The Substance

Director: Coralie Fargeat
Starring: Demi Moore, Margaret Qualley, Dennis Quaid, Edward Hamilton Clark, Gore Abrams, Oscar Lesage, Christian Erickson, Robin Greer, Hugo Diego Garcia
Running Time: 141 min.
Rating: R

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)  

Gripping, disgusting and hilarious, French filmmaker Coralie Fargeat's wicked horror satire The Substance is a cautionary tale the great Rod Serling probably would have appreciated. And that's obvious from the very first scene, which shows a star on Hollywood's Walk of Fame gradually deteriorating over the decades. If receiving one can be a source of pride and validation in an industry where respect is scarce, it's also fleeting. Especially for entertainers encouraged to measure their self-worth with superficial accolades.

Recognition may be nice, but what happens when you're kicked to the curb for a younger model? That's the question the film's aging actress faces and her male colleagues rarely need to consider, at least to this extent. While plastic surgery, collagen injections and various pills provide viable options for women to turn back the clock and enhance their appearance, it's tougher finding a sufficient explanation as to why that's now a prerequisite. 

In providing users an unusual black market drug, this mysterious company at the film's center seems to have it all down to a science. Our protagonist takes the bait because she's desperate, but the underlying implication is that many others already gave in and will continue to. And like most medical breakthroughs, there are few safe guards against misuse or addiction, a detail that serves as a compelling launch pad for the craziness that'll unfold.

When fading movie star Elisabeth Sparkle (Demi Moore) turns 50, she's fired from her Jane Fonda inspired TV aerobics show by the network's greedy, boisterous producer Harvey (Dennis Quaid), who's looking for a younger replacement. But when Elisabeth's admitted to the hospital after a car accident, she's given a flash drive by a nurse that advertises a cell-replicating serum called "The Substance," which promises a "younger, more beautiful, more perfect" version of herself. After picking up the supply, Elisabeth injects the "single-use activator," causing her body to generate Sue (Margaret Qualley), who emerges from a slit in her back. 

Every seven days the two must switch consciousness, with the inactive, unconscious body being fed intravenously. But when the wild, hard partying Sue becomes an overnight sensation as Elisabeth's replacement on the show, the latter falls into deep despair, unable to face the world as an older woman. Breaking protocol to extend her time and permanently bench Elisabeth, Sue's selfishness causes catastrophic side effects as the two consciousnesses head for a collision course, ignoring the fact they'll need each other to survive. 

Fountain of youth concepts aren't new to film, but the originality behind this particular process and its ramifications definitely are. Early on, the plot recalls elements of 1966's Seconds, in which a middle-aged banker utilizes the services of a clandestine agency to surgically transforms himself into a younger man played by Rock Hudson. Here, Fargeat takes that general idea to a different place by focusing on an actress whose age and appearance has always been her calling card. 

To say Elisabeth's insecurities apply strictly to this profession ignores how this premise casts a much wider net, independent of social status or wealth. Because she's an Oscar winner and fitness guru who isn't financially hurting, it's a credit to the script and Moore's performance that we don't roll our eyes at her unhappiness or dismiss the plot as a rich woman's Hollywood problem. The handwriting's on the wall as she's cruelly and casually cast aside, making it easy to see how she'd be drawn to "The Substance," which promises to rescue this increasingly invisible woman from certain obscurity. 

Retrieving her starter package from this sterile white medical storage facility in a dilapidated warehouse, it's amazing just how idiot proof the kit is. With clearly marked bags notating the steps so plainly you'd believe someone could perform this procedure without detailed instructions, despite how grossly absurd it looks. But none of that accounts for how Elisabeth psychologically handles taking a backseat to her younger, more desirable counterpart as she lies unconscious on the bathroom floor for a week.

Since Elisabeth and Sue share a consciousness, it stands to reason what one does should benefit the other, curtailing any potential pitfalls. Instead, Elisabeth wakes from her slumber even more depressed and invisible, binge eating all day and night. It's Sue who basks in the adulation that comes with being the hot, young ingenue, soon growing disgusted by the mere thought of her older version even existing. So it isn't long before she violates protocol to extend her time, resulting in crippling side effects for Elisabeth. Sue doesn't get off so easily either, having to inject herself with a "stabilizer fluid" to avoid a similar physical deterioration. 

This battle for supremacy is contested entirely inside Elisabeth's mind, as strange as that seems for a story so firmly situated in the body horror genre. She's the one person who can stop this, if only the pressure to remain young and desired wasn't so great. Hating Sue out of jealousy while still desperately needing her counterpart to maintain any semblance of self esteem, she becomes trapped in a prison of her own making.

With a willingness to spoof her public image while inhabiting the headspace of a character defined as old and washed up, a never more vulnerable Moore is literally and emotionally naked for much of this meta role. She also endures an absurd amount of prosthetics and physicality in an insane third act, conveying the complicated trauma of a woman who will do anything to retain her youth, not realizing the true cost of that deal. But her most pointed scene comes when she can't leave her apartment for a date, constantly altering her appearance in the mirror before collapsing in a pile of tears, shaking and unable to function.

As Sue, Qualley's job is tougher than it first appears, playing the vainest, most selfish version of a woman unwilling to squander her second chance at any cost. The character initially comes across as a cipher who smiles and looks pretty enough to please the ratings hungry Harvey, until all the attention goes to her head. Viewing Elisabeth as a loathsome burden that needs disposing of, the only thing more jarring than Sue's self absorbedness is how good Qualley is at portraying it, her iciness setting the stage for a showdown where neither can possibly walk away the winner.

Dennis Quaid's scenery devouring turn as this slimy producer isn't intended to be multi-dimensional, but he entertains every minute he's on screen as you eagerly anticipating his next appearance. Diabolically sleazy with his sinister smile and passive aggressive misogyny, Fargeat films him in these uncomfortably extreme close-ups that make the character look like the grossest person on Earth, especially when he's sloppily inhaling a plate of seafood. Comically repulsive, Quaid knows what movie he's in, even if his showy work will unfairly fly under the radar amidst justifiable praise for Moore and Qualley.

In addition to cinematographer Benjamin Kračun eye-popping, immersive visuals, production designer Pierre Olivier-Persin creates this unforgettable look for a bizarre time vacuum that looks and feels like the 1980's, but isn't quite. It also contains a windfall of cleverly coded cinematic references that range from The Shining to 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Elephant Man, Basket Case and Carrie. 

Elisabeth and Sue do eventually find a way to coexist in a blood soaked New Year's climax, though not at all how either expected, as both hold their funhouse mirror up to the ugly society that's rejected them. Filmed in a hyper realistic style that comes right out of Cronenberg's playbook, there's a deliberate build to the chaos that makes its gruesome payoff even more satisfying and thematically relevant. Lacking all pretense of restraint, Fargeat gleefully beats us into submission with sickening thrills and a fearless Demi Moore, who gives a performance unlike anything else in her career.

Footloose (2011)

Director: Craig Brewer
Starring: Kenny Wormald, Julianne Hough, Dennis Quaid, Andie McDowell, Miles Teller, Patrick Flueger, Ray McKinnon, Kim Dickens
Running Time: 112 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

When the remake of Footloose was released last year I remember reading an interview with director Craig Brewer about how after initial reservations he was inspired to take on the project after viewing 2010's The Karate Kid remake with a cheering audience of 13-year-olds. He said that reaction put all his doubts aside and thought it would be arrogant for him to tell them the original is better and that they should be watching Ralph Maccio instead. And I can totally see his point.  I would never wish a child to have a bad time at the movies or try to tell him or her what they should or shouldn't be watching. I hope every kid who saw that remake loved it. After all, it was only made for them anyway. But that still won't change the fact I thought it was horrible and a blatant cash grab. So it's strange how his Footloose remake is the exact opposite of that, having more in common with both 1984 originals. It's actually for everyone. Yet they'll still be those who refuse to see it on the grounds that it shouldn't be happening at all and I respect that. Except this is really good, at points equaling (if not flat-out surpassing) the original. Of course it helps I don't hold the original film in such high esteem and could care less that they rebooted it, but a win's a win. Musicals just might be my least favorite genre so what a compliment it is that I never once felt I was watching a musical, but a story powered by the spirit of music its effect on the townspeople's lives.

The central idea around which the movie revolves always seemed kind of silly on paper and should have proven to be even more of a creative hurdle to clear when you set the story in the present day.  After a tragic car accident claims the lives of five youths in Bomont, Georgia following a party, the father of one of the victims and town reverend, Shaw Moore (Dennis Quaid) convinces the city council to pass an injunction that bans unsupervised public dancing within the city limits. Brewer cleverly sidesteps a flawed premise by actually showing the accident in the prologue. It may seem like a tiny change and it's certainly not depicted in any kind of graphic detail, but putting it onscreen makes the ban seem less ridiculous. Stepping into the iconic Kevin Bacon role, Kenny Wormald is Ren, a Boston teen arriving in the town to live with his aunt and uncle after his mother's death. He befriends the somewhat goofy Willard (Miles Teller, great in this) and is almost immediately attracted to Rev. Moore's daughter, Ariel (Julianne Hough), a wild child still acting out after losing her brother in the accident and shacking up with brutish dirt race driver Chuck (Patrick Flueger). As Ren and Ariel grow closer through their love of dancing, the rift between the adults and kids of the town continues to widen because of the ban.

Other than actually showing the inciting accident and replacing tractors with buses in a pivotal race sequence, there isn't much that's different from the original, but in this case, that's fine. There also seems to be a more eclectic mix of music this time around while still managing to squeeze in Kenny Loggins' infamously catchy title song (covered rather lifelessly by Blake Shelton over the closing credits) and Deniece Williams "Let's Hear It for the Boy." What Brewer does really well is flesh out the setting and its small-town characters so that everything looks and feels like it belongs a small southern town in 2011. There's a sense of time and place that never feels like you're watching actors on a sound stage. It won't ever be confused with Brewer's previous feature Black Snake Moan in that no scantily clad actresses get chained up to radiators but I was surprised just how much grit the movie managed with its PG-13. It's not exactly edgy but it isn't High School Musical either. There's also at least some kind of attempt at depicting racial diversity within the cast, which probably isn't an attempt so much as a reflection of reality inexcusably absent in most mainstream films about young people.  If its content qualifies it as mainstream fluff at least it never feels that way, even during the musical numbers which are well-placed and choreographed, rarely overstaying their welcome.

As Ren, Kenny Wormald is no Kevin Bacon but he is Kenny Wormald and that seems to work out. Bacon plays bad and tough better but his modern-day counterpart is likable and charismatic without being too vanilla. But it doesn't really matter since the movie belongs to co-star Julianne Hough in much the same way Bacon owned the original. While it's common knowledge she's an incredible dancer and really easy on the eyes, she goes the extra mile in delivering a surprisingly effective dramatic performance as a grieving daughter torn between the right and wrong side of the tracks, and commanding the screen well enough to launch a career that could easily extend beyond musicals. I keep hearing her being compared to a young Jennifer Aniston which was probably intended as a compliment from those forgetting Aniston wouldn't at any point be able to pull this part off. I'd even go as far as to say the movie succeeds mostly because of Hough, who's so perfectly cast it's almost a joke. Dennis Quaid appears initially to be just collecting another paycheck as the strict preacher but at the story progresses and the character develops he finds his groove, even if one key confrontational scene involving him in the third act seems a bit over-the-top and out of left field. And sure, the courtroom-heavy finale more closely resembles a school production of a mock trial than the fun that precedes it, but that's a small complaint when examining the big picture.

A satisfying explanation for this film's success couldn't possibly be provided by me as it's summed up best by Indiewire's Gabe Toro who wrote upon its release that "it captures exactly what MTV used to represent before the laws of capitalism swallowed the network whole." What a perfect description. Ironically MTV Films produced this, which almost feels like some kind of an accident as it harkens back to an era they've gone out of their way to bury. Embracing its cliches with confidence and sincerely wearing its heart on its sleeve, Footloose is completely honest and fun, reminding us not only of the reasons the original worked, but recreating the feeling of actually watching it. With so much mainstream entertainment dumbed down to the point that they may as well be commercials, here's a rare example of smart mainstream entertainment that's actually entertaining, evoking memories of 80's originals rather than the inferior remakes they continue to spawn.     

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

Director: Stephen Sommers
Starring: Channing Tatum, Marlon Wayans, Rachel Nichols, Ray Park, Christopher Eccleston, Sienna Miller, Lee Byung-hun, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Dennis Quaid
Running Time: 118 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★ 1/2 (out of ★★★★)

It isn't often I approach a movie in the mindset of a whiny fanboy but in the case of G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, I feel entitled. As a childhood fan who watched the cartoon, collected all the figures and knew every character, I both eagerly anticipated and dreaded this big screen interpretation. Ever since the project was announced I had my suspicions of it and based just on the trailers and early promotional materials, severely questioned the direction the project was going in. In fact, I was so certain a cinematic disaster was on the horizon that I even promised a letter of apology to director Stephen Sommers if he could somehow pull this off. He doesn't, but this "re-imagining" of my beloved franchise is far from a bastardization and comes dangerously close to working, getting a few key elements right (the pitch-perfect rendering of some major characters), but unfortunately others dreadfully wrong (an embarrassing performance from a veteran actor).

While I can't get on board with the decision to aim the film at 10-year-olds and the script is nearly a sham, the movie does strangely capture at least some part of what made G.I. Joe special. What that part is I'm almost afraid to admit, but the movie is fully aware of its goofy charms and mostly succeeds in what it's trying to do. If something like this raked in the money that Transformers: ROTF did this past summer I'd at least understand. I wouldn't necessarily agree, but I'd understand. It almost accomplishes everything that the other Hasbro adaptation failed at doing, and perhaps partially due to low expectations, is much better than I expected.

On one hand my familiarity with the source material helps, but on another it doesn't because I'd helplessly hold the film to a standard it could probably never meet, even under the best of circumstances. I took the small victories where I could get them with this one and wondered whether my opinion would have been any different if this didn't carry the "G.I. Joe" name tag and all the childhood memories accompanying it. In a way, the movie never really had a fighting chance, which is a shame because there are some good things here and it'll likely be more fun for uninitiated, less demanding audience members.

After a centuries old flashback sequence, the movie opens in the not-so-distant future where weapons expert and head of the M.A.R.S. program, James McCullen (Christopher Eccleston) has created nano-technology warheads he's selling to NATO. In charge of transporting the weapons are U.S. Army soldiers Duke (Channing Tatum) and Ripcord (Marlon Wayans), who find themselves under attack from Cobra forces hell-bent on intercepting them. They're led by Anastasia DeCobray a.k.a. The Baroness (Sienna Miller) who shares a personal history with Duke that's never quite as interesting as the movie wants it to be. Duke and Ripcord are rescued by General Hawk (Dennis Quaid, beyond awful) and acclimated into his G.I. Joe secret ops team. They'll team with the black-masked ninja Snakes Eyes (Ray Park), leather-clad Scarlett (Rachel Nichols), and the authoritative Heavy Duty (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje) to do battle with McCullen, The Baroness and their Cobras, consisting of Snake Eyes' childhood nemesis Storm Shadow (Lee Byung-hun), the diabolical Zartan (Arnold Vosloo) and the deformed "Doctor" (Joseph-Gordon Levitt) who will go on to become Cobra Commander.

Surprisingly, many of the performances are adequate...with one HUGE exception. From the first moment he appears onscreen as General Hawk (laughably in the form of a Princess Leia type hologram) Dennis Quaid has this expression on his face asking, "WHERE'S MY PAYCHECK?" He looks embarrassed and physically uncomfortable even though there really isn't anything he should feel humiliated about, aside from maybe his costume. The movie isn't THAT bad (at least when he's not onscreen) and there shouldn't be THAT much shame involved for appearing in it. In a film full of clunky dialogue it always seems to sound clunkiest when it's delivered by the befuddled Quaid who flatly recites his line readings without the slightest bit of confidence or conviction, and a permanently blank expression etched on his face. He's done great work in the past which is why it scares me so much that he's capable of giving a performance worthy of a Razzie Award. Things don't improve much for him in the second half either when he's called upon to do virtually the same thing, except in a wheelchair. When the leader of your dangerous secret special ops unit can't be taken the slightest bit seriously it creates a major problem for the story.

On the flips side of that is Sienna Miller as The Baroness, who captures everything fans could have imagined that character to be on the big screen and then some. She's treated as a huge deal by the screenplay not only because she's a pivotal character in the franchise's mythology, but Miller's take on her warrants that attention. Unfortunately, a decision is made in the final act that's a complete betrayal of the character's methodology and it's no fault of Miller's that she can't do anything for the forced and sometimes ill-placed flashback scenes to her pre-Cobra days as Ana. Besides taking great liberties with the G.I. Joe folklore (which I actually didn't mind) many of the film's backstories, as entertaining and informative as they sometimes are, don't do a whole lot to flesh out the characters and play almost like a cheap soap opera. The one that plays best involves the origin of the Doctor but the studio kind of shot itself in the foot before the film was released by revealing the identity of Cobra Commander.

Despite Joseph-Gordon-Levitt being hidden under layers of makeup and a mask and impressively doing a deeper, more serious variation on Chris Latta's voice from the '80's cartoon, the revelation of who he is and his relationship to Ana is telegraphed very early on. A smarter script would have worked harder to conceal the information and paid it off as a big twist. At least it would have been a better twist than the lukewarm cliffhanger we're given in the film's final minutes, even if the intended audience for this likely couldn't care less. His transformation, as well as McCullen's into the infamous Destro, strangely felt very sudden instead of something that was brewing the entire film. And I don't even know what to say about Eccleston's bizarre, high-pitched attempt at a sinister Scottish accent.

Of all the performers, Miller and Levitt have the strongest grasp on the material they were given and the material benefits because of it. They showed up to play, not phone it in like Quaid who keeps finding ways to make the screenplay seem stupider than it is, which is no small chore. Luckily, the same can't be said for Lee Byung-hun as Storm Shadow, whose longstanding feud with the Snake Eyes (fitted in a really silly looking mask) is one of the more successful backstories conjured up for the film. The decision to have all the characters in essentially the same uniforms wasn't a great call in terms of distinguishing them but it isn't the horror I expected when I first saw the promotional posters. Tatum, Wayans and Nichols do a fair enough job giving each of their characters distinctive personalities that it doesn't become an issue. So while their casting looked suspect on paper, all three carry their load just fine with a fun, if predictable interplay developing between Ripcord and Scarlett.

My worries about the CGI sequences were mostly unfounded. That's not to say they're necessarily that well done or believable looking but they accomplish what's necessary for this kind of popcorn movie. I have to admit my eyes were glued to the screen and many of the fight scenes and chase sequences (especially one with the Joes speeding through Paris in their "accelerator suits") are compulsively watchable despite of their cheesiness. Given the tone of the movie, I can't think of another way they could have done this and it be as effective. Even though the final act goes on slightly too long and devolves into an air assault on the senses, the movie, at its best, contain elements reminiscent of Star Wars. There's holograms, a weird sibling dynamic, a face-off that recalls the lightsaber battle in The Phantom Menace, a Vader-like transformation and the Cobra vipers are basically interchangeable with storm troopers. It's a credit to Sommers that it feels more like an homage than a rip-off.

That this is even a close close call for me is miraculous considering all the ingredients were in place for this to be a complete disaster and completely tarnish the brand. I wasn't necessarily left looking forward to another installment but the franchise does have some potential moving forward if they continue to develop already existing characters and add intriguing new ones. There's at least a framework to build on, even if I have doubts the filmmakers are actually interested in exploring it. We all knew the juvenile direction they'd go in and to an extent it worked well as that, but anyone who thinks it didn't have the potential to be more is kidding themselves. This is a mixed bag that will please younger fans while reminding older ones of the fun they had playing with the toys and the movie they imagined could eventually come of it. G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra only suffers from not being that movie.

Top 5 Reasons G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra Seems Destined to Suck

I usually can't stand it when people judge something before they've even seen it. But sometimes...you just can't help yourself. Sometimes, you just get this "feeling" based on posters, trailers, TV spots, word of mouth or what have you that a certain movie is destined to fail. That all the wrong decisions were made even before the cameras started rolling. You want to approach it with an open mind but the warning signs are all there, too glaring to ignore. G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra is such a film. I'm not among the many who seem to feel making a G.I. Joe movie is a bad idea. Quite the opposite. I think it's a fantastic one with loads of potential. If anything, I'm shocked it took this long for it to happen. And that's why the direction it looks like they've taken with the material is so disappointing.

When Michael Bay's Transformers opened two years ago I kept my mouth shut. I wasn't a big fan of the cartoon as a kid, didn't collect the toys, so I couldn't have cared less what Bay did with it. But there were a lot of hardcore fans who did and I appreciated where they were coming from and how passionate they were that the cartoon they grew up on was done justice on the big screen. For all the criticism Bay took and still takes, when push came to shove, he delivered a film that was for the most part true to the source material, with certain understandable changes made to appeal to mainstream audiences unfamiliar with the toyline or cartoon. Some hated the movie, but most of them hate all Bay movies anyway and had zero interest in seeing a Transformers feature film in the first place. Bottom line: He came through.

G.I. Joe is a different story for me. I literally grew up on it to the point that a couple of years ago I browsed through a guide that prices old figures and discovered that had I kept everything that was listed, I'd probably be a millionaire right now. Since the project was announced I've been watching it VERY carefully and if this doesn't work out I'm going to have to take it a little personally.

If you can get past the movie's clunky, over-explanatory title (almost as bad as calling a movie X-Men Origins: Wolverine) there are other much bigger issues facing this seemingly doomed film. The only bright side here is that at least the casting doesn't appear to be horrific. It's mostly uninspired and lazy, but they could have done worse. I find it hilarious that diehards have been complaining about the casting of Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Cobra Commander on the silly basis that's he's "too young," especially considering this is an ORIGIN story and he'll be under a mask for the majority of the picture. Little do they know he's the only hope this movie has at succeeding provided he's given a story arc that takes full advantage of his talent (which is a real long shot).

As for Sienna Miller as the Baroness, you could have dyed any actress's hair black, stuck some glasses on her and it would have worked. As such, I suspect Miller should do fine. This isn't Shakespeare. Dennis Quaid looks like a complete fool in this costume but in theory he makes sense for General Hawk. That I'm completely unfamiliar with the actor playing Destro (Christopher Eccleston) might be a good thing. Channing Tatum (as Duke) and Marlon Wayans (as Ripcord) are the lazy, uninspired choices I'm referring to. And I'm confused as to why the minor character of Ripcord is even heavily featured in the film when better options were available. That said, if the problems below are any indication there isn't anything any actor or actress could do to salvage the film. You're probably wondering why I'm listing ONLY 5 reasons this movie looks like it will suck. What can I say? I'm feeling kind.

1. It's directed by Stephen Sommers. Deep Rising. The Mummy. The Mummy. Van Helsing. I'm not doubting that's the resume of someone capable of helming a top-tier summer tentpole franchise, but I am saying that G.I. Joe shouldn't feel like it is. Sometimes the simplest explanation works: If the director is bad, the film will be. Shouldn't we have learned that lesson already from Terminator Salvation?

2. An over-reliance on unconvincing CGI and digital effects, which even if they were done well, shouldn't be showcased to this extent. It's not a franchise like Transformers, that needs to be driven completely on huge visual effects and explosions. Just watch this trailer...if you can. It's painful.



3. It takes place in the future. Huh? I thought this was G.I. Joe, not Blade Runner. I wonder how many people always envisoned this movie taking place in a futuristic society. I'm guessing not many, even those who aren't fans. They should have set it during World War II. Just the thought of that opens up all sorts of intriguing possibilities.

4. They made it your typical superhero/fantasy movie. Tatum has described the film as "Mission Impossible meets Transformers meets X-Men." Sadly, I fear that's accurate. If it is, that's a great reason to stay home on August 7 and rent the 1987 animated feature instead. Ever since The Dark Knight was released last year there was rampant theorizing as to which franchises could be "Nolanized" and given a darker, more reality based treatment akin to that film. For most it just wouldn't fit. For G.I. Joe that approach would work.

They should have approached this as a war film and played it completely straight. I'm not saying it should be an R-rated Saving Private Ryan or The Thin Red Line, but it can be fun AND still be taken seriously. Too bad the studios are wusses and refuse to release any war film during a time of war, unless it pushes a preachy liberal agenda. Just look at this rendering of what Cobra Commander is supposed to look like and tell me this material doesn't scream out for a darker treatment.

5. The posters. Have you ever seen worse promotional artwork for a movie? It's like they didn't even care. Besides confirming the feeling that they captured the wrong tone, it's ugly and doesn't make you want to see the movie unless you had a gun to your head. All the characters look exactly the same, have no identifiable visual characteristics and could have very well stepped out of any generic superhero of the month lineup. And I hope you like black spandex and tight leather. The only two characters it looks like they didn't completely screw up were Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow (pictured above), but they were easy. At risk of sounding like a whiny fanboy, if the original costumes were fine, why change them?

Why am I wasting my time analyzing a movie I haven't seen? Because the folks at Paramount apparently couldn't be bothered to. I never thought I'd ever actually agree with the infamous Ben Lyons, but when he recently said that this movie doesn't look like it will capture the "heart and soul" of the toys or original cartoon it pains me to admit he's completely right. Hopefully, I'm wrong. Nothing would make me happier. If not, and it still does well commercially (as bad movies tend to these days), they may have another chance down the line to fix any problems. Until then, I'll be crossing my fingers that my review for G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra ends up being a letter of apology to Mr. Sommers.

Smart People

Director: Noam Murro
Starring: Dennis Quaid, Sarah Jessica Parker, Thomas Hayden Church, Ellen Page, Ashton Holmes
Running Time: 93 min.
Rating: R

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

It’s funny how our perceptions of certain actors can influence how we watch a film. Had Ellen Page not given her Oscar nominated performance as the sarcastic, wisecracking pregnant title character in Juno before Smart People was released no one probably would have thought twice about her work in it. But because she did make that previous film and garnered too much publicity for it, many will go into this one wanting to rip her apart. If you’re one of them you’re going to have a field day because her role is much larger than even the trailer indicated.

Then we have Dennis Quaid playing a depressed, burnt-out college professor. Had another actor been cast we also wouldn’t have cared, but because it’s Quaid (who has a longstanding reputation for playing man’s men) we pay attention. I mention all this because the cast is the best thing Smart People has going for it. The title is supposed to be ironic. I think. These people really believe they’re smart but in reality they’re not. That same description could apply to the film itself.

Despite some fascinating (if not all necessarily good) performances when the movie ended I wondered what the point of it was. I was never bored and couldn’t stop watching but found it was an ordeal spending time with these unlikable, irritating people. I also question the benefits of releasing another one of these low-budget indie “human comedies” that expect us to break out in a fit of giggles over issues like incest and repressed homosexuality…then have a good cry.
I really wanted to like this (and came close) but the tone felt way off and when I compiled a mental checklist I realized it failed in its primary goal of getting me to care what happens to the characters. I just couldn’t root for them and all their various emotional transformations rang false. Part of the problem is that everything is painted in such broad strokes that these people don’t feel real and instead came off as a screenwriter’s somewhat narrow vision of what “real” is supposed to be. As a result he film becomes a parody of what it’s trying to be and ends up being almost as arrogant and condescending as it’s protagonist.

To say that Carnegie Mellon University English Professor Lawrence Wetherhold (Quaid) is full of himself is like calling the sky blue or proclaiming the sun will rise tomorrow morning. A recent widower, he hides his pain and depression with sarcastic remarks and a side helping of witty insults. He’s one of those jerks who you actually have to think how to get along with and worry the next word you speak might set him off. He doesn’t care who his students are (even giving them name tags so he doesn’t have to) and is justifiably despised by his co-workers. Even his half-hearted desire to be head of the English department stems from massive egotism and a desperate need for attention rather than any kind of motivation to improve the academic program.

The real victim of Lawrence’s selfish behavior is his lonely, over-achieving daughter, Vanessa (Page) who is very much a chip off the old block and emulates his obnoxious, arrogant behavior. His college-age son James (Ashton Holmes) was smarter and just escaped into his own world, avoiding the situation entirely. On top of Lawrence failing miserably to find a publisher for his latest book, his adopted slacker brother, Chuck (Thomas Hayden Church) moves in and must act as his makeshift chauffer when he suffers an unfortunate head injury trying to retrieve his towed car. The accident causes an introduction to Dr. Janet Hartigan (Sarah Jessica Parker) a former student he doesn’t remember who used to have a crush on him. They begin dating. And so begins the redemption of Lawrence Wetherhold.

If you had told me going in that amongst these world-class Oscar nominated actors, Sarah Jessica Parker would deliver the best performance in the film I wouldn’t have believed it. It’s not that everyone else does a bad job per se, just that Mark Poirier’s familiar script turns them into indie film caricatures and there’s only so much they can do to overcome it. The worst of which is Page’s Vanessa. Anyone who hated the character of Juno MacGuff better brace themselves. Vanessa is just like her except for the fact that she’s mean, nasty and completely unlikable. Why? Because she’s a REPUBLICAN and this is Hollywood. The portrait of Ronald Reagan on her wall kind of gave it away, as did her talking about Dick Cheney in glowing terms. Her political beliefs are completely irrelevant to the family pain she’s going through which is why it feels like a cheap shot that it was thrown in there. She’s also carries an S.A.T. study guide around with her in case we don’t quite get the message that she’s an overachiever.

It's worth mentioning there’s a development with Vanessa at the midway point that’s just disgusting. It was creepy, awkward and unnecessary. I wanted to throw up. I was a fan of Page’s work in Juno and thought she deserved all the praise and recognition she received so if I found her irritating in this I can only imagine what everyone else will think. I hate to agree with her detractors because she is a big talent, but unless she starts finding some different, more challenging roles other than the “wise well beyond her years” sarcastic teen, her career will start to fizzle out.Thomas Hayden Church does what he can with the slacker brother role and had another actor been cast it could have been a disaster. It’s one-dimensional part but Church brings some real dimension to it.

The chief selling point of the film is the emerging relationship between Quaid and Parker’s characters and the best thing I can say is that the two have great chemistry and I wanted to see them in a movie more deserving of it. It’s just impossible to believe that anyone could stand to be in the same room with a narcissistic emotional cripple like Lawrence much less be involved in some kind of meaningful relationship with him. At first she can't but then, of course, she begins to warm up to the idea. I didn't. Despite the best efforts of the actors his transformation was just too much of a stretch for me to buy in the context it was presented. That Quaid and Parker even come within a striking distance of pulling it off proves how much more they could have done with a stronger script. Parker’s Janet is the only character in the film who seems like a normal, grounded human being and seems so intelligent that I was almost willing to go along with her idea that this relationship could possibly work. Parker at least made me care what happened to that character and I probably would have rather watched a film about her.

This is a huge departure for Dennis Quaid and despite being miscast he mostly does a decent job, but I found myself distracted by some of the physical choices he made. During the film I found myself asking: "Why is he walking like that?" Supposedly, Quaid traveled to college campuses to study the professors but what purpose does it serve to imitate how they walk? Unaware that college professors are some strange species that walk differently than humans, I found myself concentrating on his duck-like shuffle throughout the film. He also has a middle-aged paunch, a shaggy beard and his head wanders all over the place while talking.

Rather than worrying how professors look it would have made more sense to inhabit how they act. Quaid does do that well, which is why I found the other things so distracting. He’s an underrated actor and it was great to see him in a different role like this but everything didn’t need to go so over-the-top. I wish director Noam Murro trusted him more to tell him the physical stuff wasn’t necessary and added little to the character. Michael Douglas’ work in 2000’s Wonder Boys is a good example of more restrained work in a very similar role.
I counted about four times the movie could have come to an end but kept going. That’s scary when you consider it’s only an hour and a half long, which I can’t believe because it sure felt a whole lot longer. It was one manufactured crisis after another with these people set to one of those pretentious indie soundtracks where every song sounds like it comes from a guy who’s strumming an acoustic guitar in a coffee shop. I love movies set in academia and ones featuring dysfunctional families so with this cast you’d figure this would be a slam dunk for me. Instead, it misses its mark by trekking through familiar territory with nothing new to say. It attempts to make up for it by trying too hard. Smart People is just a little too smart for its own good.

Vantage Point

Director: Pete Travis
Starring: Dennis Quaid, Matthew Fox, Forest Whitaker, William Hurt, Edgar Ramirez, Sigourney Weaver
Running Time: 90 min.
Rating: PG-13

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

I really can’t stand it when a film’s trailer gives away a key plot point, especially if revealing it serves no purpose other than to stifle the viewer’s enjoyment of the movie. In the case of the Rashomon style mystery thriller Vantage Point, the twist in question happens to be incredibly far-fetched and dumb and the movie probably would have been more effective without it. Still, revealing it was unwise. I just sat there looking at my watch waiting for the moment it would occur, rather than being on the edge of my seat. Why the studio would do that is a rant for another time, but truthfully, it really doesn’t make a huge difference because the whole thing doesn’t quite work anyway.

At best, Vantage Point is a well-acted, technically slick film with a few good performances and at worst, an achingly repetitive exercise in pointlessness. I suppose that’s to be expected when you show the same event 8 times from 8 different viewpoints without revealing any new information until the final half hour of the film. What the filmmakers forgot was that they didn’t have a story nearly deep or interesting enough to warrant the use (and subsequent abuse) of such a risky device. You shouldn’t need a detailed field guide to keep track of events and characters in a movie. It doesn’t start to get its act together until the end and by the time the pieces come together in a satisfactory manner it’s just too late. We’re too tired to care. In trying invoke Rashomon, the film instead comes off as just a poor man’s sequel to Brian DePalma’s Snake Eyes.

In Spain, United States President Ashton (William Hurt) is giving a speech at an anti-terrorism summit in Spain when an assassination attempt is made on his life. Covering the event is a news team led by a demanding, but effective producer (well-played by Sigourney Weaver). The first (and best) ten minutes of the film depict the event from their viewpoint and then the story flashes back to reveal the viewpoints of various other characters including the President himself, a veteran secret service agent (Dennis Quaid) returning to the job after taking a bullet, a tourist (Forest Whitaker) who captures Zapruder-like footage of the event on his camcorder and a mysterious police officer (Eduardo Noriega), who may be involved in the assassination plot.

There are many other periphery characters whose vantage points are explored, very few of which are particularly gripping or interesting. The movie gets so overloaded with characters we forget to care about the actual mystery and worry more about just keeping up with not only them, but also the shaky hand-held camera work. Making matters worse is the aforementioned big twist (which I won’t give away) that comes midway through and takes the story in a different, inferior direction, somewhat negating the purpose of the entire story.

A movie with this much going on can’t be an acting showcase but with little screen time she’s given Weaver proves she should have been given more to do while Hurt is unsurprisingly very believable as the President, though it hardly matters given the circumstances of the plot. Whitaker ends up being a slightly more important presence than first appears but through most of the picture you could argue he's wasted. I couldn’t help but feel bad for him having to just hold up that camcorder in the same position for what had to be hundreds of takes of the same scene.

Another equally ridiculous twist comes into play later but at least this one results in a thrilling car chase that almost saves the film as the focus wisely shifts to the only character in this whole mess we actually care about. It’s ironic that only when director abandons the different points of view that the movie finally finds its pulse. Quaid and Lost’s Matthew Fox as his partner end up being the only two actors who have something substantial to show for their screen time and deliver the two best performances. It’s unfair, really, because they were easily given the meatiest material to work with.

The 8 different vantage points gimmick doesn’t help the film because the central story is too weak to contain it. It would have worked far better to instead show different versions of the assassination with different suspects and let the viewer attempt to uncover the perpetrator, kind of like the movie Clue. At least this way we wouldn’t be forced to watch the same scenes over and over with the same result. It tells us nothing about how different people perceive reality, which I’m guessing was the point of the entire exercise. I'm still waiting for this method to one day be used appropriately in relation to the story being told, but more importantly, be executed well.

I’m intrigued by films about assassination attempts and this premise had a ton of potential, but no one involved in the making of this saw that and rather than keeping it simple, the screenwriters poured too much in. It also would have helped if I didn’t have to use the word “assassination” loosely when describing the crime. Director Pete Travis seems to be holding out hope that after the puzzle is solved everyone will want to go back with new information and appreciate how nuanced the performances are, or view the film in a different light. But who would want to waste their time doing that? Vantage Point does an awful lot of work, but by the end, there just isn't enough to show for it.

American Dreamz

Director: Paul Weitz
Starring: Mandy Moore, Hugh Grant, Dennis Quaid, Willem Dafoe, Sam Golzari, Chris Klein, Judy Greer
Running Time: 107 min.
Rating: PG-13

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

Imagine a movie where every character is in some shape or form a spoof of a real person. Okay, got that? Good. Now think about someone you know who just keeps talking, but really never says much of anything. Then combine the two and you have Paul Weitz's American Dreamz, a movie that's supposed to be a dark comedy, but by the end, just like that friend you know, it doesn't say anything particularly interesting or memorable. I cannot lie though when I tell you it's still pretty good and if you watch it you'll probably be smiling most of the way through. The actors are having alot of fun and it shows, taking a really awful concept and almost making it work. The whole thing is ridiculous for sure, but it's also strangely compelling.

Sally Kendoo (Mandy Moore) from small town Ohio has just won a spot on the number one reality show in the country: American Dreamz, hosted by Simon Cowell clone Martin Tweed (Hugh Grant). That the movie attempts to spoof Cowell, who is essentially a spoof of himself anyway, is ludicrous, especially since he does a far better job doing it on American Idol than Grant does here. The show's so popular it even attracts the attention of the White House, which is inhabited by President Stanton (Dennis Quaid) who just won reelection, is southern, and also happens to be a bumbling idiot. Sound familiar? His Cheney-like Chief of Staff (Willem Dafoe) thinks it would be a great p.r. move for him to judge the finals of American Dreamz, even if he has to feed him everything to say since he has no brain. Complicating matters, the very likable Omar Obeidi (Sam Golzari), a middle eastern terrorist living with his family in California, is accidently discovered for the competition when it was actually his cousin who earned the spot. Omer is then recruited by his terrorist cel to make it to the finals and kill the President with a bomb. Hilarity ensues.

In a way, this movie kind of reminded me of Wag The Dog. That satire was about how the media can manipulate and skew our view of reality. Except this is about...well, nothing really. It seems to be about the media and their power over us, or our addiction with it. Is this trying to mock us for watching too much reality tv or taking it too seriously? We do. Big deal. Or is this a poltical satire? I'm not sure, and neither is the movie. It introduces so many satirical elements that by it's dark, twisted ending we're not at all sure what any of it is about. Nothing seems to come together like it should, or in a way that connected with me at least.

Terrorism and American Idol don't exactly go together like peanut butter and jelly for a motion picture comedy, so the movie really has no choice but to give us some kind of idea about what it's trying to convey. Yet, it doesn't. It's a shame too, because there is alot to admire about the sometimes clever film, mainly Mandy Moore. She's beautiful, a great actress and an even better singer. She takes what should be, and was likely written as, a caricature and turns it upside down, slyly spoofing her own good girl image. Looking at her you don't figure she could pull off a villainous role, but here, as in Saved!, she's definitely proven to be up to it. I loved the sub-plot of how she used her injured war hero boyfriend (Chris Klein) to help her win the competition at the urging of her scheming manager (well played by SNL's Seth Myers). I also have to admit the title song of the show is also pretty hilarious. Even though the target is way too easy, Quaid must have spent many late nights studying tapes of George W. Bush because he does pretty much nail it. There's a great scene toward the end where he loses the connection in his earpiece to the Chief of Staff and he can't even talk, much less even function. The look on Quaid's face is priceless.

Paul Weitz previously directed the American Pie movies, and more recently one of the best romantic comedies of the past few years, In Good Company. This movie isn't nearly as funny as the former and it doesn't have nearly as much to say about life as the latter, but it will keep you entertained for sure. The movie is so "of the moment" in it's satire and pop culture targets you have to wonder if it will look even more ridiculous (if that's possible) in like, say, twenty years. While I'm sure Weitz thought he had a lot to say about something, what that is isn't exactly clear.