Showing posts with label Tommy Lee Jones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tommy Lee Jones. Show all posts
Monday, May 13, 2013
Lincoln
Director: Steven Spielberg
Starring: Daniel Day-Lewis, Sally Field, Tommy Lee Jones, David Strathairn, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, James Spader, Hal Holbrook, John Hawkes, Jackie Earle Haley, Lee Pace, Tim Blake Nelson, Dane DeHaan, Joseph Cross, Gloria Reuben
Running Time: 150 min.
Rating: PG-13
★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)
A talky slog through a very specific point in American history, Steven Spielberg's Lincoln probably would have been better served with the title, The Passing of the 13th Amendment or maybe even Team of Rivals, the Doris Kearns Goodwin biography on which it's partially based. Then again, advertising and marketing still wouldn't fix most of the problems associated with a film that makes the 16th President a supporting player in what feels like the world's longest episode of The West Wing. Where it earns points is in impeccable period accuracy and an Oscar-winning performance from Daniel Day-Lewis that's every bit as impressive as you'd expect and then some. History buffs will eat this up, even if we're left with the nagging feeling that, barring a few notable exceptions, Spielberg doesn't give us anything that couldn't be gleaned from doing some reading.
As much as many reject standard, by-the-numbers biopics on political figures, I couldn't help but think that approach would have actually been welcome here, as the choice to only depict Lincoln's last four months in office (and of his life) seem to be almost too narrow a focus. And yet, that was easily the most interesting period so Spielberg's caught between a rock and a hard place. He responds with his most un-Spielbergian effort yet, completely abandoning the sentimentality usually associated with his work in favor of a straight, emotionless recitation of history. In that sense, the film is a welcome departure, as he makes the wise decision to get out of his own way. Other than an attempted portrayal of Lincoln as a saintly, Gandhi-like figure (that's mostly transcended by Lewis' riveting turn) there's little that would indicate it's even a Spielberg picture. You'd figure that would be a good thing. Instead, it creates an unusual dichotomy that results in a mild letdown. Albeit a really well-made one.
The film primarily focuses on President Lincoln's attempts in 1865 to obtain passage for the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery in the House of Representatives. To do this he not only needs the necessary minimum of 20 votes from the Democrats but also, without exception, the full support of the Republicans. It's not as easy as it seems and much of the verbal sparring scripted by Tony Kushner centers around the president's political maneuvering, which is often controversial. Of course, we know he eventually comes out with the win, only to weeks later lose his life to an assassin's bullet, but Spielberg shows the resistance he faced pulling that monumental victory off. Most of those battles involve an unlikely ally in Republican Congressman Thaddeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones), who gets to to deliver some of the film's sharpest insults, proving that politics was just as dirty then as it is now. But for all who are in favor of the amendment's passage, there are just as many who aren't. Namely outspoken Democratic Congressman Fernando Wood (Lee Pace), and even the emotional First Lady, Mary Todd Lincoln (Sally Field), whom the President has to constantly placate due to her wild mood swings and fears of their returning son Robert Todd's (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) desire to join the Union Army.
It's a strange complaint to level against a Spielberg film that it isn't emotionally manipulative enough, but oddly, that's the case here. It's a political procedural devoid of manufactured drama, and even as someone who usually appreciates that approach in other genres, it's dry and talky to the point that I sometimes found myself losing patience and just zoning out. A key factor as to why (aside from the material's sheer denseness) is that it just isn't visually interesting. Cinematographer Janusz Kaminski has collaborated with Spielberg many times in the past with enormously successful results, but three quarters of the film is shot in dark, dingy corridors and musty rooms. At times it's almost too dark to even see what's happening, which maybe doesn't matter since, most of the time, not a lot is. For example, there's exactly one shot of the White House, which is unusual, because if any historical period presented a golden opportunity for sweeping visual grandeur on screen it was this one. Instead, the whole thing feels kind of claustrophobic with most the film confined to offices and courtrooms.
Luckily, we still have Daniel-Day Lewis, who inhabits every scene, telling stories and providing valuable insight into Lincoln's politics and morals. It almost seems as if every revelation that comes forth about the man is contained entirely in his performance. Everything else, we pretty much knew already. He's the reason to see this. The voice, the look, the tone of speaking. There are so many points where you're taken aback by the way he delivers a line and forced to ask yourself, "Lincoln said THAT? Really?" At some points it's actually funny to hear the things that come out of his mouth because we've grown so accustomed to history dictating to us the mythic terms under which he's supposed to be viewed. But Day-Lewis humanizes him, which might end up being the film's greatest success. One of the most memorable moments comes at the start when he's interacting with a pair of Union soldiers reciting to him the Gettysburg Address. It's a transformative performance in search of a better movie that focuses entirely on Lincoln rather than the nuts and bolts of the political process.
Make no mistake that this is all about the 13th Amendment, with non of the other sub-plots even getting off the ground. Unforgivably, a mustachioed Joseph Gordon-Levitt is wasted as Robert Todd Lincoln, while little is explored regarding the President's marriage aside from a shrieking Sally Field making it perfectly clear that the Mary Todd was a real basketcase and the polar opposite of her calm, serene husband. Of the many supporting players, it's really Jones who chews into his role as stubborn Thaddeus Stevens with grumpy gusto, stealing nearly every scene he's in. Top to bottom, it's a loaded cast, with David Strathairn, Michael Stuhlbarg, John Hawkes, Hal Holbrook, Jackie Earle Haley, Tim Blake Nelson, Lukas Haas, Dane DeHaan, Jared Harris, Adam Driver, Walter Goggins and Bruce McGill all contributing in some form or another in wide variety of small and larger parts. More fun than the actual film might be trying to spot and recognize them all. Especially James Spader, who's strangely hilarious as an determined Republican party member lobbying for the amendment's passage.
It's easy to fault Spielberg for continuing a half-hour longer than what would have been the perfect end point or criticize him for a one-sided whitewashing of history, virtually ignoring (with the exception of Gloria Reuben's character) the African-American side of this issue. Both of those are true, but what really bothered me was how he treated, or didn't treat, the assassination. If Spielberg didn't want to show it (supposedly because he thought it would be tasteless, which is a cop-out, but his call), that's fine. But you can't choose not to show it and still fully acknowledge it. If he was going to show it, then he should have. If not, then he shouldn't have. You can't have it both ways. Not with something like that. Instead he does this silly bait-and-switch that ends up drawing more attention to the assassination than if he'd actually reenacted it in all its horror. You could actually argue he fulfills his fear of it being tasteless just by pulling this unnecessary stunt.
Spielberg's one of only a few filmmakers today who can reasonably be considered a "brand." The accusation that at this point he's just cashing paychecks and trying to collect Oscars isn't entirely disproven with this effort, but the film is surprisingly restrained and refined, representing at least one of his purest, most honest outings in a while. Unfortunately those very same qualities also make it kind of a chore to sit through. Perhaps it's a little too restrained and in need of some of that magic Ben Affleck was able to create with Argo. While some criticized that for "Hollywoodizing" a historical event, there's no denying his approach worked, giving the material a much-needed emotional spin that captivated audiences. In contrast, Lincoln feels more like a homework assignment. One in which students would actually be more excited to read the book.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Captain America: The First Avenger
Starring: Chris Evans, Tommy Lee Jones, Hugo Weaving, Hayley Atwell, Sebastian Stan, Dominic Cooper, Neal McDonough, Derek Luke, Stanley Tucci
Running Time: 124 min.
Rating: PG-13
★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)
Captain America: The First Avenger is Marvel's final puzzle piece in building toward next year's The Avengers, a movie everyone but me seems to be greatly anticipating. Perhaps if they hadn't botched every other film leading up to it by treating each as a full-length trailer I'd have taken a more optimistic view. As it stands, Captain America (I refuse to refer to it again by its clunky sub-title) is probably the best of the bunch. Or rather the least worst. Or at least better than Iron Man 2 and Thor. Yet something still seems to be missing, despite an effective lead performance and a decent story from which to draw from. But don't get me wrong. I'm not saying 1990's hilarious direct-to-video Captain America (starring J.D. Salinger's son!) is better. It's worse in every possible way. But given the choice of inviting friends over and having a bad movie viewing party featuring that forgotten stinker or watching the new version again, you can take a guess which I'd choose. One was clearly made with passion (and maybe a special sense of humor) but is dreadful. The other is a slick, safe, well-oiled, special effects machine that isn't completely passionless, but is kind of an empty spectacle with little re-watch value. Pair both up and you'd have really interesting double feature.
This story takes place in 1942 during World War II with underweight asthmatic weakling Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) dreaming of enlisting in the Army to serve his country. He's patriotic and motivated but his physical limitations are too big an obstacle to overcome. That is until he encounters Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci) whose latest scientific experiment to create a "super soldier" turns him into a much stronger, buffer Steve. His full transformation into superhero gets underway when he goes from selling war bonds under the guise of the costumed "Captain America" to battling the sadistic Johann Schmidt A.K.A. Red Skull (Hugo Weaving), the leader of a Nazi-like organization called HYDRA that plans to influence the outcome of the war and take over the world. Or something like that. At his side fighting the good fight is best friend Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan), British agent Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) and Col. Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones).
By far the most intriguing aspect of the film is everything before Rogers actually becomes Captain America, especially the impressive CGI work that was done to believably make Evans look like a 90- lb. weakling for the movie's first act. This is the kind of special effects work that shows what happens when digital technology is used effectively to suck you into a story rather than take you out. If I didn't know who Evans was I probably wouldn't have been able to detect that this was anyone but a really skinny actor and it's a testament to that technology that when Roger's transformation arrives it feels important and substantial. Then everything goes completely downhill from there as the story evolves into a more common action adventure with poorly realized characterizations and a sanitized Hollywood version of World War II that feels like it takes place in the present rather than the 1940's. Granted we don't to superhero movies expecting historical accuracy, but is it too much to ask that the film at least looks like it takes place in the past? It's just strange seeing what's so obviously modern special effects and sets when we're supposedly in another era.
That this was directed by Joe Johnston who brought us 1991's classic superhero adventure The Rocketeer, is a surprise. It had an authenticity and old fashioned sense of fun this lacks. But in his defense, that's the problem facing all current comic book/superhero movies. They want to stay true to the story, but at the same time everything has to be streamlined to make money and cater to the masses, causing certain elements to be sacrificed. It has to be PG-13. It can't be too violent. Supporting characters can't be too developed. That's how I'd explain what goes wrong in the second half and why it feels so goofy. Very few movies in this genre can achieve that balance and of recent ones only The Dark Knight (and to a far lesser extent Iron Man) have been able to have their cake and eat it too, though an argument can be made both had richer source material from which to draw.
Chris Evans does a commendable enough job as the lead, even if there's a certain blandness to him that's hard to describe (part of me still thinks the alternate choice of Jon Krasinski would have been more interesting). That the success of the movie doesn't even seem to rest on his shoulders is only indicative of how many other problems there are. Tommy Lee Jones collects a paycheck as the underdeveloped Col. Phillips while Hugo Weaving's Red Skull doesn't get nearly enough face time or attention considering his character's supposed to be the lead villain. I guess we should be grateful he at least has a cool look to him this time around. Hayley Atwell seems to have gotten a lot of attention for her role as generic love interest Peggy Carter and I haven't a clue why since she brings little in the way of charisma to a part that feels tacked on to begin with. I get what the writers were going for in trying to make her a modern military woman in a 1940's action-adventure but since the setting feels inauthentic and the casting is off it ends up not registering at all. What does make a lasting impression is Rick Heinrich's production design and Shelly Johnson's cinematography, both of which make the movie look way better than it actually is. From a technical standpoint, there's no denying everything is top-notch. Whether it needed to be, or it even helps the film, is an another debate entirely.
Even with all its faults Captain America still positions its title character well heading into The Avengers and this is the first Samuel L. Jackson/Nick Fury cameo that seems to exist as part of the narrative rather than as a cheap plug. Even the appearance of a young Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) seems organic to the story. With Rogers' awakening in the present-day after a 70-year cryogenic nap, there's at least a time capsule, fish-out-of-water aspect to this character that makes for a compelling cliffhanger, differentiating him from the other Marvel superheroes. Though I had to laugh at the third act development of Fury trying to convince the time traveling Rogers he was still in the 1940's. It couldn't have taken much considering the retro clean version of that period the film presented seemed so modern anyway. As a prequel to what should be an overwhelming popular superhero gathering next year, this gets the job done. But therein lies my problem. Every one of Marvel's features feels like a prequel to whatever comes next rather than any kind of standalone achievement. We'll find out next spring if that strategy pays off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


