Tron: Ares

Director: Joachim Rønning
Starring: Jared Leto, Greta Lee, Evan Peters, Jodie Turner-Smith, Hasan Minhaj, Arturo Castro, Gillian Anderson, Jeff Bridges, Cameron Monaghan, Sarah Desjardins, Selene Yun
Running Time: 119 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★★ (out of ★★★★) 

While many were blindsided by director Steven Lisberger's groundbreaking and eerily prescient Tron in 1982, even its biggest detractors knew he was onto something, as its following in the years since has proven. So when Tron: Legacy came around over two decades later, it became a euphoric payoff for longtime fans repeatedly told for years a sequel would never happen. But with the industry finally evolving enough to do justice to Lisberger's futuristic vision, audiences were given an opportunity to experience a 2010 incarnation of the Grid in all its blue neon, 3D glory. And the timing couldn't have been better, at least until those tired "style over substance" complaints that plagued the original resurfaced, squashing any immediate hopes for a follow-up. 

Now after another excruciating wait comes Tron: Ares, with Norwegian director Joachim Rønning taking the reigns of a trilogy no one thought they'd ever see, in the franchise that refuses to die. And despite multiple delays, bad buzz and divisive reactions, it's just as spectacular as the others, ensuring its eventual enshrinement into cult status. Not exactly a sequel or reboot, it exists in this grey area in between, again managing to meet the moment with a timely plot centered around the perils and benefits of artificial intelligence. Of course, the first film foresaw this moral dilemma before anyone, knowing even then that technology's impact largely depends on how humanity chooses to use it.  

It's the year 2025 and rival companies ENCOM and Dillinger Systems are embroiled in a race to bring  digital constructs into reality. One such AI "being" is a program called Ares (Jared Leto), created by Julian Dillinger (Evan Peters), the grandson of former ENCOM executive Ed Dillinger. An expendable super soldier, he's a Master Control Program following Julian's directives, but hampered by a fatal design flaw that limits its lifespan to 29 minutes. That's unless Julian can somehow obtain developer Kevin Flynn's (Jeff Bridges) "Permanence Code," which is in the hands of ENCOM's current CEO Eve Kim (Greta Lee), who located it on a floppy disk at Flynn's remote Alaskan station. 

Ignoring his mother and ex Dillinger CEO Elisabeth's (Gillian Anderson) warnings, Julian uses Ares and digital solidier Athena (Jodie Turner-Smith) to attack ENCOM's grid and retrieve the code. After that fails, Julian sends them to target her in the real world to get it, even if this means killing her. But when Ares starts showing signs of empathy and self-awareness, he and Eve agree to work together, infuriating Julian, who escalates his tactics to obtain the code. Alternating between real and virtual worlds, the war for digital supremacy unfolds, carrying increasingly high stakes for Eve and Ares. 

Picking up exactly where Joseph Kosinski's Legacy left off just wasn't feasible, especially considering how they'd have to entice the key players back after over a decade away. If anything, it's a testament to how well Sam and Quorra's arc concluded, with that unforgettable final shot leaving no where else to go, or at least not enough to justify another feature length adventure focused solely on the aftermath.  

The idea that Sam would bow out of ENCOM and hand the company over to someone capable of carrying on his dad's work seems right given how things were left. And most of that information is cleverly dispensed in a slick pre-title sequence that introduces Eve, who's been acting as sole CEO following her sister Tess's (Selene Yun) death. And to the film's credit, that's not a minor detail, as so much of Eve's desire to possess this code stems from a need to fill her late sibling's shoes, and maybe just a touch of lingering jealousy. 

Like his grandfather, Julian's a greedy meglomaniac, only with the volume turned up and far less competence. Even his own mom thinks he's a loser, only making him more dangerous and ambitiously eager to prove himself with this risky, unregulated program. If Ares' perceived flaw is a conscience then the Dillinger CEO's human malfunction is his complete lack of one, causing him to play fast and loose with potentially fatal tech. It's a concept that's permeated Tron's universe from day one, but takes on even greater relevance as AI outpaces society's preparedness in dealing with the potential consequences.  

This all comes to a head when Julian sets his sights on the code, which Eve and colleague Seth (Arturo Flores) use in digitally transplanting an orange tree, effectively breaking the 29 minute rule. This is what Julian wants and he'll stop at nothing to get it, leading to a surreal, action packed light cycle chase through the streets where Eve's hunted by the dutifully compliant Ares and Athena. But upon realizing he's no longer interested in being considered "expendable," Ares develops a rebellious streak, instead trying his chances at freedom. 

While Leto's casting was derided before a trailer even dropped, it's hard to imagine this working quite as well without him, and not just due to his involvement in actually getting the picture made. You'd assume playing a digital entity with human traits is a thin line for any actor to walk, but Leto drops subtle hints that his assassin harbors some strong feelings about what Julian's planning, taking to reality in ways his creator couldn't have counted on. 

Conveying distinctly human qualities with something just a little off, Leto proves up to that task and remains equally convincing in full fledged action hero mode, whether inside or outside of the virtual world. And in an aesthetic departure, this Grid has a substantially darker, grittier feel and look that really sets it apart from its predecessors. This red-tinged hallucinatory trip is backed by Nine Inch Nails' hypnotizing electronic soundtrack, which won't supplant Daft Punk's beloved Legacy score, but provides an awesome accompaniment, representing some of Reznor and Ross's best recent work. 

In a series often overlooked for its performances, Greta Lee's phenomenal as the sympathetic heroine who unexpectedly goes into badass mode to protect Flynn and her sister's legacies from a maniacal Julian, played with deranged glee by Peters. Gillian Anderson shines in a smallish role as the disgraced former CEO embarrassed by her own son while Jodie Turner-Smith is a physical presence, commanding the screen when Athena gradually emerges as the story's chief antagonist.

As the saga's connective tissue, Jeff Bridges' return as Flynn wasn't exactly a well kept secret, but he's perfectly utilized at just the right time, making a colossal statement with the clarity his character imparts on Ares. Taking place in a familiar setting that calls back to the '82 original, this sequence also marks a convergence point for the trilogy, bringing the saga full circle. And while the final battle is a volcanic cacophony of speed and sound, its very last scene is the best of surprises, addressing the elephant in the room and silencing skeptics who assumed the previous entry's events would go unacknowledged.

A visual feast for the senses, this legitimizes the cliché that certain films are intended to be seen and experienced in the biggest, most immersive environment possible. Of course, that's what Tron's always been, and a lot more, regardless of how many bothered to notice at the time  You're either onboard or not, which may as well sum up the history of a franchise that never really got the respect it deserved. But if this is the send-off, it's hard to imagine a better way for the series to go out than staying ahead of the curve, still waiting for the rest us to catch up.                                                  

The Giver

Director: Phillip Noyce
Starring: Brenton Thwaites, Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Cameron Monaghan, Odeya Rush, Alexander Skarsgard, Katie Holmes, Taylor Swift, Emma Tremblay
Running Time: 97 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

Fairly or not, Lois Lowry's 1993 Newbery Medal-winning children's novel, The Giver has been both credited and blamed for ushering in the emergence of a genre that's come to be known as "YA." That Jeff Bridges has been trying to get the film version going for so long that his father was originally attached to the role of the title character speaks volumes about Hollywood. When things are popular and making money an entirely new genre can emerge out of thin air, making previously overlooked material seem "hot." Now The Giver, a fairly challenging story no one would touch with a ten-foot pole for the past two decades, is suddenly a "Young Adult Franchsie Property." It's the same categorization that befell Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game, which was considered straight-up science fiction until producers realized it featured young characters. Between the controversy surrounding its author and the fact they were trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, box office failure was a near certainty. So plans to make the next Hunger Games or Divergent out of Lowry's more philosophically dense material is definitely cause for concern, especially considering its shared plot point of an oppressive, dystopian future. Surprisingly, or maybe accidentally, this doesn't happen.

Director Phillip Noyce has made a restrained, meditative picture primarily concerned with ideas, sharing more similarities with Pleasantville than any of the aforementioned titles, with ambition that often exceed its reach. Better yet, the material doesn't feel dumbed down or sanitized to attract a broader audience, as YA adaptations tend to (with the exception of last year's Catching Fire, which really did it right). You can't ask for more than that, even if something's missing. It could be some logic holes in the plot or the fact that the bottom kind of falls out in the last half hour, but at least those are respectable flaws any movie could have.

When people are given freedom of choice, they'll almost always choose wrong. That's the rationalization the Chief Elder (Meryl Streep) uses to govern a future society in which its citizens are indistinguishable from each other, all their emotions and memories vanquished. Everyone is the same race. The concepts of "family" and "love" don't exist. Homes are referred to as "dwellings," that are every bit as impersonal as the word implies. People aren't killed, but "released into elsewhere." The Receiver of Memory is the only community member possessing actual memories that are only used to advise the Chief Elder on decision-making and train the next Receiver. In a graduation ceremony where the community's children are ushered into adulthood with assigned jobs, Jonas (Brenton Thwaites) is chosen as the succeeding Receiver, set to be schooled by the man currently holding that position, The Giver (Jeff Bridges).

While his assigned, nameless parents (Katie Holmes and Alexander Skarsgard) are proud, taking this important position is a sacrifice for Jonas, who's ordered to keep this new knowledge to himself, even as it tears apart his childhood friendships with Fiona (Odeya Rush) and Asher (Cameron Monaghan). Now exposed to glimpses of the past both traumatizing and joyful, Jonas must decide whether the citizens of this sterilized future can handle the truth that their controlled utopia is really anything but. And whether it's his moral duty to enlighten them, despite the risks.

Whether the good is worth the bad is the central question the movie asks and the script, regardless of its faithfulness to Lowry's text, does go all in with those themes. But the big takeaway is the striking, crisply photographed black and white monochrome look of the community, impeccably lensed by cinematographer Ross Emery. The absence and eventual use of color does invoke literal and mostly positive comparisons to Pleasantville in that, besides looking sleek, it's actually functional and organic to the story. Even if the eventual incorporation of color is more gradual and less dramatically executed here, black and white's purpose in depicting a stark, washed-out world of boredom and sameness is similar. It's interesting to note that the 1998 film uses a colorless past to embrace the future while this does exactly the opposite.

The idea that our collective past informs our present, and without it, we're left with the nightmare depicted here, which is heady stuff, at least as far as YA goes. It's ironic that the opening hour, in which we're introduced to this bland, anemic society is the most exciting part of the film and far more entertaining than when the stakes are supposedly raised later. Far from being phoned in, it's an intricate and fully realized world, containing some elements that bare more than a passing resemblance to Fahrenheit 451. Jonas' training is the centerpiece, as he's slowly exposed, through The Giver, to a past the rest of his community has been  "protected" from. War. Death. Love. Snow. Sleds. It's what he chooses to do with this knowledge, The Giver's motivations for sharing it, and the Chief Elder's reaction, that forms the conflict, threatening to finally awaken this society from its cultural hibernation.

By the very nature of its concept, the film isn't heavy in the romance department, using Jonas and Fiona's relationship to make a larger point about how their society suppresses emotions. That their deepening bond is an integral ingredient to the script rather of a sideshow distraction to reel in teen audiences is a relief and a credit to the likability of the leads. While strangely not a prerequisite for these roles, neither exactly oozes charisma, and even with the ages bumped up considerably from the novel, 25 year-old Thwaites is still a bit old for the part. But he makes it work and is easy to root for, as is Rush. Both are kind of upstaged by their co-stars, which makes sense considering those co-stars are Jeff Bridges and Meryl Streep. A bearded, warbling Bridges shares the most rewarding scenes opposite Thwaites, literally and figuratively giving color to a Giver that plays as the Dude crossed with his aging Flynn from TRON: Legacy.

One of the big highlights is a brief flashback entailing the disaster involving the Giver's disastrous training of the previously chosen Receiver, Rosemary, who's played by Taylor Swift in a cameo that lasts about a minute. Given her massive media exposure, it's a feat in itself her presence isn't an unwanted distraction that takes you out of this. Rather, the nature of the role does really suit her and Noyce wisely avoids testing just how much she can handle. From a thematic standpoint the part is actually important and you're left wanting more Taylor, which was smart.

Streep is perfectly cast as this authoritative figure and overlord of the society, even if the writing of her character eventually becomes a little cartoonish when she evolves into a sneering villain. Holmes and Skarsgard are given the difficult, but fascinating jobs of playing emotionless robots, which is sure to incite a bunch of jokes about those actors I don't necessarily agree with. An ice cold Holmes scarily slips into this disturbing dystopian "mother" role, frequently lecturing the kids on their word usage while Skarsgard is at the center of a shockingly dark and disturbing scene that really opens the flood gates of the story. With this intact I'm kind of amazed the movie escaped with a PG-13, as a good case can be made the MPAA has slapped films with an "R" for less. But at least this shows that everyone involved in this project took it seriously, rarely shying away from unsavory aspects to the material that could have easily been brushed under the rug.      

At a certain juncture in The Giver you realize it's gone as far as it wants and rest of the narrative will consist of checking off boxes and marking time. The last act is such a foregone inevitability that's it's really easy to just bail out and lose interest. Considering everything that came before, I was prepared to expect to unexpected, and while what we get is fitting and visually beautiful, it's certainly not surprising. The one big question bothering me was why this society even bothers having a Receiver. Isn't it too much of a risk? While their stated purpose is to advise the community, this seems like a lot of trouble to go through and too much temptation put on the plate of whomever is chosen to make it worth their while. But even that might be reading too much into it, as this is a great effort that comes close to transcending the genre's limitations by virtue of its big ideas.

Tron: Legacy

 

Director: Joseph Kosinski
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Garrett Hedlund, Olivia Wilde, Bruce Boxleitner, Michael Sheen, James Frain
Running Time: 127 min.
Rating: PG

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)

Now this makes sense. Here's a film released in 3D, and a sequel no less, where an argument can actually be made that it warrants that presentation based on its STORY. TRON: Legacy doesn't feel like a cash grab so commend Disney for taking the financial risk of sequeling a massive flop released nearly thirty years ago to grant diehard fans their wish. They can even be forgiven for pulling the original from DVD shelves because they were secretly worried the uninitiated would see it, realize how bad it was, then stay away from this. Silly thinking when you consider the most interested would be those who saw and loved the original, but not so silly when that cult is probably still too small to make a dent at the box office. Not that the 1982 film is bad, just that it's a draggy mess, and the excitement of watching it always far eclipsed the final product on screen, which now seems more painfully dated than ever. Yet millions (including myself) justifiably love it anyway, having to stand by as it's pummeled by critics, waiting patiently for the sequel we didn't think could ever come, but knew with all the advances in computer generated technology, would make perfect sense.

Now that the follow-up to TRON is here and everything we imagined it could be and more, it's kind of mind-boggling (not to mention hilariously ironic) that naysayers are still looking for things to complain about. Most of the unfair complaints leveled against TRON: Legacy have been at its screenplay which makes me wonder what they thought of the original's script, mostly an incoherent mess from middle to end. This story is an improvement in every way, much sharper focused with a clear-end point destination for its characters whose fates we're completely invested in. First time director Joseph Kosinski takes the forward looking ideas from 1982 to the level we always wanted while still managing to remain remarkably faithful to the original in surprising ways. Worth every year of the wait, he's made a sequel superior in every way to its predecessor and a film that comes as close as possible to matching the actual experience of watching it. 

It's almost surreal seeing Flynn's Arcade again, only this time in a decrepit state, abandoned and unoccupied since its iconic appearance in the last film. Its owner, software engineer and ENCOM CEO Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges) has been trapped inside his own creation, The Grid, for the past 20 years. A mysterious pager message originating from the arcade grabs the attention of his 27 year-old son Sam (Garrett Hedlund), who's been in the dark about his father's whereabouts since his disappearance in 1989. As primary shareholder he's effectively pretended to take little interest in what's now become of the company. At the urging of his dad's best friend and colleague, Alan Bradley (a returning Bruce Boxleitner) he investigates the page and is sucked into the machine himself, coming face-to-face with Clu, a dangerous digital copy of his father who's seized control of The Grid, forcing the real Kevin Flynn into hiding. With his help and that of digital apprentice Quorra (Oilvia Wilde), Sam must find a way to defeat Clu and make sure they make it through the portal back to the real world before it closes for good.

Let's just get it out of the way now: The digital rendering of Jeff Bridges in the opening scene isn't anywhere near where it needs to be. It's been pointed out already by everyone but for me it's the only aspect of a technically superb production that sticks out as a big flaw. The CGI Clu that appears later is fine since he's supposed to be a digital creation within a video game, but for a flashback with young Sam in 1989 it sticks out like a sore thumb because he's sharing the screen with a real actor. With dead eyes and minimal texture and expression, Bridges looks like a cross between Benjamin Button, a character from The Polar Express or something out of a Playstation 2 game. Given how advanced movie technology has become it's almost kind of a relief to discover that we still have one problem that needs fixing. I don't know what could have been done instead since a young Bridges had to be shown somehow in these flashbacks but they're clearly not at the point where this approach can be pulled off yet.

The father/son dynamic absolutely had to hit its mark for the narrative to succeed since its the only human interest entry point for those unfamiliar with the original film. Aside from the technical issues with that particular scene, the film perfectly reinforces this aspect throughout, and it'll resonate even more for those who remembers the original, putting them roughly in the same age bracket as the protagonist. They'll also better appreciate the cool touches like the TRON and The Black Hole posters in Sam's room and little details Kosinski retained in the light cycle and disc battles in The Grid, helping make this as much a tribute to the childhood memories of those who grew up with the first film as this past year's atrocious Karate Kid remake was an attempt to butcher them. 

Calling TRON: Legacy a feast for the senses would be an understatement. The cinematography, art and set design, visual effects, costumes, sound and everything going right down the line from a technical and aesthetic standpoint is unmatchable. As hinted at from from the trailer, the trippy look of this film is amazing so it's unlikely 25 years from now the effects will be laughed at the way the original's (revolutionary for their time) are now. Daft Punk's dark, pounding score rivals Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross' work on The Social Network as the best of the year, reminding us there are usually two types of great musical scores. The ones that jump out at you with their distinctiveness and almost seem to be operating on a level different from the film in which they appear and the others that so perfectly match the material they literally become part of it. This fits in the latter category, not just fully ingrained into the fabric of the picture but feeling as if it's derived from The Grid itself.

As for the 3D (which this was filmed in, not converted to in post-production) and its benefits, the jury's still out. I'll have a better idea when I rewatch it on DVD and determine how much is lost, but there were times during the action scenes where everything seemed a little muddled making it difficult to follow what was happening, but the same could be said for just about any other action movie regardless of format. It's possible in a couple of months I pop in the DVD and it's visually an empty shell of what it was on the big screen, but that's extremely doubtful given everything else this has going for it from a production design and technical standpoint. A DVD viewing won't lie, a film can't hide behind its effects and environmental factors (people talking, uncomfortable seats) aren't influencing your perception. That said, I'd be crazy to even suggest this shouldn't be seen in a theater for maximum effect or it didn't add to the overall viewing experience so it's a double-edged sword there.

Down the road this will likely hold up better than everyone thinks mainly because the story is far more interesting and developed than anyone's giving it credit for. It's not only a logical progression of the last film's events, but recalls the best elements of the original Star Wars trilogy, such as the father-son dynamic, pupil vs. wise mentor, the light saber battles (but with cycles and discs) and even a plot development mid-way through that seems directly inspired by The Empire Strikes Back. What's so ironic is that even working within restrictive PG confines Kosinski has the guts to go the darker, more adult places George Lucas wimped out of in the prequel trilogy when he instead opted to play with kiddie gloves much like Cameron did with Avatar, an otherwise solid enterprise undermined by his silly desire to deliver an eco-friendly public service announcement. Kosinski, an architect and former director of commercials (who's unsurprisingly a disciple of David Fincher) clearly harbors no ulterior motives other than faithfully expanding Steve Lisberger's original vision from 1982 and the honesty of those intentions bleed through every frame of the picture.

Despite what James Cameron might try to convince you, actors are in no danger of being replaced by motion capture or CGI anytime soon and two performances here will vouch for it. Garrett Hedlund's isn't one of them but he's as good as can be expected in pulling off the standard hero requirements of Sam. The nature of the story doesn't even really need him to be great but he gets the job done just fine. As if we needed a reminder of just how invaluable an actor Jeff Bridges is, we get yet another, proving as he enters the elder statesman portion of his career that he's doing some of his most interesting work. Just about the only thing that could possibly top the thrill of seeing him in a sequel to TRON would be seeing him return to it as The Dude, and he kind of gives that to us with a laid-back, Zen-like turn that recalls some of the little quirks of that character while still projecting the essence of Kevin Flynn. Exiled in an "off-grid" hideout exactly resembling in both design and sound the white hotel room in 2001: A Space Odyssey (clearly another homage), a dinner table sequence reuniting father and son might be one of the most impressive scenes of the year in terms of narrative content and visual execution. Because she's so disarmingly beautiful it's easy to be distracted and miss all the things Olivia Wilde does with her eyes, facial expressions and vocal inflections to suggest Quorra's innocent curiosity and bewilderment of the world around her, as well as Sam's arrival. Doing so much with little dialogue it's the kind of strong female portrayal that's been sorely missing of late in big budget sci-fi movies, leaving any leftover memories of Cindy Morgan's work from the first film in the dust. Based on all the evidence here, she's set to become a big star very soon. In no danger of being overlooked is Michael Sheen's eerie channeling of the Ziggy Stardust-era David Bowie as flamboyant nightclub owner Castor. His screen time is limited but he more than makes the most of it, owning those scenes with a bombastic, creepy flare.

Ending a movie effectively is tough and rarely accomplished which makes it all the more impressive that a first-time filmmaker knew to how construct a final scene and shot that's perfect in every way.  It's possible to move forward with another sequel or choose not to, but based on this conclusion, neither choice is wrong. I can't understand how anyone can look at that final moment, how the story logically arrived there, and even attempt to claim Adam Horowitz and Edward Kitsis' screenplay is shaky or incoherent. This could easily be considered the most underrated effort of the year proving, just as Inception as did, that when science fiction is executed well few other genres are capable of generating as much thought and excitement. The ideas are the effects and the effects are the ideas, creating complete immersion for the viewer. It's unfortunate even those who have mildly praised the film have done so backhandedly, writing it off as nothing more than a "guilty pleasure" or excusing their endorsement by claiming to have gone in with low expectations. It has its flaws and isn't perfect, but that's kind of fitting isn't it? The sequel to a film that for many was perfect precisely because of its goofy imperfections is getting the same condescending response its prequel has been receiving for the past 25 years. TRON was always about style over substance and the feeling of excitement it created in viewers who hoped it could live up to its ideas. TRON: Legacy successfully recaptures that feeling but goes further in being the film we always wanted the original to be.

Crazy Heart

Director: Scott Cooper
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Colin Farrell, Robert Duvall
Running Time: 112 min.
Rating: R

★★★ 1/2 (out of ★★★★)

It's become a long-running joke that country music can sometimes really pile it on. Drinking. Women trouble. Pick-up trucks. More drinking. You couldn't be blamed for assuming that all those stereotypes have been adapted to the screen in Crazy Heart, in which Jeff Bridges plays a washed-up 57 year-old alcoholic country singer named Bad Blake. But what's so unusual is how the film tells an overly familiar story in such an effortless, laid back style that it seems fresh and invested with new meaning. The performances are too honest and the setting and circumstances too believable that you end up losing yourself in a story that in lesser hands could have easily come off as a poor man's version of The Wrestler, but with a country star.

There's relief in discovering the movie never feels like it's trying too hard, casually letting this world the protagonist inhabits wash over you. The music and performances are what I'll come away remembering most, but it's surprising how much respect rookie writer/director Scott Cooper shows the audience by not playing any games and just delivering it as is. And that was more than enough considering it's Bridges who carries much of the load in the role that justifiably won him an Oscar.

When we first meet Bad (Bridges) he's exiting his '78 Chevy Suburban and dumping a bottle of his own urine in the parking lot after arriving for a gig. It's a steep fall for a performer who years earlier was filling arenas and respected as one of the biggest country stars of his era, kind of a combination of Waylon Jennings and Kris Kristofferson. Now with a serious drinking problem and an adult son who wants nothing to do with him, Bad is relegated to staying at cheap motels and doing one shot gigs at local town bars and bowling alleys in the southwest.

"I used to be somebody, but now I'm somebody else" is a famous lyric from one of his biggest hits and an accurate reflection of his current situation, living in the past and singing the same songs to the same crowds who also have yet to find a way to move on. Bad was somebody, but now he's a nobody, vomiting between sets and waking up the next morning with aging groupies in his motel bed. That's until he meets Jean Craddock (Maggie Gyllenhaal), a divorced young journalist doing a piece on him, and while Bad's developing relationship with her, as well as her four-year-old son, Buddy (Jack Nation), could be his last chance at personal redemption. Meanwhile the possibility of a professional comeback rests on his recently renewed connection to Tommy Sweet (Colin Farrell), a current country star he mentored urging him to get back in the songwriting game.

It would be easy to classify the Bridges' Best Actor victory as a "make-up" for being slighted in the past or a career achievement award and that's true to an extent. We could all probably name about four or five performances he's given that already deserved recognition but in his defense this does rank up there with his strongest work and I'd only be able to name two (I'll let you guess which ones) that I thought were better. Why he tends to be overlooked and so often taken for granted when his peers collect the accolades could be because he makes everything look so effortless that it doesn't seem like he's doing anything. He disappears into roles to such an extent that it's understandable to forget he was the actor who played them. He's been doing it his whole career but the character of Bad really plays on that strength because he's a laid back, cool guy battling demons but unwilling to show anyone the pain he's in or even acknowledge it to himself. Few but Bridges, the master of understatement, could have fit it better and surprises us even more with a vocal and performing ability no one knew he possessed. This part was tailor made for him and seemed to be just waiting for him to reach the point in his career where he could finally play it.

What's funny is that Bridges doesn't possess what you'd necessarily consider the greatest voice by music industry standards but it's perfect for this character and the original songs and music composed T. Bone Burnett (including the Oscar winning original song,"The Weary Kind" co-written by Ryan Bingham) sound better than most of the country music I've come across on the radio. The musical performances from him and Farrell are easily the most believable on screen since 2005's Walk The Line. I'm not a country music fan at all but still loved the music in this, so that's saying a lot. The film takes a familiar story arc but throws in some small touches that set it apart, like how Blake's relationship with Jean just seems to come out of nowhere with little explanation, as something like that would.

How a young, pretty reporter would fall for this old train wreck of a man is never a question because Gyllenhaal doesn't let it become one. Those who only know what she's capable of from her essentially thankless role in The Dark Knight are going to be blown way by how much depth she brings to this single mom. She's Bridges' equal in every way. Certain expectations accompany the hot shot character of Tommy Sweet, especially when he's played by someone like Colin Farrell, but Cooper's script wisely ignores those, choosing to go in a more realistic direction and refusing to present Tommy as the arrogant rival we expect he has to be. Robert Duvall has a cameo role as an old friend of Bad's but if you blink you'll miss it.

As many have already pointed out, the similarities between Bad Blake and Mickey Rourke's Randy The Ram from The Wrestler are too numerous to ignore, but that's not necessarily such a bad thing since he was a fascinating character and so is this one and the setting is vastly different. You didn't have to be a wrestling fan to appreciate that film just as you don't need to be a country music listener to enjoy this. For both, the viewer hopes the protagonist can make a comeback but know the chances are slim because they seem so thoroughly consumed by their own demons and unwilling to let go.Credit Cooper for crafting a biographical drama that makes an emotional connection while remaining mostly free of any false crisis or manipulative shenanigans that would make us feel like we're watching a movie written by someone who's trying to write an a comeback tale to pull at the heartstrings. Crazy Heart is real and raw, but Bridges makes sure it's never depressing.

Burning Questions From the Academy Awards

It's officially over as the book is now closed on another year of movies. As a victim of the highly publicized war between ABC and Cablevision, I missed the first hour of the show last night. That didn't bother me too much considering it's usually about 15 hours too long anyway, I'm not big on musical numbers and the categories given out early (supporting actor, animated feature, best original song) were pretty much locks. But I was really interested in seeing the John Hughes tribute so I guess I'll have to catch up with that online. As far as my predictions, I went 16 for 24, and while that's far from embarrassing, it isn't anything to brag about and easily my worst showing in years. Missing the two screenplay categories killed me and the rest I bombed out on were the usual picks everyone misses in their office pools because they're just wild guesses (i.e. animated short).

The good news is that the ratings for the telecast were the highest in five years. Attribute that to two factors: Avatar and Sandra Bullock. Say what you want about them but the public clearly loves both and that's why they tuned in. It was all people talked about the next morning so despite The Hurt Locker racking up most of the awards it'll likely be joining the ranks of other forgotten Best Picture winners. It was a very predictable show but not an awful one and, as usual, there were many head scratching moments.

Even though I didn't see it yet, isn't it great that they actually paid tribute to John Hughes instead of just throwing him in the death montage?

And shouldn't they try to do that more often?

Shouldn't they have done it for Patrick Swayze also?

Is it some kind of cruel karma that my ABC feed came back just as Miley Cyrus was presenting an Oscar?

Did I just type the words Miley Cyrus and Oscar in the same sentence?

Can you believe Precious beat Up in the Air for Adapted Screenplay?

And didn't that completely throw a wrench in everyone's predictions?

With Jack Nicholson absent has George Clooney become the new go-to guy for reaction shots?

Has Nicholson given up attending the Oscars?

Can you blame him?

What was up with Clooney anyway?

Was he drunk?

Weren't Martin and Baldwin the two most absent hosts they've ever had for the telecast?

Was anyone clocking their screen time for the night?

How silly is it that they replaced "And the Oscar goes to..." with "And the winner is...?"

Did we really need this to be viewed as EVEN MORE of a competition?

Wasn't Mo'Nique dead-on in her speech about rewarding the performance not the politics?

And wouldn't it be nice if the Academy did that for more than just the two supporting categories?

When I heard the stars of Twilight would be appearing on the show was it wrong of me to hope they were referring to Gene Hackman and Susan Sarandon?

Did I actually see a clip from Twilight (the 2009 one) in the horror movie montage?

Is that montage the closest horror will ever get to an Academy Award?

Even after Morgan Freeman explained it, did you still have no idea what the difference is between sound mixing and sound editing?

Isn't it nice that they finally singled out The Dark Knight... for something...a year too late?

When Avatar lost both sound awards didn't you just know it wouldn't win Best Picture?

Is it a little unsettling for anyone that movie that's all CGI and green screen won Best Cinematography?

Is Elizabeth Banks thrilled that she now joins the elite company of Jessica Alba and Jessica Biel as the latest hottie selected to host the technical awards banquet?

For a change, wasn't James Taylor a great choice to perform during the In Memoriam section of the show?

How could they possibly exclude Farrah Fawcet and Bea Arthur?

After what seems like years in seclusion have you noticed that Jennifer Lopez has been showing up all over the place lately?

Was that interpretative dance tribute to the Best Original score nominees dumb or what?

How much sense does it make to include that on the show but leave out performances of Best Original Song?

Not really a question but....OSCAR WINNER FISHER STEVENS!

How many people watching actually got the connection between Keanu Reeves and The Hurt Locker?

How many people watching have even seen The Hurt Locker?

Does having these long, personal introductions for each nominee in the Actor and Actress category eat up enough time?

But isn't it worth the wait just to see Jeff Bridges FINALLY get what he deserves?

Wait a second...Jeremy Renner was in S.W.A.T.?

Doesn't Bridges' Oscar really tie the room together?

Is it okay if I pretend he won this for The Big Lebowski?

Could his turn as The Dude be the greatest un-nominated performance of all-time?

Is this the first career make-up Oscar we can actually cheer?

Couldn't they do a little better than having some of the nominees' co-stars from the performances they're nominated for THIS YEAR introduce them?

Wasn't Oprah's intro for Gaby Sidibe actually somewhat moving?

Didn't you kind of want her to pull the upset after that?

How much did that audience love Precious?

Even though The Hurt Locker and Avatar won more, didn't it feel like that movie came out as the big winner of the night?

How unfair is it that the Oscar season ends just as I finally learn how to pronounce Gabourey Sidibe's name correctly?

How much must Forest Whitaker love Sandra Bullock to publicly confess to directing Hope Floats?

Was it wrong of me for just a second to assume the connection between Whitaker and Bullock was that Whitaker starred in Hurricane Season?

Since Whitaker directed her in First Daughter, do you think Katie Holmes could be busy preparing her Oscar acceptance speech?

And after Bullock winning is that really so far-fetched?

Is ANYONE winning an Oscar really so far-fetched anymore?

How hard must it have been to go through Bullock's filmography and not find a co-star or director involved in an embarrassing project with her?

Wouldn't it have made much more sense to have Keanu introduce Bullock instead?

Is it okay if I pretend she won this for Speed?

How great a sport is she for accepting her Razzie Award for Worst Actress in person the night before?

How tacky was it for them to tell us to stay tuned to see if an "African-American or a woman wins an Oscar?"

How cringe-worthy and annoying was Barbra Streisand's presentation of the Best Director Oscar?

Was it almost as annoying as her actual "announcement" of the winner?

Does it even top Julia Roberts' legendarily awful presentation of the Best Actor Oscar to Denzel Washington in 2002?

Did you notice "Babs" still couldn't stop babbling even after Kathryn Bigelow took the stage to accept the award?

By the way, have you heard that Bigelow is the first woman to win the Best Director Oscar?

Is it wrong that a small part of me was pulling for The Blind Side to win Best Picture just to make the night more exciting and see audience members pass out?

If history is any indication, does The Hurt Locker's victory safely secure the shelf life of Avatar and Inglourious Basterds?

Can you believe that at well over 3 hours this was the SHORTEST Oscar telecast in history?

Iron Man

Director: Jon Favreau
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges, Gwyneth Paltrow, Leslie Bibb, Shaun Toub
Running Time: 125 min.
Rating: PG-13

*** (out of ****)

We’ve come a long way. The days when superhero films were perceived as nothing more than a goofy joke have come to an end. It took a while, but studio executives have finally seen the light, realizing comic book stories can still be fun even if they're intelligent. There’s nothing wrong with taking the material seriously. Better yet, they realized if the material is up to a certain standard it will attract accomplished actors whose work will make the film even better. Especially if that actor happens to be Robert Downey Jr., who previously wouldn’t have topped anyone’s list as a top candidate to play the title role in Jon Favreau’s Iron Man. Not because we didn’t think he could do it, but because we didn’t have faith that the powers that be would be smart enough to consider him for the role.

The story is that Favreau pushed hard for Downey to get this and it’s a good thing he did because Iron Man would be a far inferior film without him, perhaps even barely recommendable. Sometimes it hurts your viewing experience to come to a movie late after everyone has already seen it and other times it doesn’t make a difference. This is one of those cases where it really has an impact. This is a big spectacle movie that’s meant to be seen and experienced on the big screen. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the film a great deal, but rather that I got exactly what I expected from it. Nothing more, nothing less.

As far as mainstream recognizabilty and acceptance, Iron Man would probably fall somewhere toward the middle of the superhero food chain, well below Batman and Superman and closer to Daredevil, The Flash and Captain America. But Favreau and Downey do the character a great service by getting us to really get to know and care about the man behind the suit before puling the trigger on all the action. In a huge risk, nearly three quarters of this film is build-up, weaving a story that not only digs slightly deeper than your average superhero film but is also very timely. It’s almost disappointing that by the end you realize it is just a superhero story because there were so many other interesting issues going on. Still, as far as superhero movies go, Iron Man is one of the better ones. More importantly, it’s smart AND fun.
Robert Downey Jr. is Tony Stark, head of billion-dollar weapons manufacturer, Stark Industries, of which he shares controlling interest with his ruthless business partner, Obidiah Stane (a bearded, chrome-domed Jeff Bridges). But Tony is also a freewheeling, arrogant playboy who likes his cars fast and his women even faster. Struggling to keep his ego in check is his loyal assistant Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and best friend, military man Jim Rhodes (Terrence Howard). The film opens as Tony is seriously injured and taken captive by terrorists in Afghanistan while he’s on his way to show off his latest weapons of mass destruction.

With irremovable shrapnel lodged in his chest he’s fitted with an electromagnetic device by a doctor (Shaun Toub) to keep him alive and together they build an armor-plated bulletproof suit that enables his escape. After returning to the States following his ordeal, Tony’s priorities shift dramatically when faced with realization that his work has been aiding terrorists and taking innocent lives. Much to the displeasure of shareholders and the company’s board of directors, he controversially terminates the company’s weapons division, instead donating all his time to perfecting the design of the armor-plated suit. Tony's decision ends up causing much more than just a public relations problem.

I found a lot of the stuff involving the suit to be a little silly. I was just confused as to why this guy who has enough money and power to do whatever he wants to help the world would indulge his new found social awareness by building an indestructible, flying costume. I know I’m supposed to just go with the flow because this is a superhero movie, but because the film introduces such serious story elements like nuclear proliferation and terrorism the other elements can’t help but feel slightly off. Luckily, it’s a minor problem because Favreau, his screenwriters and Downey get us to care so much about the guy inside the costume.

Unlike the Spider-Man films, which only talk about the idea of personal responsibility, this movie's actually about it. He given maybe just a couple of notes to play, but Downey plays them better than anyone else could have. It may not be the actor’s most challenging role but he realistically pulls off Tony’s transformation from ignorant playboy tycoon into peaceful crusader with subtle ease. He’s so talented he probably still could have pulled this off just fine had he just phoned it in, but I’m glad he chose not to. If I wasn’t blown away it’s just because I’ve come to expect work like this from him. Without Downey there would be no film, or at least not one this good.

All the fancy cars and homes are nice but if I were Tony Stark all I'd want is Pepper Potts as my assistant. And as for that actress playing her, I had to stop and wonder who she was, and what she did with Gwyneth Paltrow. Besides looking unrecognizably amazing, Paltrow shows off a sexy, spunky side we never suspected she had. Who would have thought that she actually knows how to have fun? Her chemistry and interplay with Downey is priceless and the script wisely doesn’t push things too far between them. It doesn’t have to. Supposedly, Downey convinced her to take this by asking her if she ever gets tired of starring in great movies that no one sees. There's a lot of truth in that. Potts should be just the typical throwaway love interest but Paltrow makes it more. Here may be the first time she’s come off as both an actress and a movie star. The latter has always seemed to be missing. It took this role to bring it out.

In addition to Downey, the always-reliable Jeff Bridges has to sell a tough, multi-layered transformation as well when his intentions are revealed to be a bit different than we thought at the beginning. And as usual, Terrence Howard is wasted with a throwaway role but gives his all. Through no fault of his own, audiences may have a tough time remembering he was even in the film

It’s somewhat disappointing that the last half hour of the film plays like a standard issue comic book movie with a final battle scene reminiscent of Transformers. But I can’t say the movie in any way deteriorates or Favreau doesn’t have a strong grip on the visual effects, which are impressive without being overwhelming. I’m in the unique position of being one of the few to view this film after The Dark Knight and it says a lot that this still doesn’t suffer greatly in comparison. That film was an epic crime drama, but this is very much a popcorn summer action movie and a completely different animal altogether. The Dark Knight wasn’t without its flaws also but the big difference is that they were so interesting you could analyze them for years. The flaws here are more of what you’d typically expect to see in a movie like this.

I think the reason the movie has been slightly overpraised is because we’ve gotten so used to junk in this genre for years and are thrilled that an actor of Downey's abilities is there to elevate the material. For what its worth, I'd rank Downey’s work in this ahead of both Toby Maguire’s in Spider-Man and Christian Bale’s in The Dark Knight. I’ll be interesting for me to see how Ed Norton’s performance in The Incredible Hulk holds up against those.
As much as I enjoyed this I’m not interested in a sequel, or if there is a sequel, there should be a limit of one. The last thing we need is for Downey to be tied up in a series of Iron Man films and turn into another Tobey Maguire, who’s once promising career has now been obliterate because no one can ever think of him as anyone other than Peter Parker. Doing this once or twice is fine but we can’t afford to lose an actor like Downey to big-budget action movies. Having said that, it’s great to see him enjoying the success and acclaim he is right now. It’s been a long time coming. Critics and film buffs always knew how good an actor Robert Downey Jr. is, and now thanks to Ironman, everyone else finally does too.