Gattaca (1997) *****

“Gattaca” is the kind of movie that if you haven’t seen it, people will tell you “You gotta see it!” So I’m telling you, “You gotta see it! It’s awesome!” I could just leave it at that, but I guess that wouldn’t make for much of a review.

The title of this sci-fi noir film comes from the name of a future space agency. Jerome (Ethan Hawke) works at Gattaca, and as the film opens, he is on track to fulfill his dream of going into space. The only hitch is that Jerome isn’t really supposed to be there. He doesn’t have the genes to be an astronaut. In this version of the future, everyone is genetically manipulated to be perfect. Babies come from in vitro fertilization in labs which determine their height, sex, and eye color, and remove any hereditary tendencies to disease. Humans are still capable of normal reproduction, however, and occasionally someone like Jerome gets conceived in the back of a car. There is nothing obviously wrong with Jerome (I mean, he looks exactly like Ethan Hawke!), but in this future the genetically imperfect are termed “invalids” and forced to languish in the lowest tiers of society. I won’t reveal how Jerome manages to move from his janitor’s job to being an astronaut, but he lives in constant danger of being found out. All the tissue testing that is done at Gattaca to verify identity and rule out drug use is accompanied by genetic testing, so Jerome has to be perpetually prepared to cheat these tests. When a murder occurs at Gattaca, the increased scrutiny of the investigation threatens to expose Jerome and ruin his dreams of space.

“Gattaca” is one of those sci-fi movies, like “Bladerunner,” where people wear retro clothing, and it looks cool as hell. They even drive old-style cars, retrofitted with electric engines. The movie itself is very stylized as well; in fact everything about the movie is very cool and crisply done. The shadowed halls of Gattaca echo with the sound of footsteps, and everyone speaks very quietly and properly. Jerome is terse and reserved because he has so much to hide, but his manner fits in perfectly at Gattaca.

The world of “Gattaca” isn’t so very far removed from our own. It’s easy to imagine that within a generation or two, science will make possible the genetic manipulations described in the movie, and that genie will not prove easy to put back in the bottle. Just as parents today try to get their kids into good schools, the parents of the future will want their kids to have the best genes. It will mean an end to babies being born with genetic diseases, and adults will be healthier, too. There also won’t be any short people or people who need glasses, and then one has to wonder if this world might also lack for Beethovens and Einsteins.

The doctors tell Jerome that his genes make it almost certain that he will die of heart disease, but he makes it at Gattaca precisely because he has more heart than anyone else. As he tells his genetically perfect brother, “I didn’t save anything for the trip back.”

The point of “Gattaca” is that perfection isn’t everything, but the movie comes pretty close to perfection. Director Andrew Niccol blends sci-fi and noir in a great story with excellent style and acting (kudos to stars Ethan Hawke, Uma Thurman, and Jude Law.) It’s an underappreciated gem that deserves a place in your collection.

5 stars out of 5

Easy Rider (1969) ***

One might be tempted to ask what is the point of “Easy Rider”? It’s a poorly constructed film with limited narrative and an unsatisfying ending. And yet it is an icon. I think that for one thing, the movie captured, and maybe helped create, the romantic image of the motorcycle rider as a free spirit. Secondly, I think the movie tapped into a groundswell of disillusionment with how the 1960’s were turning out. After a dramatic decade of consciousness-raising, protest, and national discourse, there still wasn’t room in most of America for anyone to be different.

Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper play Wyatt and Billy, a couple of low-lifes on Harleys. They successfully smuggle cocaine into the U.S. from Mexico, then embark on a cross-country motorcycle trip to New Orleans to spend some of their profits at Mardi Gras. Along the way they have pleasant encounters with a variety of hippy types and unpleasant run-ins with rednecks and cops. They also pick up a kindred spirit, George Hanson (Jack Nicholson), an alcoholic southern attorney and amateur philosopher. He puts into words the quiet dismay simmering in Wyatt as they travel through middle America. During a campfire exchange which pretty much sums of the movie, George gives his most memorable line: “...they’re gonna talk to you and talk to you and talk to you about individual freedom. But they see a free individual, it’s gonna scare ‘em.”

For me, the message of “Easy Rider” is somewhat diluted by its contradictions. In every small town through which the guys pass, they are viewed with suspicion and contempt by the conservative, white locals. Of course, Wyatt and Billy are cocaine smugglers, so it seems that the townsfolk’s profiling is pretty accurate. The violence directed against them is completely unjustified, but still, would you want drug-runners to roll into your town and chat up YOUR teenage daughter?

“Easy Rider” is also a great example of sloppy filmmaking. The scene cuts are abrupt, and there is at least one clear editing error that should never have been allowed to make it onto the final cut. Still, I suppose it’s lucky the film got made at all. Dennis Hopper was reputedly on drugs the entire time, and he was the director! The actors also smoked real marijuana on camera for some scenes. During an LSD-tripping scene in a New Orleans cemetery, there are some interesting lighting effects that it turns out were due to someone opening the film before it had been developed.

All in all, I would say the filmmakers could have done worse. On a reported budget of $400,000 (Pretty cheap, even in 1969.) they made a film that has captured the imagination of millions. For all its flaws, the film does manage to capture the disillusionment of its time, and it puts into stark relief the pathos of a society divided against itself.

3 stars

Drive (2011) ***½

Watching this modern-day noir/heist movie is like eating popcorn. It’s delicious, but you are hungry again in an hour. Still, for a popcorn movie it has a lot going for it.

Ryan Gosling plays the nameless main character, whom we’ll call The Driver. This quiet, perhaps semi-autistic loner spends his time working as a mechanic, stunt-driving for Hollywood movies, and driving get-away cars for heists. He is very good at all three jobs, but he doesn’t seem to have anyone in his life except his employer Shannon (Bryan Cranston), who sets up all his legal and illegal driving gigs. The Driver moves through the world quietly, observing, taking few risks, and operating like a precision machine when he is behind the wheel.

One day The Driver makes the acquaintance of Irene (Carey Mulligan), the cute girl down the hall. Irene is almost as into long, intense silences as The Driver, so they get along great. Spending time with Irene and her son starts to bring The Driver out of his shell, but the interlude ends when Irene’s husband Standard returns home from prison. It turns out Standard is a fairly decent human being who wants to turn his life around, but criminals from his past pressure him to commit another robbery for them, threatening his family. Concerned for Irene, The Driver signs on to help Standard pull off the job. Everything goes to hell, and suddenly The Driver finds himself on the wrong side of the wrong side of the law.

Know right now that “Drive” is extremely violent and bloody. The sheer level of brutality is clearly gratuitous, but in a sense the gore is a metaphor for the changes in The Driver’s life. When he is isolated within himself, his life is clean and neat. Then he gets involved with people, and things suddenly get very messy. We also suddenly get to see what a badass The Driver really is, making me wonder, “Who the hell is this guy?” Unfortunately, that question is never answered. Instead, we get treated to heart-pounding ass-kicking and car chases as The Driver tries to protect his adopted family from rogue gangsters (Albert Brooks and Ron Perlman).

Everything about this film is done with style. The camera-work should set a new standard for noir films. Albert Brooks is affably chilling, and I wish there had been more of him. Likewise, the car chases are superb, as befits the film’s title, but there aren’t enough of them.

In a movie full of restrained performances, Ryan Gosling is so restrained he is practically in a straight-jacket. His part is well-played, but the best scenes are the ones where his self-contained intensity is balanced by someone with a lot of personality. I get that The Driver and Irene are kindred spirits, but the scenes between them tend to drag. I think the solution to that would have been more scenes with Albert Brooks, who absolutely owns the screen every time he appears.

Ultimately, “Drive” is a bit heavier on style than substance, and I was ever so slightly disappointed by it. The action is intense (too intense for some), but I wanted a little more explication of the character of The Driver. Another car chase or two wouldn’t have hurt, either. Still, “Drive” is a nice addition to the modern-day heist genre, fitting in well with movies like “Heat” and “The Town.”

3.5 stars

Moneyball (2011) ***

“Moneyball” is a different kind of sports movie. The theme is familiar: Someone takes a ragtag bunch of misfits that no one else wants and turns them into a successful team. The execution, however, is something new. Most sports movies introduce the inept players, then feature a montage of inspired coaching and practice that turns those losers into champions. “Moneyball” focuses on Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) and his geeky assistant Peter Brand (A fictional name given to actual A’s assistant GM Paul DePodesta, played by Jonah Hill), and the montages are of these two going over statistics and mapping probabilities. It can be dry stuff, but it’s a fascinating movie nonetheless, and it‘s based on real life.

The setup begins with the A’s losing their division to the New York Yankees in 2001. It was actually an accomplishment for a small club like the A’s to get as far as they did, considering that they were outspent 4 to 1 by the Yankees. That didn’t really ease the pain, though, when, after the season, the A’s three star players were lured away by richer teams. Left to rebuild with a limited budget, Beane becomes disgusted by the subjective criteria employed by his recruiting scouts. These guys base their recommendations on things like the quality of the sound of the ball hitting a player’s bat, the shape of a player’s jaw, or even how his girlfriend looks. (“An ugly girlfriend means no confidence.”) Beane knows there is something basically wrong with their system, and he has an inkling of how to fix it, but it all gels when he meets Brand, a Yale-educated economics major. Brand has a mathematical model that he believes can identify under-valued players, winning players who can be recruited cheaply, which is just what Billy Beane and the Oakland A’s need.

The two put together an unlikely team, butting heads with everyone else in baseball. They even recruit a washed-up catcher to play first base. Things are rocky at first, and they lose a lot of games, but they stick to their guns, and gradually things turn around. Brand applies his computer models to everything about each player’s game, helping them figure out when to let pitches go, how to get walked more, and ultimately how to get more runs.

Beane and Brand take the A’s farther than they should have gotten, for the poorest team in the league, but they don’t turn the A’s into champions. They do, however, turn baseball on its head, revolutionizing the way teams evaluate talent. I’m no baseball expert, but I’m told that today everybody does it Beane’s way.

Meanwhile, director Bennett Miller has made a rather quiet, interestingly different sports movie. Brad Pitt deserves a lot of the credit for his naturalistic portrayal of Beane. My only complaint is that the film is perhaps a little too subtle. The connection between the statistical analyses and what happens on the field isn’t drawn compellingly enough, leaving the movie feeling a little dry. It’s a good movie, and I think baseball fans will be smitten, but in the end I don’t think “Moneyball” will be a classic sports movie.

3 stars

Beginners (2011) ***1/2

Imagine that after your mother’s death, your elderly father came out of the closet as a gay man. Imagine that he gets a boyfriend, becomes involved with gay activism, then dies of cancer three years later. Imagine that you yourself are an introverted artist with intimacy issues, desperately trying to learn how to finally make a long-term relationship work. This is the situation inhabited by Ewan McGregor’s character Oliver in this wonderful film. We find Oliver looking back on a series of broken relationships and trying to prevent history from repeating itself with his new love interest, Anna (Melanie Laurent).

Jumping back and forth in time, the film reveals Oliver’s and his dad’s stories at a thoughtful, intimate pace. The film is chock full of food for thought. I was struck by how Oliver’s poor tolerance for intimacy was probably influenced by growing up with his parents’ passionless marriage. It’s interesting how Oliver and his father, Hal (Christopher Plummer) only really get to know each other after Hal comes out. Then too, it’s sad that Hal is so accustomed to keeping secrets in his life that he hides the seriousness of his illness from his lover.

Anna fits right into this little collections of misfits. Like Oliver, she craves intimacy, but has a poor tolerance for day to day closeness with another person. It will be a miracle if these two can make it work, but they are both mature enough to recognize the importance of trying to overcome their own personal failings.

Between all of this adult psychological stuff, the cancer, and the reflections on the struggles of a gay man in our society, “Beginners” could easily feel dark and depressing, yet somehow the movie maintains a lightness. Powered by an Oscar-nominated performance from Christopher Plummer, Hal’s charming sense of humor about himself overflows into the rest of the story. Plus, there is a really cute dog in the movie, and Ewan McGregor‘s interactions with the little terrier are the best I have seen since Jack Nicholson in “As Good As It Gets.”

3.5 stars out of 5

The Help (2011) ***½

It’s movie awards season, which is nice, because instead of hearing about the latest “Transformers” movie, everyone is talking about movies that are actually good. The movies that are designed to compete for these awards tend to be edgy, intellectual, or independent, in various combinations. There’s always at least one for each year, though, that is very traditional, straightforward, and made for the masses. Films like “Forrest Gump,” “Slumdog Millionaire” and “The Blind Side” represent simplicity and earnestness in a genre known for complexity and irony. This season that movie is “The Help,” the funny, heartwarming story of black maids and white socialites in segregated, 1960’s Jackson, Mississippi.

Emma Stone plays Skeeter, a headstrong debutante who returns to Jackson from college to find that Constantine, the black woman who basically raised her, is gone, with no explanation. Of course, it’s obvious to the heartbroken Skeeter that her parents have, for some reason, fired Constantine. Meanwhile, Skeeter gets back into her lifelong social circle, dominated by sorority types who dropped out of college once they found a husband. While Skeeter, who wants to be a writer, gets a job at the local paper, her friends raise babies and keep house, except they don’t really do those things; their maids do. Skeeter gets a good look at how rudely her friends treat their maids, some of whom actually raised these girls, and she gets the idea of writing a book about what life and work is like for these maids.

This is no easy task in the early ‘60’s. The maids fear for their jobs and their freedom. In addition to the usual Jim Crow laws against interracial marriage and such, Mississippi apparently also had a law making it a crime to write anything advocating racial equality. It was also illegal for an unescorted white woman to enter the black part of town. Skeeter overcomes these obstacles, convincing several maids to share their stories for a book that will shake Jackson society to its core.

I resisted seeing “The Help” for a while, figuring that I knew exactly what I was going to see, and for the most part I was right. There was one character I did not see coming, however, the lonely misfit Celia Foote (Jessica Chastain). From a poor family, she marries a successful man from Jackson high society, but the rich bitches won’t accept her as one of their own. She is a poignant, but often hilarious character, and her relationship with her maid Minny (Octavia Spencer) is very sweet. Otherwise, there are no huge surprises. The rich women are terrible, while the maids are noble. The movie’s tears are well-balanced by laughter. All the acting is superb. Viola Davis (who plays the main maid character), Octavia Spencer, and Jessica Chastain all have well-earned Oscar nominations, but the whole cast deserves kudos.

It’s possible, I suppose, that some people’s attitudes about race might change as a result of seeing “The Help,” but I don’t know how likely that is at this point in the game. For most folks, the movie will simply serve as funny, heartwarming entertainment. This is an un-nuanced story about a certain aspect of the civil rights struggle, with plenty of happy endings to go around. Nothing life-changing here, but if you get a chance to see it, it’s a good time.

3.5 stars out of 5

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension (1984) ****

What are the things that we value in a good movie? The list includes good cinematography, good acting, a riveting, believable story, and special effects good enough to seem real and allow us to forget that we are watching a movie. How then to explain the phenomenon of Cult Classics, movies that are beloved by a vocal minority despite lacking most of those qualities?

“The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension“ (usually shortened to “Buckaroo Banzai“) is a Cult Classic in every sense of the term, sporting laughable special effects, a disjointed narrative, and over-the-top performances by unknown actors and stars alike. While loved by its adherents (myself included), the film is totally unfit for a mass audience. Show this to a normal girl on a first date, and there will not be a second date! The sad thing is that this isn’t even necessarily a “low-budget” film. To put this in perspective, the first Star Wars movie was made in 1977 for $11 million, and “Return of the Jedi” in 1982 cost roughly $33 million. Modern-day sci-fi classic “District 9” cost $30 million in 2009. These are all slick-looking, well-produced sci-fi films. “Buckaroo Banzai,” with a budget of 12 million 1983 dollars, is a complete mess. And yet, like an abused lover, I can’t help loving it.

The titular hero, Buckaroo Banzai (Peter Weller), is a mild-mannered polymath, a leading neurosurgeon, physicist, racecar driver, and rock star. World-famous due to a series of comic books based on his exploits, Banzai has a loose, worldwide network of friends and short-wave radio operators who help him in his battles with evil. He surrounds himself, Doc Savage-style, with a small team of gun-toting Renaissance-men who also make up his rock band.

What can I say about the plot? There is one, but it is so bizarre, and the film is edited so poorly, that it takes a long time to figure out what is going on. Basically, the Earth gets caught in the middle of a fight between two alien species. The more warlike species, the Red Lectroids, are secretly exiled on earth. When Buckaroo Banzai makes news by crossing into the 8th dimension and back, the Red Lectroids decide to steal his invention and use it to get back to their home planet, where they plan to destroy the Black Lectroids. When the Black Lectroids get wind of all this, they give Buckaroo Banzai an ultimatum: Stop the Red Lectroids, or the earth will be destroyed in order to prevent their escape.

As I said, it takes a long time for that plot to come together, and meanwhile the audience is treated to a series of slapped-together scenes that don’t make much sense. They are, however, hilarious if you just relax and enjoy the ride. Peter Weller plays a great straight-man as Buckaroo Banzai, while a bunch of bizarre characters and events revolve around him. John Lithgow is delightfully manic as a scientist whose brain has been possessed by one of the Red Lectroids. Jeff Goldblum struts around in a ridiculous cowboy outfit. Christopher Lloyd plays a Red Lectroid named John Bigboote (emphasis on the last letter). Ellen Barkin sports a dreadful haircut but still manages to be sexy as hell.

Eventually, the whole thing turns into a slap-happy space-Western. Everyone in the film appears to be having a fabulous time. If you can put aside your usual expectations of a comprehensible narrative, then you’ll have a good time, too!

1 or 4 stars out of 5, depending on how you look at it.

Roman Holiday (1953) ****

Anyone who wants to understand the allure of Audrey Hepburn need only watch “Roman Holiday,” the movie that made her a star. With her refined, elfin features and devastating smile, there isn’t a man alive who wouldn’t want her for his girlfriend. Hepburn is so charming in this film that as a Hollywood newcomer she won the Best Actress Oscar for the role.

Hepburn plays Princess Ann, a bored royal who accidentally escapes from her handlers while on a diplomatic mission in Rome. She is befriended by a handsome American, Joe (Gregory Peck), who recognizes her, but pretends to believe her story of being a student who slipped out of school. Joe convinces her to enjoy her freedom by spending the day in Rome with him and his friend Irving (Eddie Albert). Little does Ann know that Joe and Irving are actually a reporter/photographer team, secretly documenting Ann’s adventures around Rome for what they hope will be a scandalous, exclusive story.

Gregory Peck, Eddie Albert, and Albert’s smooth-looking beard are all excellent, although Peck has to stretch a bit to play a money-hungry reporter. (Somehow I doubt that Peck ever played a real villain.) It is Audrey Hepburn who makes the film, however. She just lights up the screen. This is not the deepest character, but Hepburn lends real humanity and dignity to Ann while displaying some decent physical comedy chops.

Ultimately, “Roman Holiday” is a fun little comedy about Duty, about people paying the price to do what they know is right. It’s an odd mixture, but it works.

4 stars

Withnail and I (1987) ****

“Withnail and I” is sort of a British “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.” It’s the story of a couple of absolute reprobates drinking and drugging away their youths in a filthy London flat. Having dirtied every single dish in the house, and faced with the possible and unsurprising presence of vermin in the kitchen, the two decide that a vacation is in order. They secure the use of a country house from Withnail’s uncle Monty and embark on a hilarious weekend in which they display their complete unsuitability to exist anywhere outside of the city. Dealing with a wood stove, cooking for themselves, and negotiating muddy trails is entirely outside of their skill set, and the pair are saved only by the appearance of Withnail’s uncle.

It is never clear whether Withnail and Marwood are gay, but Monty certainly is, and the dirty old man takes an aggressive shine to Marwood. His advances border on the criminal, and the boys are ultimately forced to retreat back to the city.

I’ve been seeing a lot of British stuff lately, and “Withnail and I” may be the Britishest. It definitely isn’t for everyone, but I found it hilarious. Withnail (Richard E. Grant) is the most incorrigible character, completely oblivious to consequences, and always full of good/bad ideas. Owing to the English accents, the dialogue can be hard to follow, but even if you only catch half of what is said, it’s still twice as funny as most of what is out there. I highly recommend checking it out.

4 stars out of 5

Hellboy (2004) ***

The thing about comic-book movies is that most of them suck. They are assembled by committee to appeal to the lowest common denominator of the PG-13 universe. Still, the nerd inside me wants these movies to be good, so if there is any chance of a comic-book movie being worthwhile, I will usually check it out. Sometimes it’s a complete disaster, like “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.” Sometimes the product is brilliant, as with the X-Men movies. “Hellboy” fell somewhere in between for me, although probably more on the positive side overall.

I think the key to enjoying this movie is to just go with it. The bizarre premise is that the Russian sorcerer and advisor to the Czar, Rasputin, is not dead, but lives on through the power of some multi-dimensional, Cthulhu-like, destruction god. During one failed attempt to bring his god into our world during WWII, Rasputin instead brings over a baby demon with a stone hand. When Rasputin and the Nazis are foiled by Allied troops, the demon falls into the hands of an American paranormal expert. Instead of being raised to help bring about the end of the world, he is raised by a loving father and trained to save the world from various paranormal threats. Hellboy (Ron Perlman), along with a centuries-old, bibliophile fish-man, lives in a secret government facility, brought out Ghostbuster-style to fight the occasional demon, and sneaking out from time to time to visit his pyrokinetic girlfriend, Liz(Selma Blair). Meanwhile, Rasputin hasn’t given up his plans for Hellboy and his tentacled god.

“Hellboy” would be an absolute disaster if it weren’t for some excellent performances, particularly on the part of Ron Perlman as the cigar-smoking, gruff, stone-fisted Hellboy. He lends a world-weary humor and humanity to the character that allows the ridiculous plot to be fun rather than stupid. Rupert Evans is not particularly interesting as the government agent trying to learn to manage Hellboy, but the rest of the cast provides more than adequate support. Jeffrey Tamboor is his usual crackling self, and Selma Blair actually exudes enough sarcasm to hold her own with Perlman. Actually, one of the best performances comes from a guy named Ladislav Beran, playing a clockwork, Nazi assassin who doesn’t say a word, but moves in the creepiest way possible.

“Hellboy” doesn’t elevate the comic-book movie as a genre, but it does show how the genre looks when it is done right.

3 stars