Road House (2024)

Director: Doug Liman
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Daniela Melchior, Conor McGregor, Billy Magnussen, Jessica Williams, B.K. Cannon, Joaquim de Almeida, Austin Post, Lukas Gage, JD Pardo, Hannah Lanier, Kevin Carroll, Darren Barnet, Travis Van Winkle
Running Time: 121 min.
Rating: R

★★★ (out of ★★★★)  

Whenever a cult classic is reimagined with modern sensibilities, response among devoted fans tends to be harsh, as so much of their appreciation stems from their memories watching it. Regardless of actual quality, 1989's Road House firmly fits in that category, where the viewing experience itself supersedes any perceived flaws, serving to make the inevitable remake that much harder to crack. Luckily, director Doug Liman understands this, or maybe more importantly, the original's place within the cheesy 80's action movie pantheon. 

To that end, this rebooted Road House is everything it should be, delivering the kind of trashy, over-the-top fun we don't get nearly enough of in the genre. You can actually understand why Liman's upset this skipped theaters and went straight to streaming since there's good reason to believe it could have been a big commercial hit. With the exception of some occasionally distracting CGI and a video game aesthetic, it's ridiculously fun, exciting entertainment that blazes its own trail, alleviating any concerns this remake would damage nostalgic feelings for its predecessor. 

When former UFC middleweight fighter Elwood Dalton (Jake Gyllenhaal) is asked by business owner Frankie (Jessica Williams) to work as a head bouncer at her Florida Keys roadhouse, he initially rejects the offer. It's only after a botched suicide attempt that he reluctantly agrees, arriving in Glass Key to the appropriately named bar, "The Road House." Overrun with gangs and nightly brawls, the seemingly mild-mannered Dalton tries to keep the peace, until realizing he'll need to get his hands dirty, delivering a brutal beatdown that sends a group of biker thugs to the E.R.

At the hospital, he meets Ellie (Daniela Melchior), a doctor who warns him just how deep the violence and corruption runs in this coastal community. So it isn't long before Dalton finds himself being hunted by yuppie crime boss Ben Brandt (Billy Magnussen) and his incarcerated father's psychotic enforcer Knox (Conor McGregor). As they look to add Frankie's bar to Brandt's criminal property portfolio, Dalton remains haunted by a traumatic event in his past. Pushed to the limit, he'll have to decide whether to skip town or stay and fight, despite the danger it could mean for him and everyone else.

At one point, a member of the gang describes Dalton as having the disposition of Mister Rogers, which does accurately sum up Gyllenhaal's zen-like take on a character that's very far removed from its original incarnation. Overtly alluding to classic Westerns in both dialogue and setup, this lone drifter unassumingly rolls in and surveys his new surroundings, striking up a friendship with precocious teen Charlie (Hannah Lanier) who co-runs a small bookstore with her dad Stephen (Kevin Carroll). 

The opening hour is terrific, as Liman immerses us in the local color of Glass Key, or more specifically The Road House itself, which would come across as a fun place to hang if brutal fights didn't spontaneously erupt every two minutes. Dalton never really loses his cool, at least not exactly, remaining calm and polite even when he's pushed, transforming into this ass-kicking machine only when necessary. And even then, he doesn't take a whole lot of pride in doing it. 

Liman's biggest coup is his casting of Gyllenhaal, who has the unenviable task of stepping into his late Donnie Darko co-star Patrick Swayze's iconic role. On paper, it's an odd fit, but the actor responds with a quirky and menacing turn that fits the material like a glove, arguably giving his most absorbing performance since Nightcrawler. Through a few nightmarish flashbacks, we already have an idea why Dalton's carrying all this guilt and emotional baggage. The anticipation is in waiting for the moment he has enough and finally snaps, unleashing the dark side of himself he's struggled to suppress. 

Given how physically dominant Dalton is, he's more likely pass as a full fledged superhero than MMA competitor, but no one's going into this expecting strict realism. We're too busy marveling at the action sequences, along with Garrett Warren and Steve Brown's jaw dropping stunt/fight choreography. If forced to draw comparisons, the whole thing has a relentless energy that may remind some of the Crank films, only with more narrative meat on its bones and superior performances.

Magnussen makes for a sleazy antagonist, but from the minute he memorably enters, Conor McGregor's sadistically unhinged lunatic steals the show, delivering exactly the kind of crazed, hilarious performance you hoped for, constantly blurring lines between the character and real life fighter playing him. Even the romantic subplot between Dalton and Melchior's Ellie works better than it should once it's clear her involvement isn't merely tangential. Dalton's scenes with bar owner Frankie are just as effective, with Williams's presence grounding even the looniest developments.    

In the last act, Liman steps on the gas and doesn't let up, delivering a spectacular boat chase sequence and final showdown between Dalton and Knox that's best seen to be believed. Hardly trying to recreate Rowdy Herrington's original, this Road House is able to stand by itself, summoning a similar spirit, but with an entirely new setting and characters. And by not holding back or pretending to be more than it is, we get a fast food meal of a movie that offers no apologies for its bombastic approach.               

The Munsters (2022)

Director: Rob Zombie
Starring: Jeff Daniel Phillips, Sheri Moon Zombie, Daniel Roebuck, Richard Brake, Sylvester McCoy, Jorge Garcia, Catherine Schell, Cassandra Peterson, Dee Wallace, Tomas Boykin, Butch Patrick  
Running Time: 110 min.
Rating: PG

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

One thing you can say for Rob Zombie's remake of The Munsters is that it's unironically sincere, leaving large traces of his affection for the classic 60's sitcom in just about every frame. Supposedly, Zombie wanted to go even further and film this in black and white until the powers that be intervened and nixed that. And it's a relief they did since its greatest attribute is the candy colored, live-action cartoon world brought to vivid life through the production design, costuming and cinematography. Despite a modest budget, it looks great and the tone feels just right, to the point that it's hard not to  admire his attempt, outside of the extent to which you think it works. 

Zombie will always have his detractors, but for better or worse, this completely feels like the movie he wanted to make for himself and diehards fans of the original. As someone who always thought it would be fascinating to see someone attempt a modern reboot of the campy 60's Batman series, this seems like the closest we'll get to discovering how that would play out. He doesn't change much, as all the corny humor, dad jokes and visual gags that went over huge in that decade are updated with a new cast whose looks and performances are directly patterned after their predecessors.

In Transylvania, mad scientist Dr. Henry Augustus Wolfgang (Richard Brake) and his hunchbacked henchman Floop (Jorge Garcia) are robbing graves for body parts to build his newest Frankenstein-like creation. But when Floop accidentally steals the head of a witless comedian instead of his brilliant astrophysicist brother, Wolfgang's stuck with a goofy monstrosity Floop names "Herman Munster" (Jeff Daniel Phillips). But for 150 year-old, single vampire, Lily (Sheri Moon Zombie), it's love at first sight when she catches Herman performing a stand-up routine on morning TV. 

Lilly's father, The Count (Daniel Roebuck) is far less impressed with this giant, bumbling oaf, but has even bigger problems, as vengeful ex-wife Zoya (Catherine Schell) has been using his werewolf son Lester (Tomas Boykin) in a scheme to get him to sign over the castle to her. Much to The Count's disdain, Herman and Lily begin dating and grow closer, but Herman's gullibility soon puts the family in financial jeopardy, pushing them into a modern suburban world they may not yet be ready for. 

Building the plot around an origin story that ends exactly where the original series begins allows Zombieto incorporate familiar elements of the sitcom, while simultaneously inserting the family into new situations that exploit The Munsters' fish-out-of-water premise. It's an admittedly clever angle to approach this from, but we knew going in just how much of it would ride on the performances and comedic set pieces. Considering Zombie's the last name you'd associate with PG comedy, he's surprisingly adept at it, managing to keep it as light and family friendly, even while the material does fit into his macabre wheelhouse. 

Zombie regular Jeff Daniel Phillips' version of Herman is a little whinier and more petulant than Fred Gwynne's, and while it's impossible for anyone to capture the humanity that legend brought to the role, he has the physical comedy down and delivers his one-liners with all the ham-fisted gusto you'd want from this iconic character. Sheri Moon Zombie as Lily will undoubtedly draw the ire of those again complaining she's been cast in too prominent a part, but she's good in it, effectively channeling, if sometimes intentionally overplaying, many of original actress Yvonne De Carlo's mannerisms and expressions. 

The two scene stealers are Daniel Roebuck's Count and Richard Brake's Wolfgang, with both actors not only gifted the best gags and one-liners, but greatly improving on them with dry deliveries that seem completely in line with the project's quirky intentions. It's not a coincidence that the film's best scenes tend to feature one of the two, with Brake even pulling double-duty as the grotesque Orlock, a disastrous early date for Lily. 

Elvira herself, Cassandra Peterson, has a small role as a realtor that's most notable for its normalcy and how few will recognize her, while Sylvester McCoy is sort of an afterthought as Igor, but still entertains with what he's given. But we'd be kidding ourselves in not acknowledging the biggest impression is made by the trippy, psychedelic visuals and Zoran Popovic's transcendent cinematography. There's also a concerted effort on the part of the makeup team and costume designers to have the actors' appearances not stray far at all from their original counterparts. 

Many of the weird transitions and editing choices were likely a result of Zombie attempting to invoke the style of the 60's sitcom, which he accomplishes almost too well. The family's arrival at 1313 Mockingbird Lane might be the film's strongest stretch, retroactively justifying what came before while invoking the subversiveness of the 90's The Brady Bunch movies with a clever twist. Comparisons will inevitably be made to The Addams Family big screen adaptations, which isn't entirely fair given how long we've been forced to "pick a side" between the two warring, but considerably different properties.

It's no surprise that this is already being declared the worst movie Zombie's ever made, a hyperbolic statement that would carry more weight if it wasn't uttered every time he releases a new project. The original sitcom still exists for viewers unhappy with what he's done, though those most put-off probably haven't seen the show in a while anyway, if at all. Still, there are pacing issues in the middle section that make you wonder if everything would have flowed smoother if this was just trimmed down to an hour and a half.  

Due to the overall aesthetic and relatively inspired choices made with the script, it's not impossible to envision this becoming a Halloween staple in the years ahead. Zombie retains some of his hillbilly trash hallmarks, while patching together a throwback creation that wouldn't seem out of place being introduced by a late night TV horror host like Morgus the Magnificent or Svengoolie. 

That some sections drag or don't work while entirely retaining the original's spirit begs the question: Is there still a place for The Munsters in the current era? The movie's plot actually asks this, providing discussion fodder that isn't so different from the endless debate surrounding reboots in general. But even accounting for the belief some things just shouldn't be touched, this isn't one of them. When it ends, there's a part of you left wondering why this isn't better considering all that Zombie gets right. On the other hand, it still somehow feels as good as it could possibly be.              

He's All That

Director: Mark Waters
Starring: Addison Rae, Tanner Buchanan, Madison Pettis, Rachael Leigh Cook, Peyton Meyer, Isabella Crovetti, Myra Molloy, Annie Jacob, Kourtney Kardashian
Running Time: 91 min.
Rating: TV-MA

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

The notion of whether it's a good idea to remake the 1999 romantic comedy She's All That is entirely beside the point. Setting aside the fact we've become numb to any reboot by now, the original is hardly an impeachable cinematic treasure to be passed down through the ages, its basic plot never to be tinkered or toyed with again. After all, it's essentially a remake in itself, having cribbed its basic framework from My Fair Lady and the many ugly duckling makeover plots before and since. Now with Mark Waters' Netflix release, He's All That, it's officially happening again, complete with a gender swap twist and some other elements thrown in to appeal to more modern audiences.

There's always a certain nostalgic appreciation that accompanies even the worst films if you were in the right place and time when it hit. As a serviceable rom-com with two likeable leads that went on to become somewhat of a parody of itself in pop culture, She's All That might conjure up those feelings for some. If anything, you could argue it's one of the better remake candidates, as there's pretty much nothing that can be done that would would either enhance or diminish its source material, which was always pretty malleable.

Having successfully directed genre favorites Mean Girls and Freaky Friday, Waters not only knows the territory, but would also seem to be the ideal choice to deliver what Netflix wants. And it's very clear what that is, with their big idea revolving around an influencer playing herself and using that to commentate on social media's shallowness. Of course, when the movie's simultaneously promoting and benefiting from this, it creates a complicated dichotomy that they navigate more gracefully than expected. While stopping just short of labeling it "self-aware," the approach isn't a terrible idea on paper. But by so blatantly relying on current technology for every facet of the plot, it does run the risk of eventually looking and feeling as dated as the original might to some now, assuming that even matters to fans down the road. What it may best be remembered for is culminating in a painless, hit-or-miss experience with a few bones thrown to fans of the original. 

Instagram influencer and high school senior Padgett Sawyer (TikTok star Addison Rae) appears on the surface to be living the high life, milking a lucrative corporate sponsorship and dating aspiring hip hop artist Jordan Van Draanen (Peyton Meyer). While Padgett's divorced mother Anna (She's All That's Rachael Leigh Cook) pulls down extra shifts as a nurse, encouraging her daughter to pursue a degree, everything comes undone when Jordan's hook-up with a backup dancer is captured on Padgett's live stream. 

Humiliated by her embarrassingly honest, over-the-top meltdown that goes viral, Padgett's suddenly bleeding followers and risks losing her sponsorship. In an attempt to reclaim her social status, she accepts a challenge from best friend Alden (Madison Pettis), to turn transform one of the school's least popular losers into prom king. She's handed anti-social outcast Cameron Kweller (Cobra Kai's Tanner Buchanan), who's so miserable that even his precocious younger sister Brin (Isabella Crovetti) and only friend Nisha (Annie Jacob) are losing patience. 

After initially rejecting her superficial attempts to take an interest in him, Padgett and Cameron gradually grow closer, realizing they share more in common than they could have thought. The problem is preventing him from finding out he's just a bet, as Padgett discovers there may be more to life than accumulating likes on social media.  

Taking the circumstances and blueprint of the original into account, there's a quick turnaround in Cameron's attitude and tolerance of Padgett. After what seems like relatively short time spent on establishing his unpleasantness on the lowest scale possible, he doesn't seem incredibly resistant to her advances, or even all that suspicious of the intentions. In a sense, this might be the most realistic aspect of R. Lee Fleming Jr.'s script if the goal was to present someone so terminally unpopular instantly taken when this girl's attention suddenly comes his way. But they make such a point hammering home his disgust for high school, social media, and anything resembling attention, that's kind of tough to buy. 

If everyone's bone of contention with the 1999 original was that the removal of a girl's glasses transformed her from ugly bookworm into the most popular, beautiful girl in school, this take is at least slightly more nuanced. In a deliberate attempt to avoid potential accusations of sexism and misogyny, they've swapped the genders and while the end results remain mostly unchanged, Buchanan's performance helps, putting the emphasis of Cameron's apathy toward the world on his personal grief and past trauma. It's a decent distinction, distracting from the fact that his moppy hair, flannel and social awkwardnessis are the new version of Rachael Leigh Cook's glasses, even if it just makes him more throwback than loser. 

Addison Rae isn't a professional actress, but apparently there are ways to work around that, with the film bending over backwards to exhaust most of them. She smiles and charms her way through this, pushing the limits of just how important a lead rom-com performance really is, as the rest of the cast picks up the slack, aside from a horrifying celebrity cameo that has this year's Razzie locked up. As for Cook, she appears as Padgett's mom, just so fans of the original can feel super old. That works, but she's given very little to do in what's arguably the film's most thankless role. But at least an entire younger generation gets to feel old also when they realize Aldin is played by the same Madison Pettis who appeared as The Rock's 8 year-old on screen daughter in The Game Plan. But if there's any positive to Freddie Prinze Jr. opting out, it's that fellow She's All That alum Matthew Lillard gets to take the spotlight with his brief, eccentrically crazed turn as Principal Bosch.

If acting is usually the last thing to go wrong with a film, someone forgot to tell Kourtney Kardashian, whose minutes-long stay as Padgett's passive-aggressive social media sponsor is neither passive nor aggressive, succeeding only in making Rae look like Sir Laurence Olivier in comparison. Even while acknowledging the practical desire to stunt cast a reality star in something like this, did it have to be someone you can see physically struggling to bring even the slightest sliver of believability or humanity to the dialogue?

Rae and Buchanan do share some nice scenes together when the ball gets fully rolling with the plot, but it's Peyton Meyer's performance as a self-absorbed viral hip hop egomaniac and Isabella Crovetti's scene-stealing turn as Cameron's caring sister that go above and beyond, with the latter especially adept at making the kind of honest, wry observations you'd hope a character with a front row seat to this silliness would.

Since this wouldn't be complete without somehow working in Sixpence None the Richer's ubiquitous "Kiss Me" song (or at least a cover of it) and a dance-off, we get both, even if the latter seems a bit too choreographed, failing to even capture the spontaneous spark and energy of the '99 film. There's nothing too objectionable about the angle they chose for approaching this material so much as how obvious the execution is. That Netflix has this down to a science by now might be a part of the problem since they've been dropping so many identically filmed and performed titles lately it's become hard for any to register as more than clickbait, even one with the seemingly built-in nostalgia factor of He's All That.   

A Star is Born (2018)

Director: Bradley Cooper
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Lady Gaga, Sam Elliott, Dave Chappelle, Andrew Dice Clay, Anthony Ramos, Rafi Gavron, Greg Grunberg,
Running Time: 135 min.
Rating: R

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Bradley Cooper's A Star is Born is a tale of two movies. The first revolves around a drunk, self-destructive country rock star drowning in his troubled past who finds renewed creative purpose in discovering a new talent. It follows a trajectory not unlike 2009's Crazy Heart, with its lead actor channeling Kris Kristofferson in 1976's A Star is Born. The second is about a waitress and struggling part-time bar singer who suddenly gets her big break and falls in love with famous musician. For a little while, both two stories are beautifully told in lockstep, until they sharply diverge, splitting your allegiance and maddingly asking you to sympathize with a character who hasn't done anything to earn it. Worse yet, it's the wrong one. It's all downhill from there, taking us down a depressing path toward an inevitably doomed conclusion that's more frustrating than tragic.

In adapting material that's been previously brought to the screen multiple times with mixed results, Cooper makes a directorial debut that's unarguably impressive despite certain narrative weaknesses. He isn't blameless, but his direction, and especially his performance, are the least of the film's troubles. It starts strongly before grinding to a halt midway through and becoming the Lady Gaga Show. This isn't a knock on her so much as the character she's asked to play, who will test the patience of anyone who was even slightly on the fence about her casting. Musically, she's an inspired choice, but everything surrounding her just seems off the entire time, especially regarding the relationship at the heart of the film. By the time we get to an ending that doesn't work (and didn't the previous three times this has been made), I was confused as to what exactly I was supposed to think or feel. Alcoholism and drug addiction are diseases, but selling out isn't, as much as you may be tempted to rethink that after watching the "star" of the movie's title.

Famous country singer Jackson Maine (Cooper) prepares for each show by downing a mixture of booze and pills, and is only kept in check by his older half-brother and manager, Bobby (Sam Elliott). After a concert gig in California, Jack stumbles into a drag bar where he sees waitress and songwriter Ally (Gaga) perform. Instantly smitten and entranced by her performance, they're introduced and end up spending the night talking, as she confides in him her aspirations for a music career.

Inviting Ally to one of his concerts, Jack urges her to join him on stage to perform a song she's written, and after some initial hesitation, she agrees. With her career now off and running, they enter a romantic relationship together, but as her star rises with a new record deal and an overhauled image, Jack's continues to decline, Wrestling with addictions as he continues his longstanding feud with brother Bobby, a rift also develops in his relationship with Ally. The writing's on the wall: Jack needs to clean up his act, or risk losing everything.

The most rewarding scenes come early when we're still in the discovery stages of the story, both for the characters and audience. Of course, at the center of it is Ally and Jack's performance of the now ubiquitous Oscar-winning pop-power ballad, "Shallow," which is not only a huge, hooky powerhouse single that Gaga and Cooper sing the hell out of, but a more insightful distillation of the story's themes than so much of what follows. Everything from the opening credits leading into that moment when he calls her up to that stage are somewhat magical, and even if there are times when you doubt Jack would take this kind of interest in a drag club singer, Cooper puts it to rest with the sincerity of his performance.

Adopting a gravely voice and perpetually looking as if he awakened from a 10-hour nap, he's a more believable in this role than you'd expect and it's not a coincidence that the first half of the picture, focusing primarily on Jack, is the stronger one. Similarly, Gaga's best scenes as Ally (both onstage and off) come directly opposite Cooper, so it's a good thing nearly all of them are. It's only when Ally's made it that the story loses steam, devolving into a long-running therapy session that actually becomes a real challenge to sit through at times. Some of it stems from the fact that once this unknown waitress is plucked out of obscurity and discovered by Jack, there's no where for her to go but up while he continues his steady decline. And it's here where Gaga's casting, or really the casting of any famous singer, starts to present some problems.

Initially, we shared in Jack's sense of discovery of Ally because we've just never experienced Lady Gaga in such a grounded context before. It's kind of an odd observation, but because of the nature of her persona, she can becomes almost unrecognizable or invisible doing "regular" things like arguing with her dad (really well played by Andrew Dice Clay), being late for work, telling jokes, hanging out in parking lots or getting starstruck. She's great at all of this, but when the moment Ally signs that record deal with this obviously sleazy producer (Rafi Gavron), all bets are off. While you're never quite sure what exactly the movie wants you to think about that decision, it does seem to push Jack as a jealous drunk to be pitied for his out-of-control behavior. It's true, but Ally comes off as such a sellout and "her" music so spectacularly disposable, I'm not sure anyone could blame him.

These developments force Gaga to "play down" as Ally, who may as well now be Britney Spears if not the fact that it's unlikely she'd even deserve a residency in Vegas. And because Ally's transformation falls so squarely in the pop realm, we're jarringly reminded that a pop star is playing her. And of the one thing each incarnation of A Star Is Born has failed to do: Cast or make a rising star. It may seem insignificant, but it's maybe one of two elements that could have really helped since it appears Cooper insists on taking this story in a familiar direction...again.  

At one point a drunk Jack confronts Ally about her choices and we're clearly supposed to resent him and take her side for asserting independence in a male-driven industry. I think. But what should come off as the rantings of an alcoholic madman seem like sane, reasonable concerns directed at a record label puppet oblivious to the fact that she's popular and famous enough to entertain other options or even create some of her own. Sure, it's entirely possible Cooper's more self-aware than we think and there's some kind of meta sub-text going on in the screenplay regarding the pitfalls of fame, but none of it makes the screen. That's not to say there aren't positives to be found in these problematic second and third acts, even if most of them come from Matthew Libatique's cinematography and Cooper and Elliott's performances, which map out a complicated sibling rivalry gripping enough to carry its own film.

That the last twenty minutes feels like a depressingly cruel joke wouldn't be such a problem if the script had something more to say. There's also a scene at the Grammy Awards that's supposed to be dramatic but goes too over-the-top to be taken seriously, instead invoking uncomfortable laughs. While we should at least be grateful Cooper is smart enough not to go anywhere near the ludicrous event that closed the '76 version, it's maybe sadder that this incarnation started as something so much better than its predecessors. Maybe that's the point. Maybe we're supposed to be frustrated at these characters for wrecking each others lives, both of which were filled with so much promise. Unfortunately, the same could also be said for the film in which they appear. This take on A Star is Born does manages to put a fresh spin on a very familiar tale, but not without proving there are many different ways to make the same mistakes.

Carrie (2013)

Director: Kimberly Peirce
Starring: Chloe Grace Moretz, Julianne Moore, Gabriella Wilde, Ansel Elgort, Alex Russell, Portia Doubleday, Judy Greer
Running Time: 99 min.
Rating: R

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Let's just get it out of the way now: Yes, Chloe Moretz is too pretty to play Carrie White, the role originated by Sissy Spacek in the 1976 Brian DePalma film. It's a statement you've heard and read a lot from everyone leading up to release of a remake most would consider pointless anyway. But whether or not it's actually pointless is up to the filmmaker remaking it, and sometimes that's not even true as they're often just following the marching orders of the studio. While we'll never know for sure, that seems to be what happened with director Kimberly Peirce (Boys Don't Cry, Stop-Loss), who's as good a choice as any to make this work. And there are some moments when it almost does, in spite of all the obstacles put in front of her.

The question of whether Carrie has to have a certain look in order for Stephen King's story play believably on screen is a good one since the character's supposed to be an outcast on every level. While Spacek would never be considered "ugly" by anyone's standards, she did have an unconventional appearance that made her stand out from the pack, allowing the narrative of a shy, creepy misfit and social outcast to take flight in a way it wouldn't if another, more conventional "movie star" were cast. It's a case where looks matter. The same description even applies (to a lesser degree) to Angela Bettis in 2002 TV remake. Because the last thing Moretz can be described as is "unconventional," she's already at a deficit before the cameras start rolling. No one's denying her talent and despite being miscast she does a commendable job under thankless circumstances. Unfortunately, she just has to work harder to do it.

Shy outcast Carrie White (Moretz) is tormented by her classmates at Ewen High School, while at home she's emotionally bullied by her borderline psychotic mother Margaret (Julianne Moore), whose religious fanaticism prevents her daughter from leading the life of a normal teen. But at school Carrie finds a confidante and mentor in gym teacher Miss Desjardin (Judy Greer), who seems determined to punish the offenders, most notably popular ringleader Chris Hargensen (Portia Doubleday). Also feeling sympathy is classmate Sue Snell (Gabriella Wilde) whose guilt over joining in the teasing leads her to urge boyfriend Tommy Ross (Ansel Elgort) to take Carrie to the prom. Needless to say the invitation doesn't go over well with mother Margaret, whose daughter is now just starting to realize her telekinetic powers. And that means trouble for everyone.

What's most bothersome about this reimagining is how it almost seems to draw attention to the miscasting by overcompensating, both with Peirce's direction of the actress and some of the goofy creative choices early on. Exaggerated mannerisms and costuming choices are used to accentuate the fact Carrie is a weirdo since that's really the only viable option. She mumbles, she slumps, she walks with her arms folded. All of this screamed acting with a capital "A" to me and altogether doesn't seem like the wisest route to take, but perhaps predestined considering the casting.

Moore's take on Margaret is campy to say the least, chomping on every scene in a performance that feels like an audition reel for Mommie Dearest. The only good thing is that it's clear early on the tonal direction they were going with this and the performance works as that. Whether it's the direction they should have gone with the material is another argument altogether, but unless memory fails, the original didn't feel quite this over-the-top and silly in its first half. Carrie's discovery of her "powers" also isn't handled as well, making the original seem like a telekinesis documentary in comparison. The presentation seems off, as if the screenwriters saw one too many episodes of Heroes, as opposed to attempting to organically incorporate it into the story.            

A web video on a smartphone and some texting represents the script's stabs at contemporizing King's first novel, but given how much of a timely, hot-button topic school and cyber-bullying has become, I expected a little more. But maybe it's for the best that they didn't at the risk of it feeling like just another teen horror movie, which it kind of already does. But the scenes involving Carrie's abuse at school are some of the strongest, especially that infamous shower scene with her cluelessly experiencing her first period as classmates ridicule her. One would guess this is primarily what earned the film its "R" rating, although you can't help but think the end product still strangely feels like a "PG-13."

The two strongest performances unsurprisingly come from Judy Greer and Ansel Elgort. As Miss Desjardin, Greer is asked to do some pretty ridiculous things for a gym teacher and yet she's completely believable doing every single one of them. She's an actress who can just slide into any role and do anything so it's not a shock, but when her character hits and curses at students, I actually believed an administrator wouldn't even think of firing her. It's one of many instances of her impressively covering up the script's flaws.

Elgort shows signs of the talent he'd later emerge as in The Fault in Our Stars with a similar but not identical performance. He exudes a laid-back confidence and likability as Tommy, going a long way to transcend material that wants to paint him as a one-dimensional high school jock. He and Sue going out of their way to help Carrie just might the most compelling sub-plot, if only because there's legitimate doubt as to their intentions the entire time. While Gabriella Wilde comes off as a blank slate as Sue, what Portia Doubleday does with Chris is great, as the character is less a school bully this time around than a full-fledged sociopath. It's a wise decision that only enhances our sympathy for Carrie and has you anticipating the moment when Chris get hers.

When Moretz transforms from ugly duckling into beautiful swan for prom it weirdly feels like the equivalent of Rachael Leigh Cook removing her glasses in She's All That, to the point that I half-expected Sixpence None the Richer to start playing. Nonetheless, this is the point where Moretz's performance really comes alive, as she's freed to play a more realistic teen instead of sulking as a weirdo. With the exception of maybe a little too much CGI, Peirce nails the big bloodbath of a finale, which was high on the list of things she absolutely had to get right.

There were plenty of stumbles along the way, but the staging of the famous ending is an exciting recreation, even making a couple of minor changes to the action in that gym that seem creatively defensible. What isn't is the final image, which reminded me of what Tim Burton did in his disastrous Planet of the Apes remake: Take an iconic closing shot and unnecessarily tweak it while winking at the audience. This isn't as bad an offender, but you have to wonder why they made it a point to change one of the few things that should have remained untouched. And are all horror remakes now required to close with a hard rock song, regardless of whether it fits?   

Since it clearly isn't strong horror, you have to wonder if Peirce had abandoned all genre trappings in favor of a coldly realistic dramatic tragedy, this would have turned out better. Sure, it would have alienated horror audiences, but that's a demographic you could argue is dwindling in theater presence anyway. There's little doubt that approach would have made for a better film, but I'm not sure it would have been as fun to watch.  This latest King interpretation certainly doesn't rank amongst his worst, but it's a missed opportunity, eventually finds its footing in time to deliver a gripping third act. But by then, the damage is already done.There's no problem in remaking Carrie, but if they're not going to change anything besides the cast, it's perplexing just how inferior this turned out with all the talent involved.
   

Oldboy (2013)

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

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Thing (2011)

Director: Matthijs van Heijningen
Starring: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton, Ulrich Thomsen, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Eric Christian Olsen
Running Time: 102 min
Rating: R

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Confession: I've never seen John Carpenter's The Thing. Shameful, I know. But it's better to get that out in the open now than go through the entire length of this review dishonestly pretending I have. We all have those movie knowledge gaps. Classic films we should have seen but for whatever reason just never got around to watching. 1982's The Thing is mine. The oversight wasn't intentional, nor due to an aversion in watching what's widely considered a horror benchmark. And the plan sure wasn't viewing 2011's supposed "prequel" first, despite being chronologically correct in doing so. Now that I have, it's still tough coming up with a reason for its purpose, which isn't a good sign considering my unfamiliarity with the film that inspired it. Call it a prequel or a remake but in the end it doesn't make much of a difference because it feels like an ordinary, but technically handsome, claustrophobic horror exercise that's a slight cut above what we've come to expect from recent reboots. It's aided by a highly effective performance from its female lead that belongs in a better movie. She's a smart, well-written character, even if the same really can't be said for anyone or any "thing" around her.

It's 1982 when a flying saucer is discovered beneath of the ice of Antarctica by a Norwegian research team and American paleontologist Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is called in by Dr. Sander Halvorson (Ulrich Thomsen) to investigate what appears to be an alien body from the crash. When the team takes the creature back to the base in a block of ice, it escapes overnight and begins consuming and duplicating the crew. Taking on a human form, there's little way to tell who's been infected, prompting Kate to conduct tests and investigations with the mostly uncooperative team, as they all take flamethrowers to the beast. And each other. As mistrust begins to mount amongst them, they may just end up offing each other before they can figure out a way to co-exist and defeat this creature.

Early on, the film pretends to have something else on its mind other than being just your standard, by-the-numbers monster movie. It starts methodically, building well and successfully positioning Kate as kind of an underestimated problem solver who has to prove herself on a team full of men. The Antarctic landscape is also well shot by cinematographer Michel Abramowicz and Marco Beltrami's score really draws you in and sets a tension-filled mood. Then the "Thing" escapes and gets to work. Regardless of anyone's feelings on the original or whether this remake posing as a prequel should have even moved ahead, there's no question a lot goes wrong with the execution here. The first problem is team devoid of any type of identity, with interchangeable nobodies lacking distinctive personalities that go beyond their duties. Not to say it isn't a talented cast.  Joel Edgerton and Lost's Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje are the helicopter pilots while Eric Christian Olsen plays Dr. Halvorson's assistant. When Edgerton's in your movie and doesn't register at all, something's wrong. And how could he, when the life expectancy of each character is five to ten minutes. After a slow, almost cerebral build initially, the deaths and attacks occur rapidly at a video game level pace, leaving no room for suspense. The reliance on make-up and practical effects as well as CGI is admirable, but it looks too gross and silly to be truly scary. Instead, it creates disgustingly comical effect, with more than a few scenes actually inducing giggles.

The movie's saving grace is Mary Elizabeth Winstead, who at first seems to be a purely commercial-driven casting choice, but ends up being completely believable as a brainiac paleontologist who's competent at her job. The best thing about the character is that she isn't depicted as some kind of action hero in the mold of Ripley from Alien, but an intelligent leader who uses her resourcefulness to come up with solutions. Kate is literally the only role in the screenplay developed enough for us to care about, so it's a good thing she's the protagonist and that Winstead give us plenty of reasons to with a controlled, headstrong performance. The movie may make some dumb decisions, but her character doesn't. It seems strange to say this is a giant leap forward for her after her manic pixie role as Ramona Flowers in Scott Pilgrim, but taking that did her no favors since she should be moving past older teen and young adult parts. While I was doubtful initially, this proves she's more than just a (very) pretty face and capable of carrying a movie on her shoulders. Even one this middling. But more so, it's solid evidence that if she plays her cards right, she could potentially emerge as a great actress.

It's a shame that things don't start to get interesting until the final minutes. Just as the film's winding down is when it feels like it should actually be starting and my interest level rose. I wouldn't mind a sequel, but the of course the joke is this supposedly already has one. It's called The Thing and it came out in 1982 and stars Kurt Russell. That sparks a question: If this is a prequel, then why does it have the exact same title? That seems strange and confusion does little to help a picture fans of the original couldn't have been excited to see in the first place. But the sequel I want to see isn't that. It would center on what exactly happened to Dr. Kate Lloyd after the credits rolled and the potential fall-out from it. That counts for something. For all this reboot got wrong, it at least got one thing really right.

Straw Dogs (2011)

 

Director: Rod Lurie
Starring: James Marsden, Kate Bosworth, Alexander Skarsgard, James Woods, Dominic Purcell, Laz Alonso, Willa Holland,Walton Goggins, Anson Mount
Running Time: 110 min.
Rating: R

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

I cringe whenever I'm about to see a remake of a classic film I'm very familiar with or have great affection for. It's almost impossible to watch without comparing it, sometimes scene-by-scene, to the original. Such a comparison almost always ends unfavorably for the remake. Fortunately or unfortunately, in the case of Rod Lurie's re-imagining of Sam Peckinpah's controversial 1971 ultraviolent classic Straw Dogs, I'm extremely familiar with the original, but not altogether opposed to the idea of remaking it. Following its release late last year, one of the major complaints from critics and audiences alike was that this was merely a modernization, following exactly the same plot lines and exploring the same themes as its predecessor. Which begs the question: If the original's a classic and Lurie hardly changed a thing, how could it be a failure? And therein lies the inherent contradiction with remakes. As many as there are each year, it seems we still haven't found a way to come to terms with their purpose. This version does make some little changes, in addition to a major thematic adjustment most missed. Whereas the original clearly argues in favor of an animal instinct residing inside all men, this take is more interested in exploring society's definition of manhood. Who's to blame for the events that eventually unfold is also more ambiguous, while the one famously ambiguous scene from the original is made clear as day. Lurie's presentation isn't as subtle, but it's tension-filled, and definitely not the horror "torture porn" it was strangely advertised as.

When screenwriter David Sumner (James Marsden) and his TV actress wife Amy (Kate Bosworth) return to her hometown of Blackwater, Mississippi to rebuild her recently deceased father's house. Their arrival brings Amy's ex-boyfriend Charlie (Alexander Skarsgard) and his three friends (Rhys Coiro, Billy Lush, Drew Powell) out of the woodwork and in an attempt to extend an olive branch, David hires them to fix the roof of the barn. With his manner of speak and dress, the well-to-do David immediately sticks out like a sore thumb in town, unable to fit in and at times displaying a condescending attitude toward Blackwater's customs. Perhaps out of jealousy that he's Amy husband or maybe just merely the fact he doesn't like him, Charlie and his gang begin subtly taunting and harassing both of them. As it escalates, David's insistence at avoiding any type of confrontation drives a rift in their relationship with Amy instigating Charlie and his gang to prove a point, putting both their lives in danger and forcing him to step up, or maybe down, to their level.

As much as the commercials have tried to convince you otherwise, this isn't your routine black and white, good vs. evil thriller. And like the original, it isn't a typical horror film despite many scenes providing more than a fair share of psychological terror. There's definitely a slow burn toward the climax, for which Lurie should be commended as I'm sure the pressure was on from the studio to reboot this as some kind of relentless gore fest. Changing the location from England to the deep South (replacing the British working class with Gulf Coast rednecks) was an inspired decision that ends up benefiting the mood and atmosphere, while also bringing the culture clash uncomfortably closer to home for American audiences. The couple's Hollywood occupations don't earn points for subversion or subtly, but it does seem to create an even greater rift between David and and the townspeople he seems to look down on. Or does he? What can easily be construed as condescension could almost equally be interpreted as ignorance (such as in a key scene when he walks out during church service) or just simply not fitting in and overcompensating to cover for it.

The power of the story (adapted from Gordon Williams novel, The Siege of Trencher's Farm) has always been it's realism and ability to put the viewer in the middle of a moral circumstance that could easily occur. At worst, David's a wuss willing to do just about anything to avoid a conflict, even when the situation absolutely necessitates it. Arguably his hesitance makes the ordeal worse, letting the problem fester until finally exploding. At best, he's a normal and responsible guy who could easily be defended for showing patience and trying to work issues out with something other than his fists. According to Amy, whatever he's doing isn't enough and when David's response to her is to "wear a bra" when the gang's leering at her, the gloves come off as she intentionally baits them with her body. The infamous rape scene is presented less ambiguously and as an overt act of violence, mostly doing away with the notion that Amy could have "enjoyed" it. But given her actions up to that point and the animalistic nature of the story, discerning viewers couldn't be blamed for still at least considering the possibility.

Physically, James Marsden is miscast, seeming on the surface too much of a pretty boy to fill Dustin Hoffman's nerdy mathmatician shoes from the original. Marsden solves that problem by wisely not attempting to and offering up a completely different take on the character. He need not necessarily be believable as a full-blown geek, but instead a  passive-aggressive people pleaser who living in his own bubble. Marsden does a great job fleshing that out, while at the same time making you feel empathy for the no-win situation David finds himself in, which isn't all his doing. Bosworth's task isn't as daunting in terms of the shoes she must fill, but she's as perfect a fit as for this as she wasn't for Lois Lane, giving one of her best performances as a woman taking power of her sexuality while at the same time pressured into subverting it. And as for the more emotionally disturbing scenes, she's more than up for it. With a southern drawl and seductive smirk, True Blood's Alexander Skarsgard really steals the show as Charlie, smoothly underplaying everything to the point where it's almost difficult not to like the guy until all hell breaks loose. Even then, he never resorts to playing him as a full blown psychopath, keeping it cool all the way through. It's to his credit that lines between good and evil seem so blurred. That I have problems even remembering the actor who originated the role proves Skarsgard must have done something right.

A major sub-plot involving the town's hotheaded former football coach Tom Heddon (James Woods) and his teen daughter Janice's (Willa Holland) infatuation with mentally handicapped man Jeremy (Dominic Purcell)  is over-the-top to say the least. It's definitely wasn't this insane in the original, with Purcell oddly resembling Steve Carell on steroids and a terrifying Woods devouring each scene as if it were his last day acting day on Earth. Had nothing else in this movie worked (which it thankfully does), this would still be worth seeing for Wood's performance, if only just to say you saw it and survived. Ironically enough, it most resembles his oscar-nominated turn as white supremacist Byron De La Beckwith in 1996's Ghosts of Mississippi, at least in terms of outright hostility.  His daughter's clearly acting out to stick it to him, but the tragic consequences of that are unintended. This and the main story seemed to merge better in the original despite Lurie deviating very little from the source.

The eventual climax is thrilling, if a little too slickly filmed. It's only here where it becomes apparent we're watching a modern re-interpretation. The rest of it exists in some kind of bizarre 70's time warp, which isn't such a bad thing. The other little changes are justifiable as well, even if the jury's still out as to whether modernizing a film improves upon on it by simply making the material more timely. It all still feels a little routine, if powerful. But that the eventual violence still feels shocking and unsettling in this era proves that it was the context and ideas, not the violence itself, that made the original so unnerving. It's recreated here to chilling effect, with the original and remake both somehow coming out of this looking better as a result.

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.     

Arthur (2011)

Director: Jason Winer
Starring: Russell Brand, Helen Mirren, Greta Gerwig, Jennifer Garner, Luis Guzman, Nick Nolte
Running Time: 110 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

When I first heard they were remaking the 1981 Dudley Moore comedy Arthur, my chief concern was  getting a cover of Christopher Cross' so cheesy it's awesome Oscar winning title song "Arthur's Theme (Best That You Can Do)" Thankfully, we get it, albeit too briefly over the closing credits (performed by Fitz and The Tantrums). That I considered that a priority should give you an idea how little this remake offends me. Arthur is, at least for its time, a comedy classic and easily the great Dudley Moore's most memorable role but it it's far from a masterpiece and I can't say I reacted with any more than an eye roll at news of a rehash or even that Russell Brand would be starring. More concerning to me was simply that it's a comedy with dramatic undertones and most of those tend to fall flat. Surprisingly, this isn't terrible and of all the criticisms that can be leveled against it, two I refuse to get on board with are any targeted at Brand or co-star Greta Gerwig, both of whom give charming performances that deserved a better film. There are occasions where this is almost that film, hitting the creative bull's eye and giving you a sense what could have been, but it's ultimately sunken by pointless predictability.

Arthur Bach (Brand) is a womanizing party animal stuck in arrested development with an alcohol problem (a detail downplayed somewhat from the original) and a nanny named Mrs. Hobson (Helen Mirren) as his caretaker.  Hitting the town in an '89 Batmobile with his chauffeur Bitterman (Luiz Guzman) in Batman and Robin costumes, Arthur crashes his own party, a dinner thrown by his wealthy mother announcing him as the new chairman of her multi-million dollar corporation, a position he's blackmailed into taking for fear of losing out on his hefty inheritance. It's definitely not a stretch anyone would need to be blackmailed into marrying his mother's assistant, snobby rich debutante Susan Johnson, who plans to take control of the company herself. But that plan's complicated not only by his disdain for Susan but the fact he's falling hard for free-spirited illegal New York City tour guide Naomi Harris (Gerwig) and now risks being with her at the cost of potentially losing all his fortune.

In some strange way, Russell Brand seems like the perfect fit for the title role and the idea to cast him was a good one. Having previously excelled at playing immature screw-up battling his inner demons in Get Him To The Greek, he's proven he can be silly one minute but also handle a dramatic load the next. This part isn't as tailor made for him as rocker Aldous Snow was (Arthur's almost too nice and harmless), but the tone is better controlled here than in that film, which could never make up it's mind up as to whether it was a comedy or drama. This is clearly a very light comedy with soft dramatic undercurrents and everyone involved at least seems to know that, which is a plus. Helen Mirren does a nice job filling the shoes of John Gieglund as Hobson in the original, while still adding enough that the change in gender makes sense, giving Arthur a mother figure. She starts out as a strict, humorless authoritarian but undergoes a well-executed (if predictable) character arc that results in Arthur having to take care of her for a change. It also gives Mirren the chance to talk through a Darth Vader helmet, a moment I'm sure she's dreamed of since winning her Oscar.

Though you'd never know it from the film's advertising, the female lead is actually Greta Gerwig, not Jennifer Garner. In a misleading, money-grubbing stunt that didn't work, the studio basically refused to acknowledge Gerwig and promoted Garner as the star.  However much of a fan base they falsely assumed Garner had, much of it will probably be eroded once they see her annoying, nails-on-a-chalkboard performance as Susan Johnson. Granted her character is unwisely written as over-the-top she makes a bad problem worse with her hysteria and theatrics, hammering home just how ineffective the central storyline is in clashing with the more grounded aspects of the script. Eventually, the ridiculous, almost embarrassingly predictable blackmail plot in which the entire movie revolves around overshadows everything else, even lessening the impact of the movie's small successes. And that's too bad since the scenes Brand shares with Gerwig (specifically a memorable sequence in an empty Grand Central Station) contains an appeal the rest of the film lacks. Following her underrated, Oscar worthy supporting turn in 2009's Greenberg, this is Gerwig's first foray into big mainstream studio fare and it's of little surprise she's good in a low-key way in the type of quirky dream girl who rescues the guy part we're so used to seeing played by Zooey Deschanel. Even though you sense they're only together because the script dictates it, the two actors make the most of what they're given and come off as an odd but surprisingly effective on-screen couple.

Arthur marks the feature debut of Jason Winer, a director known for his television work on ABC's Modern Family and it does kind of feel like a TV movie or extended episode of a sitcom in the sense that there's really nothing that feels cinematic about it. What he does excel at is taking advantage of the New York City setting as it does feel like a movie that takes place there, whether it was actually shot on location or not. While the movie doesn't work, it comes a lot closer than I expected and can easily imagine that with a better script and a more interesting choice of director an Arthur remake starring Brand and Gerwig could have really worked under the right creative guidance. But the best news for Brand is that this is his second noble near-miss in a row, and he's proven he at least has the acting talent to potentially carry a great film if necessary. It just hasn't come his way yet. In an era of pointless remakes, Arthur is at least pointless for reasons other than just being a remake, hinting that it wouldn't have hurt to change more and take a few risks. Maybe in a couple of years when they try to remake this remake they'll get another shot.

Let Me In

 

Director: Matt Reeves
Starring: Kodi Smit-McPhee, Chloe Grace Moretz, Elias Koteas, Richard Jenkins, Cara Buono, Sasha Barrese, Dylan Minnette
Running Time: 116 min.
Rating: R

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★) 

Let Me In, director Matt Reeves' American remake of the acclaimed 2008 Swedish horror film Let The Right One In is not a movie about vampires. That detail is wisely a backdrop to what's a coming-of-age period film and mood piece featuring a character who happens to be a vampire. It's a means to an end, important in identifying why the film succeeds and how it escapes the pitfalls always accompanying this genre. Having still not seen the original I can't compare, but can still somewhat appreciate the uphill battle Reeves faced in justifying such a project's existence. One group will hate it because they reject the idea of their favorite horror film being remade or just assume any foreign property will have to be dumbed down to appeal to mainstream audiences. Everyone else won't care at all because they've never heard of it. Reeves manages to overcome both those obstacles with an unusually smart, suspenseful film that's beautifully photographed, lushly scored and fully absorbing from start to finish. And that statement comes from someone who usually can't stand anything having to do with vampires and considers it a lazy, overused film topic. If only the final product could turn out like this more often. The few scenes depicting that are handled surprisingly well, but the real horror is found in the emotional pain of growing up.

It's 1983 in Los Alamos, New Mexico and an apparent suicide of a disfigured patient at the local hospital panics the local police detective (Elias Koteas), who finds only a note by his bedside reading: "I'm sory Abby." We flashback two weeks earlier to meet 12-year-old Owen (Kodi Smit McPhee), lonely, depressed boy going through some serious issues with his parents' impending divorce and brutal harassment from bullies at school. With no one to turn to and too afraid to retaliate, he internalizes everything and creates imaginary scenarios of revenge with his pocket knife and a tree. If ever a child were destined for a future filled with trips to the school psychologist's office, it's him. Relief comes in the arrival of Abby (Chloe Grace Moretz), a girl who claims to be his age who moves in next door with a solemn looking middle-aged man (Richard Jenkins) who appears to be her father. After some reluctance on her part to befriend him they start to grow closer and it becomes clear she isn't a twelve year-old girl and that isn't her father. But let's not call her a "vampire," because doing that would be a betrayal of how intelligently the narrative unfolds and the restraint with which her situation is presented. She simply needs to blood to survive. This becomes a problem as she forges a closer relationship with Owen, who inches closer to the truth about her as she teaches him to stand up to his tormentors.

Vampirism always seems to fare best in films when it's treated as an affliction or almost a disease of sorts, as it is here. Abby's condition isn't glamorized in any way, she doesn't think it would be cool to live thousands of years, dress in gothic clothes, sleep all day or hang out with werewolves. Instead, this is a curse ruining her life and preventing her from ever forging a meaningful bond with anyone. That you could probably replace being a vampire with any other physical or psychological affliction and still emerge with a story just as strong proves how much more is going on beneath the surface. It's really about two lonely, troubled kids brought together with their friendship tested by this huge obstacle put in front of them. The question becomes whether Owen can still accept her and whether Abby can withstand the temptation to use him as she does everyone else, including her "father." There are times that this budding childhood romance is handled with such special care that if not for the dark, somber undercurrent, the storyline would recall My Girl before it would a horror film.  What scares there are come not from the few, well-placed and suspenseful vampire attacks from Abby but instead the bullying Owen endures at school by Kenny (an effectively menacing Dylan Minette) and his gang, which is more terrifying than any of the the graphic blood-drenched events that unfold during the picture.

As smart as Reeves' script (based on the novel by John Ajvide Lindqvist in addition to the Swedish film) is in putting the emphasis in the right place and cloaking the vampire elements in a coming-of-age tale, casting was crucial. Thankfully, the young performers are amazing. Kodi Smit-McPhee is subtly devastating as the fearful, lonely Owen so disconnected from everyone else that even his mother (played by Cara Buono) is barely shown on screen at all, her face covered or out of view throughout.  After going two for two in 2010 with this and Kick-Ass, Chloe Moretz is emerging as an actress whose career bares watching in much the same way Natalie Portman's did in its early stages. This is a complex role requiring her to be doomed killing machine in addition to conveying the emotional pain of a lovestruck young girl sentenced to spend her entire life in childhood. This dark, heavy material but these kids get it and rise to the challenge. Just as strong in a small but pivotal role is Richard Jenkins as Abby's guardian, with his sad eyes and morose expression revealing more than any line of dialogue possibly could. And during one memorable stretch of the film, he still somehow does it with a bag over his head. As a character added for this adaptation, Elias Koteas is the eyes and ears for the audience as a nameless local cop, but he gets us to care what happens to him, even if against better judgment we find ourselves in the uncomfortable position of rooting for a vampire to escape.

The early 80's setting present in both the novel and original film was retained and is maximized to great effect through the perfect placement of certain classic rock songs of the era and period details that leave no doubt this takes place in the 80's without ever hammering us over the head with it. The time and setting feel like an natural extension of the plot, like a dream or memory that if updated to modern day could somehow ring false regardless of one's familiarity with the source material.  Only the best period pieces understand it's not so much about the clothes, hairstyles or music (though it's a factor), but capturing a certain mood or spirit of the time that takes you back. The somber tone of the film is spot-on and never waivers, reinforced by Michael Giacchino's creepy, melancholy score and cinematography from Greig Fraser that's soaked in washed-out browns and a yellowish amber tint that creates a visually unsettling atmosphere. That such a methodical, introspective film came from the director of 2008's shaky-cam monster movie Cloverfield is kind of a shock. This is about as far from that as can be while still vaguely straddling a similar genre.

When Stephen King named Let Me In his favorite movie of 2010, calling it the "best American horror film in the last 20 years" I was skeptical knowing his history of overpraising mainstream fluff.  If the statement is a bit of an exaggeration (and as much a testament to all the inferior horror films we've suffered through), it isn't much of one. Nothing about this movie feels mainstream and it's too intelligent to ever be mistaken for the latest Hollywood cash-in slasher remake. If nothing else, it teaches the lesson that the best movies are rarely about what they're actually about and horror can't truly unsettle unless you care about the characters and their situation. Let Me In gets this right, proving all remakes don't have to be pointless and aren't necessarily destined to fail.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

Director: Samuel Bayer
Starring: Jackie Earle Haley, Rooney Mara, Kyle Gallner, Katie Cassidy, Thomas Dekker, Kellan Lutz, Connie Britton, Clancy Brown
Running Time: 95 min.
Rating: R

★★ 1/2 (out of ★★★★)

On the horror remake offensiveness scale, A Nightmare on Elm Street would probably fall somewhere in the middle, ranking below A Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Halloween and Psycho but slightly above Friday the 13th in terms of how many fans a reboot will upset. While the 1984 original was an entertaining, well-made 80's slasher with an unusually original premise for its time, it wasn't scary and with each progressing sequel Freddy Krueger, much like Jason, became less an icon and more a parody. That seems to be reoccurring problem in the horror genre as these franchises continue long past their expiration date, losing all creative steam while the studios beat a dead horse trying to wring every last cent out of them. Saw is the latest victim, and though its seventh installment is being touted as the last, you can bet it'll eventually be back in some form or another. These movies always come back, and that's not necessarily such a bad thing since many love them with a passion so in that sense reviving a long-dormant franchise like Nightmare isn't the worst idea there is. Sure, it's a shameless cash grab, but at least there's a need for creative resuscitation here, unlike the recent remake of that same year's The Karate Kid, which raped a classic story solely for profit. Hardcore horror fans may feel the same way about this but they should at least be grateful the kids aren't pre-teens, it's rated "R," and there's a concerted effort to return the series to its darker, more serious roots. Unfortunately, for all the arguments you can come up with for this remake being somehow defensible, the filmmakers have gone out their way to make it FEEL as pointless and disposable as possible. The same problems that have plagued all the other Platinum Dunes-produced horror remakes like Chainsaw, Friday The 13th, The Amityville Horror and The Hitcher are again on display to a lesser extent, but this does have three big things going for it: A great concept and two very talented actors. The results are decidedly mixed, but better than expected. In the end though, it still doesn't work mainly because these horror remakes are all starting to feel and look the same, adding nothing to what was already there and ineffectively re-executing everything that was done well enough the first time around.

Much of the original story remains intact (save for a few changes) which is a good thing because this is one of the rare slashers powered by a concept so strong that even the 1984 film and its inferior sequels couldn't fully capitalize on it. In a small American suburb, high schoolers Nancy (Rooney Mara), Quentin (Kyle Gallner), Jess (Thomas Dekker), Kris (Katie Cassidy) and Dean (Kellan Lutz) are all having nightmarish visions featuring a severely burned man in a red and green striped sweater and a glove equipped with sharp knives. He attacks only in their dreams and if he kills them there, they die in real life. The key is to stay awake (whether that be with the aid of stimulants or just sheer force of will) so that doesn't happen but Freddy slices through the teens until only Nancy and Quentin are left to discover the truth of everyone's shared past with this man and attempt to defeat him for good. One of the more positive changes the updated script provides is the introduction of the idea of "micro-naps" in which the potential victims fall asleep for 10 or 15 minutes, making it even harder for them (and us as the viewer) to distinguish between what's real or not, which ups the suspense level considerably. There isn't anyone who hasn't dozed off for a few brief minutes or felt so tired that they haven't a clue where they are making so it's a clever twist on a familiar idea.

Giving us as much back story on school caretaker and accused child molester Fred Krueger as possible (even going so far as to come up with with an origin story for his sweater) isn't necessarily a bad idea in theory since he isn't one of those horror villains where the more you know or see of him, the less scary he becomes. He simply isn't scary at all to begin with so no harm done there. But you do have to question the logic of showing and spelling out information what was subtly, but effectively implied in the original films. This can't either but it makes little sense attempting to recreate key scenes, moments and plot points from the original, only with cutting edge computer generated effects. Re-tracing the original film's steps beat for beat but with higher production value is a silly idea that only helps make this feel like the latest inferior sequel in the franchise. This is a problem similar to the one marring the final act of Rob Zombie's 2007 Halloween remake, in which he attempted to faithfully reconstruct and jam John Carpenter's original film into the last third of his, but with more overt brutality. It's almost as if all these filmmakers want to have their cake and eat it too by teasing a new direction only to fall back on recreating scenes from the original (in some cases rather poorly) as some kind of misguided tribute or an attempt to throw a bone at hardcore fans. Last year, Zombie rebounded strongly with the gutsy, unrelenting Halloween II when he strayed as far as possible from the source material, finally breaking free from the genre conventions holding these remakes back. That's a template this could have followed in place of the typical sequel/reboot mish-mash route that was chosen instead. It's also interchangeable with a lot of other recent horror remakes with its slick music video style approach to the material, which diminishes the sense of dread and urgency in favor of making everything look dirty, but high budget dirty.  In other words, it's too polished. Maybe not coincidentally, this was directed by Samuel Bayer, who's first ever directing gig was Nirvana's classic 1991 "Smells Like Teen Spirit" video. Say what you want about Zombie's efforts but at least he captured the visual feel of trashy, low budget midnight drive-in movies.

The biggest hurdle cleared is the casting of Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy Krueger, who steps into the role made famous by Robert Englund after online fans pushed to have him cast. They were right on target, and as much as this will upset loyalists, he's no worse at it than his predecessor. Not necessarily better mind you, but different in a way that's appropriate for the liberties taken with the source material. Whether that more realistic approach (facially looking very much like an actual burn victim) is the right one considering this is supposed to be a horror/fantasy character may be up for debate, but Haley's the right guy for the job considering Freddy is supposed to be more frightening than entertaining. His small stature is a minor issue (he's nowhere near the physical presence Englund was) and there aren't as many clever one-liners for him to deliver, but that's not what's really called for here anyway. Unfortunately the character he's given isn't all that interesting and the flashback backstory, despite playing to all of his strengths as an actor, isn't really developed enough since doing that would mean the writers would have to stray from the predictable horror rules suffocating the picture.

My (and seemingly everyone else's) new favorite actress of the moment, Rooney Mara, gives us a Nancy that's a far cry from Heather Langenkamp's appropriately superficial incarnation over 25 years ago. Sullen, morose, and shy, she's the most withdrawn female protagonist we've seen in a horror movie in some time and pensively looks and acts like she's suffered some great tragedy, maybe one outside of what's actually happening in this story. And whatever that tragedy is I can practically guarantee you it would have made for a better movie than we got here. As an actress, Mara has this interesting look and expression to her face that's inscrutably intelligent, making you think she knows something you don't and if you stare long enough you might be able to figure out what. It was evident in just her few sensational, Oscar-worthy scenes in The Social Network and it's only a little bit of a surprise that the quiet intensity that made her performance there so memorable carry over into this. It's unlikely any studio decision makers completely knew at the time of her casting just how much they got or what would happen with her career so it's unfortunate that she's contractually locked (as is Haley) into appearing in a sequel should it occur. And judging from the final scene, it's a safe bet it will. That this doesn't seem like the worst news in the world for her (at least no worse than Robert Downey Jr. spending the rest of his career in Iron Man purgatory) is a credit to how much she brings to a project that doesn't deserve her talents. Until she takes over the film, Katie Cassidy does a surprisingly credible job early on with a one-note scream queen character and Kyle Gallner seems right at home as the weirdo, emo co-lead opposite Mara. Friday Night Lights' Connie Britton and gifted character actor Clancy Brown are wasted in the obligatory adult roles, as is too often the case in these types of films.

Sadly, the acting all-around is actually better than the original and it doesn't seem to help one bit since no one could decide whether they wanted to make a slasher with cheesy acting faithful to the original or an updated version that takes itself seriously. The result ends up being a fake cheesy slasher taking itself too seriously and I'm wondering if removing some of the goofier horror elements and playing it as a straight psychological drama would have been wiser. With a premise this strong and the acting clearly there to support it, a gripping story could have been constructed centering on dreams and reality as these teens come to grips with a buried childhood tragedy. NOES 2010 feels like it should have ambition beyond just covering the original and if a more realistic approach was the game plan they should have had the guts to go all the way with it since there was real potential to do something interesting here. This near-miss exposes the biggest problem with remakes in that there's always a cause to worry that studios will continue to casually resurrect a beloved title or franchise without seriously considering how.