Green Zone (2010) **

 

In 2003 the U.S. was at war in Afghanistan, and we were contemplating war in Iraq. We had already fought Iraq 12 years earlier, driving them out of Kuwait as a stern warning to dictator Saddam Hussein. The narrative in 2003 was that the warning hadn't worked. Saddam continued to threaten the rest of the Middle East, and most importantly, he might be developing weapons of mass destruction, WMDs. Saddam had a history of using chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq war, so he was considered particularly prone to using chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons, or even supplying them to terrorists. Despite U.N. monitors, we kept getting intelligence reports that Saddam had a secret WMD program.

And so, in 2003, we invaded, driving Saddam from power. As soon as we captured the capital, Baghdad, our intelligence agencies began the search for WMDs. It was a search that would prove fruitless. Whatever else Saddam was up to, no evidence was found that he was making chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons.

Why am I rehashing all that history? Because “Green Zone” is a fast-paced, fictionalized war movie about that WMD search, and it may be hard to follow if you don't have some knowledge of those circumstances. Matt Damon plays Chief Miller, head of a WMD team that keeps getting sent on dangerous missions to sites that turn out not to have any WMDs. Frustrated, he tries to discuss this with his superiors, but they tell him to keep quiet. The politicians back home promoted the war based on WMDs, and no one wants to hear that they might not exist.

Miller and his team stumble onto information about some Iraqi generals, and Miller begins to suspect that one of them may be the source of the WMD “intelligence” that led up to the war. Working with a CIA operative (Brendan Gleeson), Miller tries to track down the source one step ahead of rogue, American, political elements.

Directed by Paul Greengrass, “Green Zone” is based on the book Imperial Life in the Emerald City, an account of the war by journalist Rajiv Chandrasekaran. Matt Damon is a compelling lead, and he pulls us through some pretty dense material. Like I said, you have to really pay attention to keep up with all the spy stuff. Some of the action scenes are poorly lit, and it can be hard to tell who is who. Given that the film had a $100 million budget, I assume this was intentional, meant to help the audience identify with Miller's disorientation in this confusing war.

It's actually a pretty gripping thriller, and all the confusion would be worth it if it were not for one thing: most of it never happened. If the movie were completely fictional, then there would be no problem. If it were a documentary, that would be cool, too. This mixing of fiction and fact, however, is problematic for me, because it has the potential to hijack the historical narrative. “Green Zone” isn't just a war story with the Iraq War serving as a background, like "The Hurt Locker,"  it's a fantasy about very specific events that led to America invading Iraq. Watching this film, a person could come away thinking they know things about the war that aren't true. It's a problem I have with many “based on true events” movies, where you can't see the line between fact and fiction. A good movie is so much more compelling than a dry news report that it's easy for the film's narrative to become what people believe. In the end, “Green Zone” is a decent action thriller, but not good enough to justify the creation of a false narrative about real events.

2 stars out of 5

Boogie Nights (1997) *****

 

17-year-old Eddie Adams (Mark Wahlberg) dreams of something better than washing dishes and making extra money showing his large penis to random men. When adult-film director Jack Horner (Burt Reynolds) offers him the chance to act in a porno, Eddie never looks back. Handsome, well-endowed, and un-self-conscious, Eddie was made for the job. Changing his name to Dirk Diggler, he rises to the top of the industry. Along the way, the once-wholesome young man gets well acquainted with the porn industry's considerable dark side.

The story draws heavily from the real-life story of porn-star John Holmes and his director, Bob Chinn. Like Holmes and Chinn, the fictional Diggler and Horner create a series of porno-detective-action movies. In “Boogie Nights,” Dirk is also featured in a documentary about his life and career that is extremely similar to the real-life documentary “Exhausted: John C. Holmes, The Real Story.” Nonetheless, “Boogie Nights” is not a biopic; it's a fictional story that happens to draw a lot of inspiration from real life.

“Boogie Nights” was not director Paul Thomas Anderson's first film, but it was the movie that made him a household name among certain households, and I think it may still be his best picture ever. Often hilarious, sometimes serious, occasionally sexy, the movie is gripping throughout its 2 ½ hour run time. The depth of acting talent is amazing, including Reynolds, Wahlberg, Julianne Moore, Heather Graham, John C. Reilly, William H. Macy, Don Cheadle, and the list goes on. There's a saying that there are no small roles, only small actors, and in “Boogie Nights” there are no small actors. Anderson takes all this talent and weaves it into a makeshift family, whose members are completely unaware of how ridiculous they are. We get to laugh at their silliness and still view their humanity.

A distinction needs to be made between a movie ABOUT porn and a movie that IS porn. “Boogie Nights” has some nudity and sex, but it is NOT pornography, and it isn't even all that erotic. Nonetheless, Anderson had to do some careful editing to get an R rating instead of an NC-17. The film's two biggest stars, Burt Reynolds and Mark Wahlberg, have also expressed some regrets about making “Boogie Nights,” despite the fact that it launched Wahlberg's career as a serious actor and revitalized Reynolds's fading career. I find it sad that people who are offended by the film are probably more offended by the sex scenes than by the scenes of violence or homophobia. I guess that's just the world we live in. The movie isn't for everyone, but for those who aren't bothered by the subject matter, it's an absolute classic tale about the rise of a star and the decline of an industry.

5 stars out of 5

Shiva Baby ***1/2

 

For those who aren't aware (or pretend not to be), there are websites where young women can offer their companionship to older men in a quasi-legal manner. In these Sugar Daddy/Sugar Baby arrangements, there is no direct exchange of sex for money, which presumably keeps everyone on the right side of the law. Instead, the Sugar Daddy does things like make car or rent payments or pay college tuition for his young partner. It's just the same phenomenon that has been going on for eons, made wholesale by the internet.

When college student Danielle (Rachel Sennott) attends a shiva (a jewish funeral/wake) with her parents, she expects a boring time with a bunch of older relatives and neighbors, and maybe to run into her ex-girlfriend, Maya (Molly Gordon). What she doesn't expect is to run into one of her Sugar Daddies, with his wife and baby in tow. This tense situation comes to a boil over a couple of hours in a small house, as Danielle deals with family expectations, her ex, and coming to terms with her romantic/economic relationship.

“Shiva Baby” is writer/director Emma Seligman's first feature film, and it displays a genuine talent for storytelling. This is one of those movies that is basically a play, just a series of conversations taking place in a few rooms. It's fun, funny, and well-played, with a surprisingly strong cast on a budget of only $250,000.

3.5 stars out of 5

The Independents (2018) ***

 

If you love music and the process of creating music, you definitely have to check out the films of Irish director John Carney. In films like “Once,” "Begin Again," and "Sing Street," he lovingly creates stories about artists finding one another and creating great songs. What's that you say? You are already a John Carney fan? Already watched all his movies? In that case, you need to check out “The Independents,” the best John Carney film not made by Jon Carney.

Greg Naughton, 1/3 of the real-life musical trio The Sweet Remains, wrote and directed the film, which is loosely based on his band's origin story. He plays himself in the film, as do the other 2 Sweet Remains members, Rich Price and Brian Chartrand. It's a sweet story about 3 guys whose lives are screwed up in different ways, saving themselves by finding their musical soulmates. The story and performances are decent, but the real draw is the music. With their acoustic sound and 3-part harmonies, The Sweet Remains sound great, and the movie makes the process of creating those songs look delightfully effortless. Truth is, I couldn't remember any of the individual songs by the end, but they sounded epic while they were being made!

3 stars out of 5

Swingers (1996) ****

 

“Swingers” is a story about what it would be like to be a guy if guys were like chicks. By this, I mean, if guys were constantly complimenting each other and building up each other's confidence, constantly checking in with how their friends are doing emotionally. Watching the movie, you would naturally assume it was written by a woman, but, oddly enough, it's written by Jon Favreau, who also stars in the film.

Favreau plays Mike, a comedian struggling in L.A., desperately missing his old girlfriend back in New York. He obsesses night and day about this girl, following the advice of his friend Rob (Ron Livingston) to wait for her to call him. Meanwhile, his tall, confident friend Trent (Vince Vaughn) keeps taking Mike out to meet honeys, but it's no good. All Mike can do is mope about his ex-girl, but at least he does it to a background of glitzy, L.A. nightlife and boppin' music, including classic crooners and modern swing-bands.

“Swingers” is deservedly a cult classic. I re-watched it recently, and it is still hilarious. Favreau is a blazing ball of insecurity. In one iconic scene, he gets a girl's number, his friends congratulate him, and he is feeling pretty good about himself. His friends debate how many days he should wait to call her, but once he gets home that night, he gives in to temptation and calls her number, leaving a voice mail. Then he obsesses about how he sounded in the message, so he calls back and leaves a follow-up message, then another and another. As the situation deteriorates, Favreau is hilarious and painful to watch.

Meanwhile, Vince Vaughn is a revelation. This is the movie that launched his career, and you can see why. His fast-talking Trent is magnetic. It's basically the same motormouth he has played in every role since, but in 1996 it was fresh and original. He made lines like “Vegas, Baby, Vegas!” and “You're so money, and you don't even know it” into Gen X catchphrases.

On a budget of only $200,000, Jon Favreau created a truly special film, one that launched both his and Vince Vaughn's careers. If you can ignore the fact that it's a completely unrealistic depiction of male interaction, “Swingers” is a delightfully good time, full of good music and hilarious dialogue. “Vegas, Baby, Vegas!”

4 stars out of 5

Let Him Go (2020) **1/2

 

In the crisp air and open vistas of Montana, Margaret and George Blackledge (Diane Lane and Kevin Costner) lose a son to a riding accident, then watch their daughter-in-law re-marry, to a man of questionable character. When their new son-in-law packs up his family and leaves town without warning, taking their beloved, little grandson with him, the Blackledges set out on an Odyssey to find their grandson and rescue him if necessary. The trip takes them across Wyoming and into North Dakota, where they have to face off against an insular, dangerous family of ranchers, led by the steely-eyed Blanche Weboy (Lesley Manville).

“Let Him Go” is hard to get a handle on at first, because it fakes you out. It starts out looking like a movie about rugged men in a rugged landscape, but the film is best understood as a story about two strong, complex, flawed women. Margaret's love for her grandson, driven as it is by grief, leads her to marginalize her daughter-in-law. This drives the girl into an inappropriate marriage, which sets the whole tragedy in motion. On the other side of the coin, Blanche has used her iron will to hold her family together and eke out a living in an unforgiving North Dakota landscape. In the process, she has browbeat everyone so much that she lives surrounded by men who appear unable to make any decisions without her. She enforces a harsher life on her family than is necessary, and her prickly nature makes an enemy of anyone she can't dominate.

I found the plot to be irritating. The characters make a bunch of stupid decisions. The movie is worth watching, though, for the stunning, western imagery, not to mention Diane Lane and Kevin Costner. I don't know which of them is more beautiful, but I'm leaning towards Diane Lane, who sports the best head of gray hair since Emmylou Harris. Lesley Manville is also excellent as Blanche. The rest of the cast may as well be extras, with the exception of Booboo Stewart, a striking, young actor who plays an Indian man who befriends the Blackledges.

“Let Him Go” is the kind of movie that usually garners a bunch of Oscar nominations. It's mostly slow-paced. It gives the audience a taste of violence and revenge, while officially frowning on such things. Hollywood usually eats this stuff up! Maybe the movie is too white for a newly-woke Academy, or maybe Oscar voters just felt, as I did, that the uneven story-telling was not completely redeemed by the excellent cast and cinematography.

2.5 stars out of 5

Animals (2019) ****

 

Based on Emma Jane Unsworth's 2014 novel, “Animals” is a tale of a couple of drunks. Laura (Holliday Grainger) and Tyler (Alia Shawkat, from “Arrested Development”) are flatmates living a life of excess, drinking and drugging their way through a misspent youth. When Laura meets and becomes engaged to Jim, a straight-laced concert pianist, she keeps partying with Tyler, but the situation is unsustainable. The tug-of-war between the two most important people in Laura's life begins to strain both relationships, and the cracks begin to show.

“Animals” has been compared to “Withnail & I” for good reason. Like Withnail and his reprobate friend, Laura and Tyler live in filth, continually addling their brains. Where “Withnail & I' was a total farce, however, “Animals” is a more serious character study, with the focus on Laura and what she will do with her life. In college, she had shown promise as a writer, but she has now been “working” for years on her novel. Any attempt to get serious about her writing is sabotaged by Tyler, and the same thing happens with Laura's attempts to get serious about her relationship with Jim.

On one level, Tyler's motivation is easy to understand: She doesn't want to lose her drinking buddy and partner-in-crime. It's never completely clear, though, why she is so dedicated to stunting Laura's progress in life and to remaining stunted herself. She is aggressively against marriage, family, or sustaining anything that looks like personal growth.

“Animals” benefits from great source material (The novel was excellent.) and a great cast. Holliday Grainger and Alia Shawkat are pitch-perfect in these roles, sexy in one scene and then really committing to the grossness of excess in the next. It would be easy for a movie on this theme to veer into after-school special territory, but “Animals” avoids easy moralizing or a neat ending. It's a funny, satisfying, thought-provoking story about the challenge of being a complex, young human being.

4 stars out of 5

Fatman (2020) ****

 

I'm not sure the world needed a movie about a grizzled, gun-toting Santa Claus, but we sure got one with “Fatman.” Mel Gibson plays the titular Chris Kringle, living up north with Mrs. Kringle (the excellent Marianne Jean-Baptiste) and his elves. Kringle's business is waning. There are fewer and fewer “nice” kids every year to receive his toys, and he spends more and more time dropping off coal for “naughty” brats.

One of these brats takes his lump of coal personally, and he hires a hit-man (Walton Goggins) to go after Kringle. This isn't Kringle's first rodeo, however, and when the epic, bloody showdown comes, the fat man is ready.

“Fatman's” premise makes it a comedy, but filmmakers Eshom and Ian Nelms play the story straight, giving us a dark Christmas story, indeed. It's an unlikely movie, and it works because they allow it to play out to the end as an action-drama, never getting jokey. Gibson reminds us of why he is still a movie star, exploring Kringle's disillusionment and world-weariness, and he benefits from a talented supporting cast, especially Jean-Baptiste. She lends a lot of gravitas to Kringle's cookie-baking wife and partner.

“Fatman” clearly will not be everyone's cup of tea. A dark comedy, action thriller, noir, Christmas western is a mixture of genres that will leave many viewers scratching their heads, just as it did many of the film executives to whom the Nelms brothers pitched it. The movie is an instant cult classic. If you find yourself wondering why anyone would make a film like this, then it probably isn't for you. If you heard the premise and said “Hell Yeah!,” then you should definitely click “Play” and hold on for a wild sleigh ride!

4 stars out of 5

You Were Never Really Here (2017) ***1/2

 

You may know of the writer, Jonathan Ames, from “Bored to Death,” the delightful HBO series based on his novella of the same name. It's about a bored, blocked writer who decides to try his hand at being a private investigator. What you may not know is that while the show is a comedy, the novella is actually a dark, serious, noir tale, not funny at all. Ames's writing covers a lot of genres, but I find him to be at his best writing serious noir. His other noir piece is another novella, “You Were Never Really Here,” and this time around, the screen version follows the written story pretty closely.

Joaquin Phoenix plays Joe, a troubled veteran who operates as something between a private detective and a hit-man. Joe specializes in rescuing girls who are being trafficked. Unlike a private eye, Joe doesn't get the cops involved. He just goes in and gets the girl out, and anyone who gets in his way is screwed. His weapon of choice is a hammer, because it's cheap, legal to carry, and easy to dispose of after the job. Joe isn't some ripped martial artist. He's a bit flabby, but bulky, and I would not want him coming at me with a hammer. His super-power is his complete lack of compunctions. When he isn't working, Joe's life is simple. He lives with and cares for his elderly mother. Otherwise, he ruminates on his troubled past, which includes his military service, his time in the FBI, and having an abusive father. We are given hints at this past in tiny flashbacks throughout the film.

Joe is hired by a politician to discreetly recover his daughter from a fancy brothel. The job is right in Joe's line, but it sucks him into a high-level conspiracy that threatens his insular world.

“You Were Never Really Here” is a good movie, but not for the faint of heart. The story is dark, the noiriest of noirs. It is also fragmented. We are thrust into Joe's present without explanation, given snippets of his past randomly, and only slowly does the story come together, and only if you are paying attention. Screenwriter and director Lynne Ramsay assumes a certain level of intelligence in her audience, an ability to infer what isn't explicitly given. This makes for a compelling film that I like more the more I think about it, but it also means you cannot afford to zone out for a second. When Ramsay tells us something important in this film, she only says it once. Not that you will want to zone out. “You Were Never Really Here” is a challenging film, and slow-paced, but it's a compelling story about a man who has seen terrible things, trying to find a reason to continue existing.

3.5 stars out of 5

Dazed and Confused (1993) *****

 

I've been catching up on some classic horror films lately, and the lesson from those is that teenagers hang out, get drunk, get high, get laid, and then get killed. It's nice to revisit a movie about teens doing the first four, without having to get slaughtered. Richard Linklater's coming-of-age story is a classic slice of life, full of classic lines and classic rock.

The film takes place on the last day of school, in Austin, TX, 1976. A varied collection of students prepare for their summer. For the rising Seniors who happen to be jocks and cheerleaders, this means hazing the incoming Freshman, a time-honored process that will continue all summer. On the receiving end of this abuse are Mitch and Sabrina, who tolerate the hazing and are rewarded by getting to hang out and party all night with the older kids. Rising Senior Randall “Pink” Floyd is the star quarterback, and he takes part in the hazing halfheartedly. Pink basically gets along with everyone, including the stoners at his school, and he lacks the sadism of his fellow athletes. He spends the night debating whether he should continue playing football, which will involve signing a hypocritical, “voluntary” pledge to avoid alcohol and drugs.

Not everyone in the film is a popular jock or cheerleader. The story includes stoners, thugs, and nerds, including a trio of intellectuals who cruise around overthinking everything, trying to find a literal party and trying to find the party in themselves.

The most memorable character in “Dazed and Confused” was almost a footnote. David Wooderson is one of those guys in his early 20s who still hangs around high school kids, leching on the girls, and trying to act cool and wise. In the original script, Wooderson was just an extra. The legend goes that Matthew McConaughey, a film student at the time, spotted casting director Don Phillips in an Austin bar, and introduced himself. The two hit it off, and Phillips offered him the small part. Once McConaughey got on set and started bringing the character to life, everyone was blown away, the part was expanded, and Wooderson became a classic character with lines like “That's what I love about these high school girls, man. I get older; they stay the same age.”

More lighthearted than “Fast Times at Ridgemont High, “ and without the obligatory tragedy of “American Graffiti,” “Dazed and Confused” is much closer to a slice of real teenage life, although a bit idealized. Belying its title, the film depicts teens who are much cooler and more self-aware than my friends and I ever were. It's a reasonable fantasy, though, about a perfect party night, hanging with friends and making new friends, meeting a guy or girl, and feeling cool.

5 stars out of 5