L.D--which initiated the Avengers program--and “The Winter Soldier” turns into another fugitive/on the run action movie involving a flash drive, (there’s always a flash drive of some sort) an evil German organization (no, not Nazis) and another super soldier called The Winter Soldier, who’s connected to Roger’s past. It’s Captain America and fellow S.H.E.L.D member Natasha Romanoff (sexy and snarky Scarlett Johansson) against the world, too bad there isn’t a team of superheroes they can call on. Oh wait! There is! It’s called the Avengers. The S.H.E.I.L.D organization is being compromised and one of the main Avenger’s is being hunted--in Washington D.C no less--and Iron Man, Thor, or The Hulk are nowhere to be found. Are they all on vacation or something? Sadly the answer to this question simply comes down to: because “ The Avengers: Age of Ultron” is currently in production and we can’t have all of the Avengers together in a movie that isn’t an official “Avengers” team movie. Sorry Steve and Natasha, looks like you’ve got to clear your name and stop those gigantic flying warships from destroying the capital on your own.

This is my main problem with this ever growing, intertwining, overlapping super-hero world. Since The Avengers have already come together and formed a unified team, these subsequent individual movies feel sort of pointless now and somewhat undermine the spirit of teamwork this franchise so strongly promotes.

I suppose all this makes me sound like a grouch and I’m supposed to talk about how sweet the action scenes are in “Winter Soldier.” Well they are, more or less. The rest of the movie provides entertaining bits here and there and I did like the playful, chummy relationship between Natasha and Steve but overall there aren’t many real major surprises, simply because this never ending franchise and its “think three or four movies ahead” tactic has mostly eliminated that element.

Take for example S.H.E.I.L.D leader Nick Fury’s (Samuel L. Jackson) supposed death that sets the rest of the movie’s events into motion. If Fury had stayed dead, that would be interesting, that would be something shocking, but no! Nick Fury can’t get killed off because he has to appear in future movies. Jackson, to his credit, does a fine job in the role but there are already so many characters in this universe, with even more being introduced in every new movie that I think we can afford to kill off some of them.

As I write this review, “Captain America 3” has already been announced, which tells you how much the studio cares about this one. The franchise has practically become a TV show; sure pleasures can be found in individual episodes but it’s the overall series that matters. “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” is a mildly entertaining big budget episode in this massive budgeted TV series. Fans and general audiences will love this movie I’m sure, which is perfectly O.K in my book, but by the time “Avengers 2” and whatever the hell else comes next, I imagine this movie—like so many of the others-- will be mostly forgotten.

C+

Sabotage Review

“Sabotage” is the most exciting, satisfying, suspenseful and intelligent Arnold Schwarzenegger action flick I’ve seen in recent. The best way to describe it is: an ultraviolent actioner crossed with a revenge flick, crossed with an Agatha Christie “And Then There were Fewer” style mystery. Did I really just write Agatha Christie and Arnold Schwarzenegger in the same paragraph?

The movie is directed and co written (with Skip Woods) by David Ayer who wrote the excellent crime drama “Training Day” and was the writer/director behind the Jake Gyllenhaal/Michael Pena cop drama “End of Watch” in 2012. Even though “End of Watch” didn’t completely work for me, Ayer still managed to breathe some refreshing and thrilling life into a tired subgenre and he does something similar with “Sabotage.” Though, with “End of Watch” Ayer was going for realism (the movie used an interesting but ultimately frustrating combination of Found Footage and Cinema Verite) whereas “Sabotage” is more in the vein of a cartoon-y, B-movie style action ensemble.

The picture revolves around members of a special DEA task force, although they don’t really seem like DEA agents, or at least what we think of when we think of DEA. They’re a big, beefy, tatted up, rambunctious group complete with cool action movie tough guy nicknames. There’s James “Monster” Murray, (Sam Worthington, who struggles to maintain his American accent near then end) Joe “Grinder” Phillips, (Joe Manganiello) and Eddie “Neck” Jordan (“Lost” star Josh Holloway). In addition there’s Julius “Sugar” Edmonds, (Terrence Winter) Tom “Pyhro” Roberts, (Max Martini) Bryce “Tripod” McKneely (Kevin Vance) and the solo female Lizzy Murray, (Mireille Enos, who gives a wild hot mess of a performance. If she was a wet blanket wife to Brad Pitt in last year’s “World War Z” she’s definitely not here) who might as well be considered “one of the guys.” And of course, how could I forget old Arnold “The Governator” Schwarzenegger himself (“that’s not his movie nickname, but I like it better than “Breacher”) as Jack Wharton, the leader who tries to keep these unruly men in order.

Seriously these guys are ultra loud, obnoxious and rowdy; when they’re having a celebration at someone’s house and a detective named Caroline (Olivia Williams) comes over to conduct business they mistake her for a stripper. They’re more like mercenaries than DEA agents, exaggerated comic-book mercenaries at that. And yet, there’s something sort of genuine about them; as vulgar and bone headed as they can be at times, they’re still a tight-knit unit. They’re still a family. When they trade insults with one another or get into fights it’s done so out of adoration, much in the same way Gyllenhaal and Pena—as two street cops—in “End of Watch” would grill each other out of brotherly love. In their reckless, macho way the team loves one another and there’s also something endearing about Schwarzenegger playing the stern parental figure of the group.

The comedic banter between the team doesn’t always work as well as Ayer probably would have liked. I realize he’s going for a cartoonish vibe but sometimes the repartee feels forced and occasionally the performances are just a little too over-the-top and hammy. Again I realize this is Ayer’s intent but there is a point where things can be too silly, especially when Ayer is also trying to develop and maintain a sense of dread.

When drug money--that the team planned on taking for themselves--goes missing they start dropping one by one. Who could it be? The drug cartel looking for retaliation? Or is it one of the team members themselves. The team may seem close knit but they’re also loose cannons, (excuse the cliché cop movie terminology) in fact they’re more than loose cannons, so it’s not totally impossible one of them could be killing the others off in search of a payday. This is where the “And Then There Were Fewer” style mystery comes in. Now the mystery in “Sabotage” isn’t nearly as elaborate or intelligent as it would be in a more traditional mystery story, but it still contains legitimate tension and suspense. In this age of infinite franchises, sequels and remakes/reboots I can’t remember the last time I’ve experienced actual surprise in commercial action cinema.

It’s also sort of rare these days to see an action movie as violent and gory as “Sabotage.” With the seemingly endless barrage of watered down, PG-13 superhero movies (the studios need to attract a bigger audience so they can make more movies) it’s a relief to see bold, R rated cringe worthy violence. The team members get killed off in elaborate and grotesque ways; one guy gets nailed to the wall of his house. At the same time though, Ayer doesn’t overdo it. He makes sure to put story and character over action and violence, so that when violence does come there’s weight behind it. In other words, it’s deserved.

I’m not going to tell you that “Sabotage” is great art and I highly doubt it will end up on any kind of year end list, but it’s still one of the most refreshing, R rated action movies I’ve seen of late. Besides the reasons I’ve already given, the movie contains not one but two strong female characters that match the males at every turn. And perhaps best of all, the movie isn’t just a gigantic wink to famous action movies of the past like “The Expendables” or “The Last Stand” was. “Sabotage” tells its own story, creates its own characters and contains some intelligence.

And it doesn’t have a post-credit scene teasing a future movie. I know, weird right?

B

Cesar Chavez Review

If anything, Diego Luna’s “Cesar Chavez”—a biopic about the famed Hispanic civil rights activist who fought for basic human and labor rights for migrant workers in the 1960’s and 70’s—should be commended for not trying to tell Chavez’ entire life story. This is a common trap biopics fall into, it was the main reason why last year’s Nelson Mandela biopic was so disappointing. With “Chavez” Luna doesn’t begin with Chavez as a little kid and doesn’t end it with him as an old man proudly looking back on his life’s work.

Instead it focuses on the five-year period in which Chavez led a grape pickers’ strike/boycott in Delano California with the intent to get better wages and better working conditions. When we first meet Chavez he, along with his wife Helen (America Ferrera) and others have opened up a credit union, formed the United Farm Workers group and are in the beginning stages of the boycott/strike.

However, while this narrowing in on one specific period is good, Luna and screenwriters Keir Pearson and Timothy J. Sexton leave out one important thing: they don’t show us Chavez’ motivation for wanting to be a civil rights activist in the first place. At the very beginning--in what looks like an interview with some unknown person--Chavez (Michael Pena) mentions how when he was younger and working in the fields (not the Delano fields) he was exposed first hand to the injustices faced by the migrant workers and that’s when he knew he would be an activist. This is a key bit of information but by just telling it to us instead of showing us--instead of placing us in those fields with him--we don’t get enough sense of why he’s passionate about his cause.

In fact, overall this movie does a lot of telling when it should be showing. We get a lot of speeches and lectures that pretty much say the same thing over and over again and are full of big, movie poster-worthy quotes like: “you can’t oppress someone who’s not afraid anymore.” And to go along with these endless speeches (or rather over-explanations) we get one repetitive and generic picketing/protesting montage after another that don’t carry much weight. Furthermore, at times, Luna struggles to create a cohesive narrative flow, as there are numerous awkward lapses in the film’s timeline.

Pena does what he can in the role (I do think Pena is a massively underrated actor) but ultimately the script sort of lets him down. I don’t know much about the real Chavez but from the movie he appears to be funny, charming and not afraid to go head to head with the myriad of ignorant rich white jerks—such as a grape grower played by John Malkovich—that are opposing the strike. All good attributes but they remain surface level. We don’t get to know him as a person, how he interacts with people as a non-activist. Basically it’s not a down to earth portrayal and unfortunately he’s the one who delivers the majority of those speeches and lectures. And even as an activist he doesn’t seem all that commanding and influential. Pena doesn’t give him much of a powerful presence and so you wonder why so many people are following him.

The supporting cast isn’t treated much better. Ferrera tries her best but her character is mostly just there to be tough and loyal at Chavez’ side and also fill in plot points. At times you get the impression that this boycott/strike is taking its toll on her (especially when Chavez decides to go on a hunger strike) but Luna doesn’t dedicate much attention to that. There’s also a side plot involving Chavez’ oldest son and how Chavez’ neglects him too--it’s interesting how these famous leaders and activists turn out to be lackluster fathers—which again isn’t given much time to blossom into anything lasting. This wouldn’t really be a problem except that Luna ends the entire movie on a tender moment between the son and Chavez (well, in letter form) that’s well intentioned but doesn’t feel entirely deserved.

I don’t mean to come down on this film too much. It’s a feel good flick that sheds light on an important historical activist who did a lot of great stuff. The movie is never flat out boring and I still appreciate that Luna doesn’t bite off more than he can chew in regards to the film’s scope. And yet, it still manages to fall into biopic clichés and the characters rarely go beyond surface level.

C