The Running Man (2025)

Director: Edgar Wright
Starring: Glen Powell, Josh Brolin, Colman Domingo, Lee Pace, Michael Cera, Emilia Jones, William H. Macy, Daniel Ezra, Jayme Lawson, Alyssa and Sienna Benn, Katy O' Brian, Karl Glusman, Martin Herlihy, Sean Hayes, David Zayas, Angelo Gray, Oluniké Adeliyi
Running Time: 133 min.
Rating: R

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)     

Of the many Stephen King adaptations that hit screens in 2025, a new take on The Running Man always seemed the most logical on paper. That's mainly due to so much happening in the world since the author first published his 1982 novel about a dystopian reality show that sees its protagonist competing in a nationally televised battle for his life. But when the Arnold Schwarzenegger original hit theaters a few years later, it arrived as a cheesy guilty pleasure very much of its era, yet ripe for a potential revisiting down the road. 

Now, with the confluence of reality TV, the internet, smart phones, digital surveillance, artificial intelligence and socio-political conflicts, key aspects of King's eerily prophetic tale have come to pass, creating a wealth of new ideas from which co-writer/director Edgar Wright can draw. And does he ever, which only makes the chilly reception this received from critics and audiences even more perplexing. Unfolding at a breakneck pace, it's edited and constructed well enough to earn a lengthy run time, with much of its success attributable to Wright's world building, a smart script, its great cast and a handful of mind blowing action set pieces. 

In a near future, the United States is governed by an authoritarian media entity called the Network, which ensures the country's population lives in poverty with little access to affordable healthcare. Rearing the nation's viewers on a trashy diet of reality TV and violent game shows, ordinary citizens are given a chance to beat the odds in rigged televised competitions that offer substantial monetary rewards. The most popular is The Running Man, where three "runners" have a shot at winning $1 billion if they survive 30 days without being killed by the Network's five "hunters." But for recently unemployed blue collar worker Ben Richards (Glen Powell), it could be his only chance at affording medicine for he and wife Sheila's (Jayme Lawson) sick two-year-old daughter, Cathy (Alyssa and Sienna Benn).  

Despite Sheila's pleas, Ben auditions for the show, bringing him face-to-face with producer Dan Killian (Josh Brolin), who senses he might have a huge ratings draw on his hands. Ben signs on the dotted line, but when the hunt begins, he quickly realizes fans are being duped by Killian and bombastic show host Bobby Thompson (Colman Domingo) into viewing him as a cold, calculated criminal. But while Ben captivates the audience and outsmarts mysteriously masked lead hunter Evan McCone (Lee Pace), Killian orchestrates the ultimate finale, as the show's latest breakout star fights for his survival. 

Even before the film's title card appears, we see a desperate, quick tempered Ben pleading for his old job back, having risked standing up for co-workers in a society where selfless actions aren't just frowned upon, but punished. Now with a sick child and his wife pulling double duty waitressing at a shady establishment, desperation starts sinking in. It's also our first glimpse of this corporate media dictatorship that strikes just the right balance of hewing close enough to certain aspects of contemporary culture while also having a semi-futuristic feel firmly rooted in sci-fi.  

Wright and co-writer Michael Bacall are threading a thin needle here, but the execution is backed up by Andrew Whitehurst's VFX and some really impressive set design from Marcus Rowland that help move this far past the TV-centric plot of its 1987 cinematic predecessor. And though a certain cheese factor remains, it's considerably less, passing as an actual game show you'd watch, albeit one that serves the story's many thematic goals. 

This battle-to-the-death manhunt presided over by its sleazy, carnival barker of a host manipulates viewers into accepting whatever constantly changing "rules" Killian sees fit. But it also accomplishes a larger, more sinister goal in keeping the lower class subservient to the Network, who dangle the possibility of hope over helpless contestants who don't stand a chance at winning. They're aware how stacked the deck is, but don't have a say, knowing their only shot at escaping poverty is surviving to the end. Cunning, athletic and angry enough for that to seem attainable, Ben's in a different league than fellow contestants Jenni (Katy O' Brian) and Tim (Martin Herlihy), creating an intriguing dynamic with Killian, who sees dollar signs for at least as long as he can control him.

The show's presentation and format is concisely explained without slowing the momentum, but it's what happens once Ben leaves the studio that makes for such a thrilling ride. If the '87 film failed at opening up King's story, this better explores Ben (given some flimsy disguises by William H. Macy's store owner Molie) contending with a bloodthirsty public eager to give him up for a reward. As the hunters close in, the film cleverly incorporates social media and drone cameras, making it clear even the highly skilled Ben needs more help. This is evident when mandatory video testimonials he mails in to air on the program are edited and manipulated by Killian to push the Network's agenda and turn viewers against him.  

There's a relentless, brilliantly staged hotel action sequence that sees Ben attempting to escape the hunters' clutches that's somehow topped by a latter one that plays like a deranged and dangerous Home Alone reenactment. All of it eventually leads to a plane ride from hell that finds Ben in an explosive final showdown that'll determine his ultimate fate. Along the way we get some lively supporting turns from Daniel Ezra as a Running Man-obsessed streamer aiding Ben in his escape and a wildly entertaining Michael Cera, whose rebellious survivalist Elton will do anything to exact revenge on the Network that killed his father. 

Cera's brief, but incredibly memorable and eccentric performance strikes just the right tone while Emilia Jones appears late in the third act as Amelia, a highfalutin woman taken hostage by Ben. Yes, her character's a plot device, but you'd never know that considering all she brings to a role that serves an such an important function in Ben's quest to open the public's eyes to government crimes and corruption. 

Though Pace strikes an evil, imposing presence as masked vigilante McCone, it's Brolin's Svengali-like Killian who calls the shots, filtering instructions through Colman Domingo's flamboyant emcee. The latter puts his own unique spin on Richard Dawson's '87 outing while the ideally cast Brolin personifies this smarmy, manipulative mastermind with more than a few twists in store. He may respect Ben's will to win, but primarily sees him as a tool for further strengthen the Network's grip over society. 

Ben becomes a symbol, and whether he survives the ordeal or not, his impact could prove longer lasting by showing citizens their potential power to invoke change. Powell provides a worthy mix of anger, desperation, physical prowess and morality to the rebellious Ben, demonstrating again why he received all those early Tom Cruise comparisons. While he's not there yet, and his best work remains 2024's overlooked Hit Man, this project can't help but feel like another step forward in further showcasing that versatility.        

Aside from a pat, overexplanatory final few minutes that tells rather than shows, The Running Man flirts with perfection and may even be superior to King's similarly themed The Long Walk adaptation from the same year. Easily putting to shame the '87 version, it'll rattle Scott Pilgrim fans to hear it's a strong contender for Wright's best film, or at least his most focused and accessible. Free from any polarizing quirks, this looks and feels like a big deal, rarely letting up as it makes the most of its inspired premise. And by using time and technology to expand on the original's ideas, it enhances the potency of a message that's only grown in the decades since. 

Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery

Director: Rian Johnson
Starring: Daniel Craig, Josh O'Connor, Glenn Close, Josh Brolin, Mila Kunis, Jeremy Renner, Kerry Washington, Andrew Scott, Cailee Spaeny, Daryl McCormack, Thomas Hayden Church, Jeffrey Wright, Annie Hamilton, James Faulkner, Bridget Everett, Noah Segan
Running Time: 144 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★) 

Among writer/director Rian Johnson's trilogy of Knives Out films, Wake Up Dead Man is sort of an outlier, taking a slightly different route than the two mysteries preceding it. Besides having more on its mind philosophically, the tone is darker and its lead detective shares the spotlight, resulting in enough of a departure to keep us guessing. But what's always been fun about the series remains unchanged, as Johnson still delivers the surprising twists, only this time digging a little deeper into these characters than usual. It's also a slow burn, waiting nearly a half hour to reintroduce the quirky sleuth who'll be diving into another seemingly unsolvable crime. 

While those elements distinguish this, there's no reason for those enamored with the familiar formula to worry Johnson's off his game, especially once we meet the latest rogues gallery of eccentric suspects. An argument could even be made it's the strongest entry of the three, at least outside the original, which would still justifiably win the popular vote. But in displacing those films' eagerness to please with a more somber tone and religiously supernatural plotline, this is the true Glass Onion of the series, its many layers gradually peeling away as we approach the final reveal. 

When former boxer turned Catholic priest Jud Duplenticy (Josh O' Connor) punches a widely disliked deacon, he's transferred by Bishop Langstrom (Jeffrey Wright) to small upstate New York parish, Our Lady of Perpetual Fortitude. While there, he serves as assistant pastor to the enigmatic Monsignor Jefferson Wicks (Josh Brolin), whose angry, controversial sermons have driven many from the church, leaving behind a small, but intensely devoted group of parishioners who both fear and respect him. It isn't long before Jud and Wicks clash over moral differences, but when the latter is stabbed during a Good Friday service, local police chief Geraldine Scott (Mila Kunis) calls in private detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) to investigate. 

Jud is the prime suspect, followed by a handful of others, including Wicks' devoted church lady Martha Delacroix (Glenn Close), recently divorced alcoholic doctor Nat Sharp (Jeremy Renner), lawyer Vera Draven (Kerry Washington), her adopted son and aspiring conservative politician Cy (Daryl McCormack), struggling sci-fi author Lee Ross (Andrew Scott), disabled former concert cellist Simone Vivane (Cailee Spaeny) and groundskeeper Samson Holt (Thomas Haden Church). Everyone's hiding something, but in attempting to crack the case, Blanc unconventionally recruits potential killer Jud to tag along.   

What resonates most about this mystery is how a spiritually doubtful Jud being sent to this church simultaneously becomes the best and worst thing that could possibly happen, testing him in ways he didn't know possible. And that it's Jud rather than Blanc serving as our entry point makes this as much his story than anyone else's, including the eventual victim. Equally believable here as he was as a struggling pro tennis player in Challengers, O'Connor quickly settles into the role of an affable, good natured priest with a chip on his shoulder. Jud takes his reassignment in stride, at least until he gets there and meets the arrogant Wicks, who's played with villainous energy by a scene stealing Brolin.

Clearly resentful toward Jud for intruding on his territory, Wicks rules the congregation with an iron fist, resembling a cult leader in how his devoted followers worship his every word, needing guidance they're convinced only he can provide. In exchange, he doesn't just get their money, but fuel for his insatiable ego, fostering a transactional relationship where they're entirely dependent on him. Whether it's a doctor whose wife just left him or a wheelchair bound musician in need of a miracle, they all think he has the cure for what ails them. 

There's a timely undercurrent running through the film as a manipulative Cy sees dollar signs in the church, harnessing Wicks' hold over his desperate believers as a springboard for his own political ambitions. But more fascinating is Wicks' sordid family history involving his grandfather and church founder Rev. Prentice Wicks (James Faulkner) and troubled mother Grace (Annie Hamilton), who unsuccessfully schemed to obtain her father's missing inheritance after his death. Depicted in a gripping early flashback, it could provide possible clues related to the details of the murder.  

Blanc's brought on by local law enforcement, and if we know anything about him by now, it's that he works alone even when he's not, using his own unique approach to plausibly fit all the puzzle pieces together. And while his bizarre crime solving alliance with Jud hinges on letting the young priest's perspective guide the investigation, Blanc doesn't want to believe Jud did this any more than we do, leaving us wondering what angle the detective's working. But even with O'Connor and Craig standing out as MVPs, there's no shortage of impressive supporting turns from a thoroughly unlikable Brolin, the hard to read Renner and especially Glenn Close, whose Martha serves as the church's eyes and ears.

The ending's jaw-droppingly convoluted and drags a bit, but still somehow makes complete sense, rewarding audiences for paying attention to smaller details pertaining to each character. But the real mystery might be how Johnson again managed to wrangle such eclectic cast, who all look to be having the time of their lives playing against type in some form or another. So while it's difficult to gauge just how much longer he can keep pumping these mysteries out or when we'll tire of them, the continued level of quality suggests this series still has a long way to go before reaching its saturation point.             

Weapons

Director: Zach Cregger
Starring: Josh Brolin, Julia Garner, Alden Ehrenreich, Austin Abrams, Cary Christopher, Toby Huss, Benedict Wong, Amy Madigan, Whitmer Thomas, Callie Schuttera, June Diane Raphael, Luke Speakman, Sara Paxton, Justin Long, Clayton Farris, Scarlett Sher
Running Time: 128 min.
Rating: R

**The Following Review Contains Plot Spoilers**

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★) 

Some of the best films begin with a simple, single sentence idea that's notable for being unlike anything we've heard before. Writer/director Zach Cregger's Weapons is built on such a premise, showing early signs of a potential masterpiece as it attempts to fulfill the promise of its wholly original concept. But how it starts is entirely different from what follows, especially when the crux of that story hinges on one seemingly unanswerable question. 

To Cregger's credit, he doesn't cop out on giving us an answer, regardless of whether it's the one we want. And because of this, we're willing to buy into the payoff accompanying those astronomical expectations. While its wisest to approach this as a straightforward horror vehicle along the lines of Cregger's own Barbarian or Oz Perkins' Longlegs, a captivating jigsaw puzzle structure, great performances and an equal abundance of scares and laughs enable it to easily eclipse both. There's an an ambition and assuredness to how it comes together, resulting in a divisive reveal that also happens to be a total blast.

Two years ago in the town of Maybrook, Pennsylvania, seventeen students from elementary school teacher Justine Gandy's (Julia Garner) third grade class ran out of their homes at 2:17 a.m. and disappeared. Later that morning, Justine arrived to discover only one child, Alex Lilly (Cary Christopher), in her classroom as authorities get involved and parents frantically search for their kids. With an irate public demanding an investigation into Justine, a muted Alex quietly processes the tragedy, all while the days leading to and following the event are shown through separate, occasionally intersecting chapters.  

Each of these sections follow a character impacted or perhaps even potentially involved. There's Justine, her ex-boyfriend and police officer Paul (Alden Ehrenreich), construction contractor and parent Archer (Josh Brolin), school principal Marcus (Benedict Wong), homeless drug addict James (Austin Abrams), the shell shocked Alex and an eccentric older woman named Gladys (Amy Madigan). Each of their segments provide additional pieces of information about what happened to these children, bringing us increasingly closer to the truth.

In the film's hypnotic opening minutes, we watch those kids run down the street arms outstretched as George Harrison's haunting "Beware of Darkness" plays over the soundtrack and an unidentified girl's folksy voiceover describes the vanishing. This casts a pallor of atmospheric dread that extends beyond the parameters of "elevated horror" into another realm we're not sure the rest of the film can deliver on, despite our willingness to take the ride. And though much of its first half plays as a psychological thriller, it's impossible not to view the event itself, along with the ensuing search for answers, as a clear allegory for school shootings and child abductions.   

Much of the first act surrounds the direct aftermath of the disappearance, with the town's enraged parents baring down on Justine since it can't merely be a coincidence that only her students went missing. But it's also an argument more borne from helpless anger than logic since she's an easy scapecoat unaided by her own checkered past. That she's the town's defacto suspect on circumstance alone isn't a detail that's lost on school principal Marcus or Toby Huss' Police Captain Ed.

An understanding Marcus sympathizes with Justine's plight while recognizing the problems her continued employment causes, especially when she insists on talking with a traumatized Alex. Ed just lacks any credible evidence of her involvement, as everything took place outside school hours, with the kids caught on camera willingly running from their homes. And that detail will prove particularly important.  

Garner's career defining work in Ozark aside, few could argue the actress's performance here represents her best onscreen performance yet as Justine's attempts to maintain the facade of an orderly, composed grade school teacher is frayed at the seams by insurmountable pressure and judgment. Whether she's harassed by parents, having her car vandalized, hitting the bottle or reigniting an affair with married ex Paul, she's understandably overwhelmed and close to reaching the end of her rope. 

While those who really know Justine seriously doubt she has something to do with this, her own instincts about Alex couldn't be more correct. If from the start it's implied these two "surviving" characters hold the key, no parent demands answers more than the brutish Archer, who Brolin plays with the quiet intensity of a determined father who'll stop at nothing to find his son. Giving little credence to what cops or other parents think, Archer adopts a logical method in scanning neighborhood security footage for crucial clues. And aside from his illicit affair with Justine, Ehrenreich's Paul battles an issue of his own that doesn't appear connected to the central mystery. At least until it is.    

The fun of Cregger's story comes not just from speculating which character he'll pivot to next, but why, and how that dovetails with what comes before or follows after. And it gradually start coming together during a combative gas station moment between Justine and Archer that goes completely sideways, confirming our suspicions of a supernatural component lying at the heart of this dark, twisted fairy tale. 

Dots connect in the film's big reveal, entertainingly unraveling every clue we've been given, most of which involve Alex and his creepy "aunt" Gladys, played by an unrecognizable Amy Madigan in a bright orange wig and garish clown makeup. Wacky, campy and sinister all at once, her ability to embody this outwardly disarming kook with a sadistic plan defines the concluding thirty minutes. Like everything else in the film, there are numerous interpretations of her presence, whether that's as a malevolent instigator of change and disruption in children's lives or even the physical manifestation of society's fearful disdain of the elderly. Either way, she's pure nightmare fuel, especially in a terrifying moment that sees her spontaneously pop up in the woods.  

As it all comes to fruition, you can definitely make a case for plot holes (such as no one noticing those missing name tags), but good luck turning away from the craziness for even a minute. And the actual execution remains undeniably thrilling in the face of a bar set high enough for any chosen ending to cause disappointment or controversy. But therein lies the dilemma of whether to judge this for what it is, isn't, or maybe a little of both. Transcending limitations of the genre, Weapons takes a fresh approach, inviting repeated viewings that should determine the extent of its staying power. For now though, let's file it under "mind blowing" and appreciate that Cregger's just getting started, with his best still likely to come.             

Dune: Part Two

Director: Denis Villeneuve
Starring: Timothée Chalamet, Zendaya, Rebecca Ferguson, Josh Brolin, Austin Butler, Florence Pugh, Dave Bautista, Christopher Walken, Lea Seydoux, Souheila Yacoub, Stellan Skarsgård, Charlotte Rampling, Javier Bardem 
Running Time: 166 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)     

Denis Villeneuve's adaptation of Frank Herbert's seminal sci-fi novel Dune always seemed intended as a giant, visually impressive spectacle that doesn't primarily rely on its story to succeed. You could even argue it benefits the viewer not to think too hard about the details for risk of ruining the experience. That definitely holds true for its 2021 predecessor, where Velleneuve overcame the challenges of introducing a world populated by characters who needed to hold our interest through two or more sequels. 

Most of that first film felt like setup, abruptly ending before the main course arrived. Now, after what felt far longer than a two and a half year wait, the sequel arrives. Only this dark, heady, somewhat odd property isn't your usual franchise tentpole, carrying the risk that some fans may find themselves playing catch up with the story. But with its mind boggling vistas, astonishing effects and flawless sound and production design, it does qualify as "epic" in every sense of the word, noticeably bigger and more ambitious than what came before.

Picking up almost immediately where the last film left off, Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) aligns with the Fremen following the destruction of House Atreides by House Harkonnen. Against his pregnant mother Jessica's (Rebecca Ferguson) wishes, Paul is taken in by tribal leader Stilgar (Javier Bardem) as "the chosen one," forming a close bond with Fremen warrior Chani (Zendaya). Now with friend and mentor Gurney Halleck (Josh Brolin) back by his side, Paul aims to avenge his father's death while the Harkonnens escalate their attacks to gain control of Arrakis. 

Meanwhile, the incompetent hothead Rabban (Dave Bautista) proves himself a failed leader of the Harkonnens, prompting his Jabba-like uncle Baron (Stellan Skarsgård) to transfer the reigns to ruthless younger sibling Feyd-Rautha (Austin Butler). And as Paul settles into his new role with the Fremen, Emperor Shaddam IV (Christopher Walken), daughter Irulan (Florence Pugh) and the Reverend Mother (Charlotte Rampling) brace themselves for retribution. With fighting between the two factions reaching its boiling point, only a showdown remains in determining Paul's final destiny.

Overflowing with plot and characters, you'd think this follow-up would lend credence to all the skeptics who still consider Dune one of those notoriously unfilmable novels. So it's to Villeneuve and co-writer Jordan Spaihts' credit that they manage to balance it all out and wrangle the themes into a straightforward, digestible package. If someone bypassed the 2021 entry and came into this cold they may not be completely lost, especially since the world itself is as much a draw as the actual narrative.

Paul's journey takes detours and excursions, but all roads leads to his gradual transformation. While we're given some voiceover from Pugh's Irulan, the opening hour mostly consists of his assimilation into the Freman, the burgeoning relationship with Chani and a handful of spectacular battle sequences. Originally, Chalamet was considered a divisive choice for the role, but everything about the character's arc in this sequel lends more credibility to his that casting, as the actor quietly builds on the groundwork laid out in the last film, paving Paul's path from insecure, reluctant outsider to burgeoning leader, despite Chani's legitimate reservations.

Zendaya further extends her 2024 on screen winning streak with her extended take on Chani, conveying just the right mix of stubborn skepticism and practicality opposite Chalamet. We detect her character's unease over what's to come and it won't be long before discovering just how right she is. And as the dangerous consequences of mixing politics and religion remain constant, Rebecca Ferguson's hooded, face tattooed Reverend Mother Jessica (who telepathically communicates with her unborn daughter) will come to represent the inflection point for that conflict.  

As everything converges in Empire Strikes Back style by its end, so too does the rise of the ruthless Feyd-Rautha, terrifyingly played by a pale, unrecognizably demonic Austin Butler. Tasked with stepping into the role originally filled by Sting in David Lynch's '84 attempt, he definitely makes it his own, especially during a black and white coliseum showdown stunningly shot by cinematographer Greig Fraser. 

The more our "hero" avoids fulfilling his prophecy the closer he gets, with that ongoing sense of inevitability hovering over every scene. By the time he eventually reaches his perceived goal, it won't come without major sacrifices he'll continue to weigh as this saga continues. Some of the metaphysical elements are a bit much, but at almost 3 hours, Joe Walker's masterful editing ensures there's no extra fat on the bone, as everything at least feels important and unmissable. Once pulled into this expansive, oddly hypnotizing universe, any uninitiated viewers' concerns should wash away, replaced with anticipation for where Villeneuve plans to go next.  

Dune (2021)

Director: Denis Villeneuve
Starring: Timothée Chalamet, Rebecca Ferguson, Oscar Isaac, Josh Brolin, Stellan Skarsgård, Dave Bautista, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Zendaya, David Dastmalchian, Chang Chen, Sharon Duncan-Brewster, Charlotte Rampling, Jason Momoa, Javier Bardem
Running Time: 156 min.
Rating: PG-13 

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

Better the longer it sits with you, Denis Villeneuve's Dune has the unenviable task of once again bringing to life the world in Frank Herbert's groundbreaking 1965 novel, while also picking up the pieces from one already perceived failure of an adaptation. There are few major, commercially viable cinematic properties left carrying as much baggage, due mostly to its inaccessibility and heady themes. Despite a story predating Star Wars by over a decade, on paper the plot contains elements justifiably earning those comparisons, albeit with more abstract material at its core, previously resulting in a rough big screen transition. Even if appreciation for his vision has grown slightly since, David Lynch learned found out the hard way in 1984, ensuring it wouldn't be revisted on a similar scale or scope until now. 

Arrival and Blade Runner 2049's Villeneuve seemed as good a choice as any to tackle this, possibly bringing the visual grandeur necessary to distract from, or maybe even enhance, some of the colder, navel-gazing excursions long thought to make it a better read than watch. And he does, giving us the best possible adaptation under the circumstances, even if a feeling of dread may overcome viewers when they see a title card reading "Dune: Part One" at the start of this 265-minute epic. Given the density of its source, that was inevitable, but you have to wonder whether this has the creative momentum necessary to become the franchise it's being positioned as. But it's a success, carefully guided by a director who, to his credit, doesn't try to fit a square peg into a round hole or dumb down a story that takes its time to marinate.

It's 1091 and the ruler of the ocean planet Caladan, Duke Leto (Oscar Isaac) of House Atreides has just been assigned to replace Baron Vladimir Harkonnen (Stellan Skarsgard) of House Harkonnen as the fief ruler of desert planet Arrakis. It's a rough, harsh terrain, but provides the only source of "spice," an invaluable resource critical to human viality and interstellar travel. Unbeknownst to Leto and House Atreides' weapons master Gurney Halleck (Josh Brolin), the Emperor is having Harkonnen stage a coup wit his troops to retake the planet, eradicating them before they can control the spice or form an advantageous alliance with the Freman, Arrakis' native inhabitants, represented by tribe leader Stilgar (Javier Bardem).

Leto's concubine, Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson), an acolyte of the Bene Gesserit sisterhood, possesses advanced physical and mental capabilities that have been passed on to son Paul (Timothée Chamalet), who is trained by her, Halleck and  swordsmaster, Duncan Idaho (Jason Momoa). While they all sense greatness in young Paul, he has impulse control issues and problems harnessing his powers, distracted by visions of a turbulent future and dreams of a mysterious young Freman woman (Zendaya). A war looms as Harkonnen's fleet of troops and hulking nephew Glossu Rabban (Dave Bautista) prepare to attack. With the fate of House Atreides, as well as the planet of Arrakis hanging in the balance, their futures may depend on Paul answering the call to fulfill his true destiny.      

As involved as this all seems, it's even more convoluted than that, so Villeneuve deserves credit for distilling the script he co-wrote with Joe Spaihts and Eric Roth into a palpable cinematic experience that reaches a certain level of comprehensibility. They didn't exactly hit the jackpot in terms of the breeziest sci-fi tomes to adapt so it's actually amazing how well this holds together, especially in its strongest middle section. For anyone not already familar with Herbert's novel or Lynch's '84 take, what will initially be most noticeable are how many basic mythological tenets it shares in common with the Star Wars trilogy, including a young hero struggling with his lineage who's now suddenly thrust into a leadership role in the wake of family tragedy. 

The use of a Bene Gissert Force-like technique known as the "Voice" that's ultilized to control others actions are where the closest similarities between Paul and young Skywalker end. If the latter was an eager go-getter almost too energetic for his own good, Paul's the most reluctant and introverted of heroes, with Chamalet subtly conveying a quiet confidence, while still registering his character's inner anguish and growing dread in nearly every scene. He's asked to do a lot while at times sustaining an almost absent stillness, putting a lot of pressure on the audience to embrace an entirely different kind of protagonist who must adhere to a philosophy built almost entirely on restraint and passivity, at least until it isn't. 

Since the character of Paul is such a departure, for some it may not be the most compelling thing to watch, but Chamalet completely makes it work, especially in his many scenes opposite a tremendous Rebecca Ferguson as his mother, Lady Jessica, who's simultaneously disappointed in and encouraging of her son. This, and his futuristic visions of Zendaya's Chani might be the film's most successful element, with even cinematographer Greig Fraser's impressive vistas and Hans Zimmmer's score managing to take a backseat (though not too much of one) when those actors are on screen. And while his time is more limited, Jason Momoa finds a way to make maybe the biggest impression as the spectacularly named Duncan Idaho, perfectly filling the cocky, anti-hero warrior role that's been so frequently miscast of late in these big blockbusters. 

That such strong acting assets as Oscar Isaac, Javier Bardem and a slimy, Jabba-like Stellan Skarsgård (buried in prosthetics) are far from an afterthought in an already stuffed A-list cast is a testament to how well Villeneuve utlilizes what he has. Whatever the story's perceived problems or occasional lapses in focus are made up for by them and the sheer spectacle of the fight sequences and effects, especially those ferocious sandstorms. Striking just the right balance of keeping your eyes glued to the screen without going overboard, the ratio of meditative scenes to slam bang action is well proportioned, with visuals that make one of the better recent cases for theatergoing.

A seemingly uncompromised Dune that's free from the pandering you'd expect from a movie this size might the best thing about it, staying true to its vision while avoiding the temptation to self-indulge. Culminating in more of a stoppage than an end, it feels so much like a first part, they may as well just slap a "to be continued" on the screen. How many will want to follow this story into the next chapter is the bigger question, even as it stands as one of the year's bigger technical achievements, awash in imagery and scenes that stay with you long after the final credits. No one expected this new Dune film to achieve perfection, but it's impressive nonetheless, reigniting a spirited debate as to why that lofty goal seems unattainable, both for better and worse.

Labor Day

Director: Jason Reitman
Starring: Kate Winslet, Josh Brolin, Gattlin Griffith, Tobey Maguire, Dylan Minnette, Clark Gregg, Brooke Smith, James Van Der Beek, JK Simmons, Alexie Gilmore, Brighid Fleming
Running Time: 111 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★ (out of ★★★★) 

There are two scenes in Jason Reitman's stab at an Oscar-friendly period piece, Labor Day, that had me howling with laughter. No, it's not the infamous peach pie scene, in which Josh Brolin's escaped convict romantically teaches Kate Winslet's single mom how to make a peach pie. It's ridiculous for sure, but what  beats it is a long soliloquy from a manipulative teen girl that's one of the more hysterically out of place and overwritten speeches in recent cinematic memory. To say dialogue like this wouldn't come from the mouth of a girl that age isn't even doing it justice. It wouldn't come out of the mouth of any human being on the planet. Even in 1987. The boy listening to it has this dumbfounded look on his face the whole time and who can blame him? He'll later have a dream about her that's the second most ridiculous scene in the film and an embarrassingly bizarre depiction of an adolescent's first stirrings of sexuality.

Give Reitman credit for going way out of his comfort zone in adapting a Joyce Maynard novel, even if it's a place I hope he never goes again. And that's coming from someone who thought his last film, Young Adult, qualified as a darkly comic masterpiece. Apparently, enough people disagreed for him to attempt this mishmash of tones, which starts promisingly as a lurid crime drama before evolving slowly and painfully into what feels like a lightweight Nicholas Sparks adaptation. While featuring a pair of strong performances, it contains holes in logic large enough to drive a truck through, which is odd considering just how dull and formulaic the story ends up being. If this came from any other director it would probably be considered a decent if middling effort, but from a talent like Reitman, it's an unwelcome departure and an even bigger disappointment. If nothing else, we should at least give him credit for admitting it. The faster he puts this behind him, the better.

Adele Wheeler (Winslet) is a depressed single mom raising her 13-year-old son Henry (Gattlin Griffith) in a Boston suburb in 1987. After husband Gerald (Clark Gregg) left her for his secretary, it been difficult for Adele to even leave house, with young Henry stepping up to assume the responsibilities of the household. As luck would have it, the one time a month the agoraphobic Adele can bring herself to the store, bloodied fugitive and convicted murderer Frank Chambers (Brolin) takes her and Henry hostage, formulating a plan to evade police while hiding out in their home. But he gets a little too comfortable, and so do they, with Frank becoming a sort of surrogate father to Henry and the husband Adele wishes she always had. After a while, the word "hostages" hardly applies as the stoic fugitive warms up to the idea of a new family even as he's haunted by a troubled past. But police are closing in, forcing him to decide whether his freedom is worth the potential  harm that can come to this woman and her son.

The story is narrated by an adult Henry (a miscast Tobey Maguire) and is in a way presented as a coming-of-age tale centered around his journey and memories of that Labor Day weekend in 1987. Ultimately though, that portion is where the film falls shortest, taking a backseat to the dopey romance. At the risk of dating myself, there's little in the film that gives us any real sense it's taking place in 1987, or was part of anyone's childhood, save for maybe the period cars. There's also little in the way of establishing the setting which we're lead to infer is a Massachusetts suburb primarily because of Frank's Red Sox cap and little else. After the standoff start one would expect from a fugitive taking hostages, he settles into the role of cook, handyman, electrician, dance instructor, husband and father. For Henry he's a more than suitable replacement for the dad who walked out on him while Adele's sees as a potential lover rather than a dangerous criminal almost right from the start.

Many of the film's problems stem from Frank being such a great guy that there's basically no conflict at all, aside from some really nosy neighbors. Everyone in town is bothering this kid about his mom, and not of out concern for her mental health, but because they're annoying and invasive. A supermarket clerk cross examines him about his items. Townsfolk show up at their door unannounced, and in some cases, even walk right in. And yet, Frank's been cleaning gutters and fixing cars in broad daylight without anyone noticing. Ironically enough, the one time everyone should have known something was up was when Adele and Henry are first abducted at the store, and none too subtly either. You couldn't imagine two more obviously petrified people not wearing shirts that read "HOSTAGES." But there is one rewarding sequence involving the unexpected visit of a handicapped child that does create some genuine tension and suspense with Frank's identity threatened to be accidentally revealed in a surprising manner.

Interspersed with the present-day action are flashbacks to Frank's past and the murder that landed him in prison. These sequences work and are some of the more visually impressive, but we know from the start Frank is no coldblooded killer, so while the scenes are engaging, nothing about them feel revelatory. Winslet and Brolin are fine in their roles, with Brolin the clear standout. But you could probably name half a dozen or more of their performances that are better, if only because the material was. Gattlin Griffith is strong too, except when he's dragged down in scenes with the aforementioned girl (played by Brighid Fleming), which force him to react to the unreactable.

Everything completely collapses in the third act when a character figures out information they couldn't possibly know and what started as a fugitive on the run story recalling A Perfect World or The Fugitive deteriorates into The Notebook. James Van Der Beek appears as a cop, and maybe the only smart character. Too bad even he's wasted when we realize Reitman was more interested in settling into a weepie love story. Maynard's source material is just too stilted and reserved for a filmmaker of his type. He needs that contemporary humor and a satiric edge to really excel. Here, he's handcuffed, dishing out a traditional period piece as is, without the benefit of being able to explore. Labor Day starts as something important with accelerating tension but by the end it's almost completely neutered, fizzling out as it approaches its final lap. It's one of those movies that seem enjoyable enough while you're watching only to discover afterward just how much better it could have been.            
       

Oldboy (2013)

Director: Spike Lee
Starring: Josh Brolin, Elizabeth Olsen, Sharlto Copley, Samuel L. Jackson, Michael Imperioli, James Ransone, Max Casella, Pom Klementieff, Lance Reddick
Running Time: 104 min.
Rating: R

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Watching Spike Lee's remake of Park Chan Wook's 2003 South Korean cult classic Oldboy, it occurred to me just how little I remembered about the original. Of course, there's one thing EVERYONE remembers and all eyes were on how Lee would handle or avoid the gigantic, shocking twist that constitutes the core of the story. He's really in a no-win situation. The film can't exist without it, yet if he decides to go there, critics and audiences will call for his head, accusing him of not only remaking a respected classic, but doing so pointlessly by not altering enough of it. Lee handles this thankless dilemma in the best way possible, even if any choice he made would have been wrong in the eyes of the original's rabid admirers. But if that version's so good, why am I having problems remembering it? There's the twist and the famous hammer hallway scene, all wrapped around a story that's fairly unique and daring, not to mention downright disturbing. But I haven't thought of it since. At least until now.

Being no fan of Spike Lee's and counting very few (if any) of his films amongst my favorites, this strangely ranks as one of his most satisfying outings for me. Remakes are a good idea for him since  they're completely out of his comfort zone, reining in his worst tendencies and removing some of the pressure of having his original fingerprints all over it. His creative loyalty must be to the source material rather than his own ideas, which have always been shaky and inconsistent at best.  If the original Oldboy didn't exist, I'm convinced the reception to this film would have been far different. And retaining certain elements from the original doesn't make it "safe, "as its sharp edges remain surprisingly intact. The film definitely won't be confused with your generic, run-of-the-mill sanitized Hollywood thriller, which should have been the biggest fear going in.

It's 1993 and alcoholic ad executive Joe Doucett (Josh Brolin) just lost a major potential client and is arguing with his ex-wife about how little he's been involved in their 3-year-old daughter Mia's life. After arriving in a drunken stupor at the front door of good friend Chucky's (Michael Imperioli) bar late at night, he encounters a woman with a yellow umbrella before being knocked unconscious. He awakens imprisoned in a hotel room with vodka and Chinese food, seeing on TV that he's been framed for the rape and murder of his ex-wife while Mia was put up for adoption. That's all he knows, but it's enough. He quits drinking, starts writing letters to his daughter and gets himself into fighting shape, training for the day he can escape.

Twenty years pass before Joe's let out by his mysteriously deranged captor (Sharlto Copley) whose identity and motives for imprisoning and eventually releasing him remain unknown. But it's a mystery he'll have to solve if he wants to clear his name and be reunited with daughter Mia, who only knows her missing father as a murderer. He gets help comes from Chucky and nurse Marie Sebastian (Elizabeth Olsen), whose own troubled past and weakness for helping tortured souls puts her in harm's way. The clock ticks for Joe, with his only shot at a father-daughter reunion hinging on finding out why this happened, and acclimating himself to life as a fugitive in 2013.

It's easy to forget just how strong a premise this is. While everyone can agree the film's central concept is brilliant and needn't be heavily tampered with, a great deal of suspense comes from speculating just how far Lee's willing to stray from the original film (as well as the Japanese Manga from which that's adapted) when Joe is released. That tension reaches alarming levels in one particular scene, as we're not quite sure yet whether screenwriter Mark Protosevich plans on repeating the shocking twist or going in an entirely different direction.

Without giving too much away, it's almost as if you're watching everything unfold with double awareness, seeing what's actually happening as it is, but with that sick thought in the back of your mind that it may be this other thing that the original pulled. There's legitimate doubt and the movie has fun with this, zigging and zagging in certain ways and offers up a great deal of misdirection to throw viewers off the trail. There's probably no better recent case of a remake actively engaging the audiences' knowledge (or lack thereof) of the original as part of the film experience. It's always arguable whether certain things work or don't, but you can't say it doesn't do so equally for both familiar and uninitiated viewers.

There's a twenty year imprisonment here as opposed to the fifteen year term the protagonist endures in the 2003 version and that's important only in the sense that it brings us into the present time and makes Joe's disconnect to the real world a little more pronounced. The early scenes of Joe's plight are particularly gripping, giving us an even better idea of the passage of time and hammering home key cultural touchstones via the media. It also takes full advantage of the protagonist waking up to a society that's technologically moved past him, as he's forced to adjust to iphones having taken the place of the beepers and phone booths of the early nineties. That he has no idea how to use his means of communication with his captor makes for some funny scenes, making us stop and consider a fairly recent advance that's already taken for granted.

The fight scenes are deliriously entertaining and well choreographed but I'd be lying if I said the big hallway hammer sequence comes off as well as it did in the original. It works on its own terms and Brolin is great at selling it, but there was something about the lighting and cramped corridor that made the staging of the original extra special. Lee was probably wise in not attempting to exactly duplicate it, as Gus Van Sant found out the hard way with his shower scene reenactment in 1998's Psycho. He also makes very clever, original use of flashbacks that could have felt especially tired since it's a story some are already familiar with. He actually has the characters in the present as somewhat active participants in the past events, which often makes for a striking and creepy visual. Cinematographer Sean Bobbit does a great job here, as images linger in the mind's eye long after the credits have rolled.

Brolin was the right choice to play Joe, as he expertly conveys a silent anger befitting a fairly complex character. He's also believably intimidating as a brutish tough guy, despite the quite sadness over his daughter being what stands out most in the performance. Though we know from the original  that Elizabeth Olsen's Marie will likely be important, she would have been anyway since Olsen is so captivating and capable in the role. Clearly nursing some serious emotional wounds from her past, she has her guard constantly up with this guy, yet still can't help falling in. Her involvement isn't a coincidence but just how it isn't keeps you guessing all the way, with Olsen's natural instincts as a performer further solidifying her status amongst the most talented of young actresses.

Sharlto Copley's performance is absolutely insane and next level as far as movie baddies go. There's simply no other way to put it. This is how it's done. Creepy, scary, menacing and dangerous, his character is the most original creation in the film, gloriously hitting his peak in the final scenes when the truth comes out. The screen time may be limited, but he chews up each scene like a madman.  Samuel L. Jackson's presence as the henchman doing Copley's character's bidding is less welcome, if only because it feels like a performance we've seen from him countless time before. It's not his fault he's been typecast in this badass persona but at least he's collecting his paycheck for a quality film this time, in a remake that doesn't feel like a cash-in.

A South Korean film is bound to have elements that appeal primarily to that country's audience and leave us scratching our heads, while the reverse is also true. So adapting a foreign thriller for American audiences is far from "pointless" when considering different cultures. That's true here in a script incorporating media obsession with a late act development that calls to mind something out of The Truman Show. And unless I'm mistaken, it seems we get a closer look at the inner workings behind Joe's actual imprisonment and release, in a way not totally dissimilar to the presentation of the CRS organization in The Game. This is largely one calculated game in which Joe is the playing piece and his unknown adversary controls the board. This is all Lee and Protosevich updating the material just enough to make an impact, while still preserving the creative integrity and themes of the original.  

This couldn't have turned out better, while still representing Spike Lee at the top of his game, excelling in a genre few figured he could. Supposedly, there's an unreleased 144-minute director's cut of this movie that may not see the light of day but it's difficult getting too excited knowing how strong and tight this is in its current state. That Steven Spielberg and Will Smith were originally attached to this project is perplexing, as if either would ever compromise their squeeky clean images or bank accounts by tackling it. But it's even more doubtful they'd be able to read the last few pages without fainting, calling for changes that would neuter the entire project before cameras even started rolling. Nothing Lee does here feels sanitized and the eighty or ninety something percent who haven't seen the original will be shocked out of their minds a mainstream studio released it. For the rest, its biggest crime is being a remake of Oldboy.
           

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps

Director: Oliver Stone
Starring: Michael Douglas, Shia LaBeouf, Josh Brolin, Carey Mulligan, Frank Langella, Susan Sarandon, Eli Wallach
Running Time: 133 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

Don't count me among those who thought it was a terrible idea for Oliver Stone to make a sequel to Wall Street over 20 years after its release, but for whatever reason, a lot of people seemed to think it was. In my mind there are few greater thrills than catching up with a memorable movie character decades later and finding out what they're up to. How many times has a film ended and you wonder what happened to the key players after the credits rolled? In many cases it's better to just not know and leave it alone, but sometimes you just can't resist because there's more story there. Gordon Gekko, the role that won Michael Douglas his 1987 Best Actor Oscar, is one of those rare exceptions where we just need to know, even at the risk of shattering our perceptions of a film that was always meant to be trapped in its own time period anyway. No one can convince me that the idea of dropping him in the midst of 2008's economic collapse has no dramatic value and Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is a sequel that lives and dies on Douglas' supporting performance. The big draw is finding out what happened to Gekko and how one of our greatest actors will re-interpret his most iconic role. Everything else is just gravy. Featuring a hammy central storyline, the film lacks the bite of the original, but we knew it would. This is more a human, emotional drama very much unlike the corporate thriller its predecessor was. It's slicker and more calculated, but still works in its own way.

The film cleverly opens with Gordon Gekko (Douglas) collecting his belongings (which hilariously includes a relic 80's cell phone) before being released from prison in 2001 after serving an eight year sentence for insider trading and securities fraud. No one's waiting for him when he gets out. We flash forward seven years and Gekko's now a best-selling author and lecturer, all over television promoting his new book, "Is Greed Good?" which puts a new spin on his famous catchphrase. His sudden re-emergence grabs the attention of Jake Moore (Shia LaBeouf), a trader at Wall Street investment bank Keller Zabel and boyfriend of Gekko's estranged daughter, Winnie (Carey Mulligan), an idealistic political blogger who's inherited none of her father's ruthlessness and still blames him for her brother's death. But when Jake's boss and longtime mentor Louis Zabel (Frank Langella) finds his company on the brink of collapse due to vicious rumors and takes his own life, Jake knows whose help he needs. He makes a trade, promising Gekko a reconciliation with his daughter if he can help bring down rival CEO Bretton James (Josh Brolin), the man Jake suspects is responsible for it all.

There are two intertwined stories being told here, one a lot more interesting than the other. The Wall Street power struggle is old hat, just an excuse to bring Gekko back into the picture in a meaningful way and act as a backdrop. That plot is needlessly complicated, bogged down by business jargon and a villain is so cartoonishly over-the-top I half expected to him to grow a mustache just so he could twirl it. But for what needs to be accomplished from a goofy entertainment standpoint it works even if I found myself wishing less time were spent on those details and more on the re-entry of a seemingly more humbled Gekko into society after personally and professionally paying the price for his crimes. Jail has mellowed him, changing his outlook on things and the most fascinating aspect of the character is how Douglas puts on all these different masks to reveal varying shades of Gekko's personality when he's around certain people. A mellowed business titan dispensing sage wisdom as a lecturer. A cutthroat schemer advising Jake. and a pathetically inept father still cleaning up his messes in attempting to earn Winnie's trust. He makes it clear why Winnie wouldn't ever be able to trust him and feels betrayed Jake would even attempt to. The more reversals the plot takes the more appreciation you build up scene-by-scene for what Douglas does to adapt and add even more layers to his original creation.

At first glance the casting of LaBeouf as the protagonist would seem to be a miscalculation, but youth and inexperience count in his favor with the character's early success being explained away with him having the right connections. Given Shia's recent Indy 4 track record I was skeptical, but he brings his "A" game as a young broker green enough to be taken advantage of by the heavy hitters but still confident and determined enough to put up a fight to get what he wants. His role is absolutely huge, asked to carry every scene in the picture and he responds better than anyone could have suspected. Whatever issues there are with the film definitely don't fall on him or his chemistry with Douglas or Carey Mulligan. Good luck finding an actress working today who possesses a lovelier, more natural onscreen presence and I can't say it's wasted at all in this emotional role, which wouldn't have amounted to nearly as much had anyone else been given it.

As James, Josh Brolin's stuck as your typical stock villain but since he's Brolin and looks to be having such a blast playing it, we hardly notice or care. Speaking of having a blast, the unfortunate timing of Charlie Sheen's cameo (reprising his role of Bud Fox from the original), whether by design or not, does more to shine the spotlight on Sheen's celebrity reputation than the character and earns unintentional giggles above all else. Maybe a fun moment, but it should have been left on the cutting room floor as it turns his experience with Gekko years ago into a cheap punchline. Sporting a convincing Long Island accent, Susan Sarandon makes a few brief, but meorable appearances as Jake's mother, a real estate agent in over her head financially along with everyone else. The best creative addition Stone makes is musical, recruiting rock legend David Byrne of The Talking Heads' (whose song "This Must Be The Place" was featured in the first film and reappears here) to provide the soundtrack, which strangely fits the tone of this movie like a glove and feels like a major character.

Many will accuse Stone of wimping out with the ending and he does to an extent but you'd have to be pretty glum to wish for the finale we come close to receiving. That said, Stone carries things on a about a scene or two longer than he should when a more ambiguous final act would have served the story better and driven the point home harder, or at least given us more to think about. The wrap-up's a little too tidy for characters complicated enough to deserve better, especially Gekko. Continuing the action past that point and even through the closing credits (in a particularly befuddling sequence) was an ill advised choice, but doesn't really harm the overall integrity of the film. Anyone going into Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps expecting another Wall Street will feel let down. As it should be, this is far different since over two decades have passed and that movie couldn't be made today, nor would we need it to be. As much as the original stands as timepiece for 80's greed and excess this sequel provides a compelling, if Hollywoodized, snapshot of the recent economic collapse, but more interestingly allows us a glimpse into what one of our most memorable movie characters would have to say about it.

Milk

Director: Gus Van Sant
Starring: Sean Penn, Emile Hirsch, Josh Brolin, Diego Luna, James Franco
Running Time: 128 min.
Rating: R

*** (out of ****)

There are few directors working today as unpredictable and inconsistent as Gus Van Sant. Always straddling that line between art house fare (Elephant, Last Days, Paranoid Park) and the mainstream (Good Will Hunting, Finding Forrester) he’s the rare filmmaker for which you can honestly claim that you haven’t a clue what to expect each time out. With Milk he’s made the most standard, mainstream film of his career, which is kind of ironic considering the subject he’s tackling this time around. Had another less skilled director had made it and it covered another less timely topic I’m not sure it would be garnering the adulation and awards buzz it has. It’s a good film, just not a great one like you’ve been led to believe.

For those who disagree and feel Milk should be among the five films nominated for Best Picture let me just refer you to one scene. In it, Harvey Milk, in one of his three bids to become the first openly gay official elected to public office, receives an anonymous, emotional phone call from a teen who had come out to his parents and is now contemplating suicide. Then the camera pans down to reveal…he’s also in a wheelchair. Supposedly, this event did happen but I’m judging its authenticity on the screen, not in real life. As a stand-alone scene I can forgive it (I’ve seen worse), but what’s troublesome is the nagging feeling that it’s in some way an accurate representation of the film’s motives. It tells you what to feel instead of just letting you feel it and marks off boxes on its historical checklist as it goes along, never fully engaging you emotionally. The result is a film I respected a great deal, but couldn’t rally around like I desperately wanted.

Arguing its greatness solely on the basis that it houses one of Sean Penn’s most dynamic and interesting performances in the title role have a very strong argument because he supplies whatever emotion is lacking elsewhere, and it’s almost enough. He shows a jubilant side of himself here as an actor that we haven’t seen before. In all the roles he’s played I don’t think I’ve ever seen tackle a man who’s actually happy with his life and is doing what he wants to do. It’s thrilling to see him actually smiling for a change after all the morose, tortured protagonists he’s brilliantly portrayed over the years. Harvey Milk may have met a tragic end but he did it doing what he loved and his infectious warmth is in every one of Penn’s words and mannerisms, which is news because I had my doubts as to whether he was an actor even capable of projecting warmth.
It’s a good thing Penn is this strong because Dustin Lance Black’s script doesn’t make him the easiest guy in the world to root for nor does it portray those he was trying to help in the most favorable light. At times during the picture I also questioned the protagonist’s motives in asking everyday citizens to vote for him BECAUSE he’s gay. The movie stacks the deck in that regard, but being gay wasn’t just a political platform for Milk, it was his life.

While the film seems to do him justice it’s more of a “big issue movie” than a biopic. Milk would always open his speeches with “I’m Harvey Milk and I’m going to recruit you,” but that may as well be Van Sant’s motto. He comes off as unnecessarily trying to recruit us for a cause. I consider myself fairly liberal and love the biopic as a genre and even I found he was beating the drum very hard. My thoughts on the film will read as somewhat negative only because given what I’ve heard about its quality I can’t help but feel disappointed. Outside of Penn’s performance there just isn’t a whole lot here, but what is here is done well enough to at least earn a look.

The film begins in the early ‘70’s with Milk (Penn) and his lover, Scott Smith (James Franco) packing their bags and leaving the hustle and bustle in New York for San Francisco where they open a small camera shop on Castro Street. The neighborhood is slowly transforming into a gay hangout, which doesn’t sit well with other storeowners and local politicians. They consider that “lifestyle choice” immoral, and despite depending on them for revenue, refuse to treat them as equals in any way. Out of this Milk emerges as a local activist and hero (eventually elected city supervisor in his third bid) while the debate regarding gay rights reaches a fever pitch on the national level.

The widespread homophobia is powered by pop star/evangelist Anita Bryant and California Senator John Briggs (Denis O’Hare) whom Milk battles in the fight against Proposition 6, which would give schools the right to fire gay teachers. Anointed “The Mayor of Castro Street,” Milk grew a legion of followers including dependable sidekick Cleve Jones (Emile Hirsch), lesbian campaign manager Anne Kronenberg (Alison Pill) and new boyfriend Jack Lira (Diego Luna in an entertainingly awful performance). All these characters are really just colorful wallpaper though and at moments disappointingly call to attention the worst gay stereotypes.

I’m not spoiling anything by revealing that Milk (along with Mayor George Moscone) is assassinated by fellow Supervisor Dan White (Josh Brolin) in 1978 (that information is dispensed in the first scene). A man who worried that he’d accomplished nothing by the age of 40 ended up accomplishing more in the next 8 years than most could in a lifetime. Ironically, the relationship between Milk and White and the details leading up to and including the assassination I found to be the most fascinating aspect to the film. White isn’t portrayed how you’d expect and if someone had told me halfway through that they actually sympathized with White’s situation (at least before he completely loses his marbles) I could see where they were coming from. That Brolin plays him with such depth and nuance only reinforces that. Because Black’s script is essentially a gay history lesson Penn has to carry everything as the flamboyant and charismatic Milk, and does he ever. His energy and enthusiasm are the beating pulse of the picture and he can comfortably start preparing his Oscar acceptance speech. I wish he had more to work with, but that he’s given this little and turns it into so much proves just how good he is. He literally BECOMES Harvey Milk.

Cinematographer Harris Savides does his usual great work although I’d argue he did one better in interpreting 1970’s San Francisco in last year’s Zodiac. Van Sant’s use of actual archival footage doesn’t really help the film’s cause as it at times makes the endeavor feel like any other cut-and-paste biopic you could catch on The History Channel. Nor does his portrayal of gays as sex maniacs and drug addicts who streak down the street naked. Of course, this is more a reflection of the times and situation than anyone’s sexual preference, but it’s a tall order to expect viewers (especially straight ones) to make that distinction. As I was leaving the theater I overheard someone remark that they felt the film was “too gay.” While those wouldn’t have been my choice of words I kind of understood what he meant.

A curiously under-reported aspect to the film is that there were many sex scenes that would make even the most tolerant, open-minded filmgoer wince. I noticed many in my theater squirming uncomfortably in their seats. If Van Sant put them in to just simply give the most accurate portrayal possible then it’s fine but if he did for shock value or thought it would be a riot to rub uptight audience’s noses in it then it's not. I can’t speak to his intentions but for those who don’t think the latter is possible consider this: How many movies open with two total strangers randomly making out then running home and jumping in the sack? It’ll be interesting to see how the allegedly homophobic Academy reacts to the film considering just a few years ago they wouldn’t even honor Brokeback Mountain, which was essentially a love story that happened to feature two gay characters.
You could say it’s hypocritical of me to point out so many of the film’s flaws yet still recommend it but the truth of the matter is that it’s a well-made, exceptionally acted film that kept me interested, but always at an arms distance away. My duty is to review it as a film not a potential Best Picture contender but when something is this widely overpraised it almost becomes impossible to separate the two. If this were nominated for the big prize (and heaven forbid it actually won) it would be one of the most underwhelming choices in years. In many ways I feel about this film how many have told me they feel about another awards contender this year, Slumdog Millionaire, meaning that it’s good, but all the love needs to be taken down a few notches. I guess since this is based on a true story it’s allowed to be as preachy and uplifting as it wants while Slumdog gets unfairly dragged through the mud and labeled as manipulative.

Harvey Milk’s story is inspiring and this covers a timely topic but the inherent contradiction in it is that gay rights should be a human issue, not a political one. In exploring the life of a political figure, Van Sant has problems reconciling the two and what sometimes results is a film pushing an agenda. Luckily, Penn was there to save him, if just barely. Milk is a reminder that Oscars should be given to great films, not great causes, no matter how important or relevant they may be.

W.

Director: Oliver Stone
Starring: Josh Brolin, Elizabeth Banks, Jams Cromwell, Ellen Burstyn, Richard Dreyfuss, Toby Jones, Jeffrey Wright, Thandie Newton, Scott Glenn
Running Time: 129 min.
Rating: PG-13

***1/2 (out of ****)

In a lot of ways I fit the profile of the type of moviegoer Oliver Stone is reaching out to with W. Someone who definitely agrees George W. Bush didn’t do a good job as President yet doesn't necessarily have a burning desire to see him dragged through the mud. He was bad at his job and that’s it. A lot of people are bad at their jobs, but unfortunately it just so happens his job description reads: “Leader of the Free World.”

It’s possible for someone to enter a situation with the best possible intentions, only to find themselves in way over their head. Recently, I was talking to someone about the upcoming election and mentioned that Bush must be counting down the days until he’s a free man so he can go home to Texas to get some rest. That didn’t go over so well. Just that I even implied Bush was trying to do his job to the best of his abilities was blasphemous. As if he’s been sitting in the Oval Office for 8 years thinking of ways to wreck our country.

People can say what they want about Bush (and likely have) but I never thought there was a phony bone in his body. This isn’t Nixon. He’s not a crook or a liar. Instead, this is someone who shoots straight and will go to whatever lengths necessary to carry out what he believes in, even if it’s wrong. But in his mind he’s never wrong, especially when surrounded by people whose primary job it is to agree with everything he says. W. may be a fair portrayal of the man but despite what you’ve heard it isn’t necessarily a sympathetic one. That it’s actually been considered such should tell you all you need to know about how poorly the public perceives him. But it is just about as flattering a portrait as he could have possibly received and you could argue he’s just lucky to have a film based on his life with this much depth at all.
Stone paints him as an underachiever, full of self-doubt and burdened by expectations. In doing that he sets the stage for the film’s most frightening realization: He’s just like us. And whether we want to admit it or not, there’s no guarantee we could have done a better job in the White House under the circumstances. But more importantly, in being the first biopic centered around a current sitting President’s legacy, we’re robbed of time, distance and historical context in examining the film, making for some fascinating results. Not having that context may affect how we view the film right now, but strangely it doesn’t seem to have any impact on how Stone made it. Is it too soon? Probably, but that doesn’t make it any less memorable.

Stone presents Bush (Josh Brolin) as living a life defined by a failure to earn his father George Senior’s (James Cromwell’s) love and respect, something that was always exclusively reserved for his younger brother Jeb. The film follows a non-linear structure, flashing back to Bush’s younger days at Yale as a drunk womanizer who couldn’t hold a job and occasionally had to be bailed out of jail. He meets his future wife Laura (Elizabeth Banks), runs for Governor of Texas and helps dad with his 1988 Presidential campaign. There’s little shown of Bush’s days as owner of the Texas Rangers baseball franchise, though that’s more than made up for with a very inventive framing device. He never really got his act together until the age of 40 when he quit drinking and found God. That faith would beckon him to seek the country’s highest office and guide much of his future decision-making. The flashbacks are interspersed with scenes of the Bush Presidency post-9/11. This is the portion that will have everyone talking.

Of course the real thrill here is seeing a diverse and talented group of actors flesh out current political figures whose personalities have just only been touched upon in the media. Each of them plays a pivotal role in Bush’s life and career and, as expected, some performances work better than others. Toby Jones’ Karl Rove is a coach to Bush with Stone insinuating that as clueless as Bush is with Rove's guidance he’d be even more clueless without it. Jones’ take on the character is interesting as he plays him as a know-it-all creepily lurking in the shadows waiting to impress everyone with his answers.

Richard Dreyfuss wisely doesn’t go for a full-on impersonation of Dick Cheney and instead inhabits him. But if we were giving points for how well he gets the mannerisms down he’d score high marks there also. It’s scary, but not as scary as Thandie Newton’s transformation into Condoleezza Rice, which is either brilliant or terrible depending on your perspective.You could argue all day and night whether Newton’s dead-on mimicry is even appropriate for this kind of film but there’s no denying she nailed it to the point where the real Condi wouldn't be able to tell the difference. She’s basically portrayed as a suck-up to the President.

Jeffrey Wright’s Colin Powell is the sole “the voice of reason” clashing often and memorably with Dreyfuss’ Cheney, particularly in one electrifying “War Room” scene. Bruce McGill, Rob Corrdry, and Noah Wyle have much smaller roles as George Tenet, Ari Fleischer and Don Evans respectively, popping in and out when the picture requires. What’s interesting is that the film presents those working for Bush as being just as underwhelming as he is, if not moreso (that’s particularly true of Scott Glenn’s Donald Rumsfeld). With all the clashing personalities, egos and agendas, Bush never really stood a chance.

The worst thing that could have happened to the younger Bush was his father being elected President because that set the bar even higher for him. He carried that resentment all the way to The White House and Stone surmises that he went into Iraq at least partially to prove that he could finish the job his father couldn’t. Cromwell’s performance is miraculous in that he never attempts to capture George Senior’s mannerisms or any of his physical characteristics, but instead focuses his efforts on conveying the elder President’s deep disappointment as honest and reasonably as possible.

We see how the elder Bush would feel let down by his screw-up son, but at the same time we see that he unintentionally helped cause the whole mess. His inability to communicate with him on the most basic level plagued them both, right up to and throughout his term in office. When the going got too tough in his son’s administration he couldn’t even bring himself to offer any advice, much to his wife Barbara’s (Ellen Burstyn) dismay. Ironically, W. always had something his dad lacked. Not ambition, but a fire in his belly and an obsessive desire to prove everyone wrong. It ended up taking him further than anyone expected, but also helped destroy him.

What shocked me most and I didn’t expect going in was how in control of the material Stone was. I expected the tone to be all over the map and if you’ve seen any of the trailers and commercials you wouldn’t be wrong to expect the film to be a political satire. While it definitely has its subtle moments of humor, Stone plays it remarkably straight. That these were the people making decisions of that magnitude and that’s what they said while making them is scary not funny. Cheney embodies it as Dreyfuss is given the best line of the film, laying out the timetable for when U.S. troops should get out of Iraq. What he says will send chills down your spine. There’s a scene of Bush choking on a pretzel at Camp David that on paper should be hilarious, but Stone makes terrifying. No giggles. You could hear a pin drop. It’ll be a while before you can eat pretzels again.

Last year I may have had some issues with the overpraised No Country For Old Men, but Josh Brolin definitely wasn't one of them. Here he delivers a career high performance that starts as great imitation but evolves into much more as the film slowly evolves with it. The more notes he’s asked to hit the more he starts to resemble Bush in both appearance and in spirit, to the point where midway through you realize it’s a full immersion. His work never comes off as parody, a huge feat considering the subject he was asked to portray.

I didn’t think the present-day scenes worked as well as the flashbacks to his early life mainly because they’re almost too uncomfortably “of the moment,” but I could be bias since I enjoyed watching the dynamics of Bush’s younger days so much. The last hour drags its feet a little bit and spins its wheels in hammering home the message that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction. Dumb mistakes were made. That goes without saying. Like most of Stone’s film’s, its also messy but not to the point where I feel we were seriously shortchanged on anything so he could rush it into release before the election.

With all the jumping back and forth we're missing a full-fledged emotional connection with the man, although that’s almost fitting. Nor do we really form a full one with Laura, just about the only aspect to Bush everyone agrees they like. In just a few early scenes Banks shows us why, encapsulating everything we suspected she was. What she saw in him we'll never know. The term “Better Half” couldn't be more applicable. It’s a bit of a let down she doesn’t play a bigger role, but inevitable she’d have to take a backseat given the direction of the story. This isn’t Walk The Line.
W. is a return to form of sorts for Oliver Stone who took the easy way out with 2006’s World Trade Center. It wasn’t a bad film, but played with the resonance of a Hallmark greeting card next to something as powerful as Paul Greengrass' United 93, which was released the same year. There are elements in this that characterize Stone's best work like JFK and Nixon where he’s focusing on doing what he does best: pushing our buttons. This film isn’t going to change anyone’s mind about George W. Bush and I don’t think Stone intended it to. Whether you like the man or not you can't deny it's far better to attempt to understand him than angrily make ridiculous films like Rendition, Redacted, Lions For Lambs, In The Valley of Ellah, Stop-Loss or whatever other political garbage Hollywood feels like feeding us this week. That doesn’t accomplish anything. This does.

In the long run I don’t think it matters whether this was released now or 10 years from now because this almost feels like it was made in the future and time will likely treat it well. Those who went in expecting a train wreck won’t exactly be disappointed and neither will those who expected a serious examination of Bush’s psyche. On one level it’s a standard biopic, yet on another it isn’t at all. Everyone wins. But more importantly it gets us to feel something for him. I’m not sure if it can be categorized as pity, sympathy, understanding or even any of those but it at least it’s something other than hatred.

History will judge the 43rd President, not Stone. It would be nice to think that Bush now has time to contemplate the mistakes he’s made but if there’s only one thing to take out of this film it’s that he doesn’t think he made any. In his mind he did what he felt was right for the country, acting with unwavering, stubborn consistency the entire time. Whether we needed W. to be released right now is debatable but what isn’t is that you’ll have plenty to think about when it’s over.