(Long Island, N.Y.) There’s nothing like being dragged into a movie kicking and screaming, expecting it to be horrible beyond words, and actually leaving having been, at least to some small, tiny degree, entertained. Now, I’m not saying that I Am Number Four, a lame and blatant attempt to cash in on the success of Twilight, is actually a good movie, oh no…I’m just saying that, if you set your expectations low enough, you can see the good in just about anything.

So you can understand my reasons for expecting I Am Number Four to be the infected hangnail of motion pictures, let’s discuss author James Frey. You remember him, don’t you? He’s the guy that wrote the autobiographical “A Million Little Pieces,” a tome that chronicled his harrowing recovery from drug addiction. However, it came out that several incidents depicted in the book were…umm…”exaggerated,” to say the least. As a result, Mr. Frey endured a huge public backlash and even a televised tongue-lashing from no less than Oprah Winfrey herself, formerly one of his biggest supporters.

Anyway, Mr. Frey moved on, wrote some more books, and eventually started a publishing company whose purpose is to create highly-marketable, Twilight-like books that can then be turned into movies. Yes, seriously. Such a crass, shallow, and frankly lame business model aside, it also came out that Frey allegedly preys upon college students to pen his books, signing them into contracts that gave them no rights to their material, no real author credit, and a mere $250 advance. Again, allegedly (just covering myself here).

So, considering that the source material was created with only the most commercial of ideals involved, you can forgive me for expecting the movie to suck. But it actually doesn’t…well, not completely.

I Am Number Four is equal parts somewhat okay and unbelievably stupid. It’s the story of some kid named “John Smith” (that’s his alias…real name: “Number 4,” played by Alex Pettyfer), an alien hiding on Earth while on the run from his home planet with a group of evil invaders in tow. It seems that there’s special members of his race (who are named with numbers…I sure wouldn’t want to be “Number 2”) that get superpowers as they mature, and they’re all being hunted down and killed for some reason. As it serves the plot, John looks like a 25 year-old human who’s trying to pass himself off as a teenage boy.

As an aside – am I the only person sick of casting people who don’t look even remotely teenaged to play teens? I mean, damn.

Anyway, John has a bodyguard of sorts, Henri (Timothy Olyphant), who decides it’s best to “blend in” by enrolling John in high school. But how incognito can someone be when their hands glow in the middle of science class and weird, stupid-looking tattoos appear on their legs every time one of their brethren is killed?

So, as you were expecting, John encounters every teen movie stereotype in existence while at school: Sarah Hart (Dianna Agron), the misunderstood, artsy girl who’s “different” (as her defining trait, the screenwriters deemed that she must be obsessed with photography and thus, at all times, carry a camera with her); Mark James (Jake Abel), her mean, jealous ex-boyfriend (who, of course, she didn’t realize was mean and jealous until after she’d been dating him for ages); and Sam Goode (Callan McAuliffe), the socially awkward nerd who is repeatedly bullied by the mean, jealous ex-boyfriend of Sarah.

Things are complicated by the arrival of the evil alien invaders, who are perhaps the biggest problem with the movie. Remember that old Sylvester Stallone stinker Judge Dredd? There was this scene where Sly ends up in the “Cursed Earth,” which is basically a radioactive wasteland populated by in-bred, redneck mutants. There was one in particular who says something to the effect of “LEMME KILL IM, PAWWW!!” He’s bald, has rotten teeth, and just generally looks disgusting and even a bit retarded. THAT’S what the bud guys in I Am Number Four look like. Every one of them. If they were cool-looking Darth Vader-types or something it would have made for much better viewing, but there’s no way anyone could ever take the nuked cast of Deliverance seriously as a threat, even if they do have big ray-guns.

So, John, whose powers are now emerging (among them, his hands are now flashlights…seriously), falls in love with Sarah (except, on his planet, when you fall in love, it’s “FOREVER”…hahaha), and together the two have to deal with the invaders, Sarah’s ex-boyfriend and his jerky cop father, and the arrival of the mysterious “Number 6,” a girl from John’s planet who’s using her powers to fight instead of run away like sissy-boy John. Eventually, they team up to take on just about everybody.

I know I’ve been pretty critical of I Am Number Four thus far, but deservedly so; it’s corny, derivative, unoriginal, and just has a feeling of being mass-produced to coincide with any possible trend that could enable it to catch on to the Twilight crowd, with a sci-fi twist. However, the actors (especially Timothy Olyphant…what’s HE doing here?) all do solid jobs and can be occasionally likable, and that right there is more than I expected out of anyone associated with this movie. It also helps that there’s plenty of action and that it’s all very well done. Also, there’s a cute shape-shifting puppy!

But bear in mind, there’s nothing else even remotely good about I Am Number Four; there’s an abundance of horrible dialogue, no character development, and cheese galore (for example, several human characters suffer injuries that would kill dozens of real people, but appear just fine seconds later). But at least it caters to the base moviegoer’s instincts of excitement regarding watching pretty people and things that go “boom.”

So, I Am Number Four is actually pretty bad, but if you go into it with the right mindset – like expecting it to give you cancer – then you might just walk out somewhat satisfied like I did. Otherwise, unless you’re either a pre-teen girl or a sci-fi geek, avoid it.

(Long Island, N.Y.) Oh, man, I loves me some Liam Neeson. He’s one of the few actors walking the Earth that can class up just about any movie he sees fit to appear in. In fact, I think he’d even make a navel lint documentary pretty darn entertaining, if he chose to go that route.

Okay, so, with that opening statement, it’s probably more that readily apparent that I’m going into today’s review of Unknown pretty biased, as it stars Neeson. Also, long-time readers of mine know of the deep, deep affection and love I hold for 2008’s Taken, a film that blissfully recalled the supreme ruthlessness of 80’s Action movies as Liam Neeson systematically tortured and slaughtered most of Europe with his bare hands to get his beloved kidnapped daughter back. Now, along comes Unknown, and while it’s not the Taken 2 that has been rumored for ages, it’s still an excellent little action/mystery flick kicked up a few notches by Mr. Neeson’s undeniable charisma and acting abilities.

Unknown starts out with Dr. Martin Harris (Neeson) and his wife, Elizabeth (January Jones, who’s way too young and hot to be the hitched to any man pushing 60…but Liam’s so damn cool that we’ll just suspend disbelief in this case) arrive in Germany for a biotechnology summit that Harris is due to speak at. Once they reach their ritzy hotel, Harris realizes that he forgot his briefcase at the airport and quickly hops a cab back to get it. However, a wayward refrigerator sends his taxi cab off a bridge and into the drink, and Harris only narrowly escapes death when the cab driver, Gina (Diane Kruger), hauls him to safety after a bump on the noggin sends Harris to dreamland.

Harris wakes up in the hospital after spending several days in a coma, and, thinking it odd that his wife never came to see him, sets out for his hotel, only to discover her with another man…a man who claims to be the REAL Martin Harris! With his own wife seeming not to know him, Harris finds himself torn between wondering if that blow he took in the car crash scrambled his noodle or if something fishy is going on. Eventually, after fending off mysterious men who try to kill him and an encounter with the cabby who saved his life, Harris sets out to discover what’s going on…but he might not like the answer, provided he lives long enough to get it.

Now, a lot of people have seen the trailer for Unknown and compared it to Taken, and by doing that they’re wrong. Dead wrong. While yet another European production, Unknown is actually more of a whodunit that shares similarities with Arnold Schwarzenegger’s awesome 1990 hit Total Recall than anything else. Neeson spends more time trying to figure out what’s going on with his identity crisis than pummeling, slicing, and shooting bad guys, but don’t worry, children…eventually, the blood starts flowing, and while it only takes up a mere fraction of Unknown’s running time, the suffering to humanity that Mr. Neeson manages to pack into this small time frame is truly impressive.

Otherwise, Unknown is an intense and fast-paced thriller that will really pull you in to the main character’s plight. Liam Neeson, at 58 years old, remains today’s top action great, in my opinion. When the chips are down, most of today’s stars will go soft and let the bad guys live, but you know that Liam will always finish ’em off. It’s interesting that, later in his career, Neeson seems less picky about the roles he takes, opting for more action-oriented films than dramatic ones, but hey, that’s fine with me. His acting ability still manages to shine through, giving each character he portrays a realistic and emotional edge that other actors lack.

The rest of the cast do a solid job of backing Neeson up. January Jones isn’t really given much to do other than act like your usual damsel in distress, but later in the film she’s given the chance to show a bit more range. Diane Kruger brings a plucky and streetwise attitude to her role as the cabbie that eventually is dragged into Harris’ quest to reclaim his identity. And a special note must be made of the performance of Bruno Ganz as Ernst Jürgen, an elderly German detective who also joins Harris’ cause.

Director Jaume Collet-Serra has crafted a great little mystery here, with a twist that is actually rather satisfying and plenty of action to keep you on the edge of your seat the whole way through. Until Liam Neeson finally fulfills my every birthday and Christmas wish since 2008 and makes Taken 2, this will remain a solid little film to tide me over. Highly recommended.

(Long Island, N.Y.) The phrase “okay” was pretty much invented to describe The Eagle, a movie about the occupation of Britain by Rome back in 2nd century AD. It’s not a bad movie, it’s not a good movie, it’s just…”okay.” To expand a bit, one could say that it has a rather interesting and unique setting, but the otherwise solid action scenes are rendered almost unwatchable by an epileptic cameraman, and the somewhat stupid story is “enhanced” by all-around wooden acting (you were expecting something else with Channing Tatum on hand?).

Okay, so Mr. Tatum plays Roman centurion Marcus Flavius Aquila, who takes over as head of a small fort in Britain. Not long passes before the fort is attacked by local savages, and Marcus earns his men’s loyalty by displaying some level of competence as a leader and repelling the invaders. Yes, the field of view during the combat was as if an ADD-ridden 5 year-old was handling the camera, but there was still some bone-crunching, blood-gushing goodness to be had. It was especially cool when the Romans used their great big shields to form a “human tank” when getting up close and personal with the locals.

Now, Channing Tatum actually seems to display some marginal talent when it comes to action scenes – when he’s in a role where he’s grunting, swinging swords, and chucking spears, you get the feeling that he’s going to be okay for a while. But, unfortunately, The Eagle removes him from this element very early on, and when it comes to other things like reciting dialogue, emoting, or changing facial expressions, the guy pretty much comes up short.

Yeah, so the filmmakers thought that since a whole movie about Roman centurions kicking ass would just be too cool, they decide instead that Marcus should get injured and be honorably discharged. Boo. So, Marcus is shipped off to his uncle Aquila (Donald Sutherland) to recover. While there, he ends up getting his very own slave after saving the man’s life during a gladiatorial amphitheatre show. The thing is, the slave (named Esca, played by Jamie Bell) is kinda mad about being a slave, but who cares? He’s a slave, their opinions don’t count, right?

Anyway, it turns out that Marcus’ father was also a centurion back in the day and ended up losing 5,000 of his men (himself included) in Britain, along with some hunk of metal shaped like an Eagle that’s considered this big important standard by the Romans. Needless to say, this kind of put a black mark on the family name, so when this is randomly brought up, Marcus decides to use his newly-found spare time to wander into the boondocks, with just his slave who doesn’t even like him, and look for daddy’s lost eagle.

Now, I’ve seen countless movies where countless idiots die protecting some worthless inanimate Zu finden ist hier beispielsweise auch der Jackpot Slot Book of Ra Mega Fortune, ebenso Hall of Gods, das beruhmte Gonzos Quest oder auch Jack Hammer. object that they’ve elevated to a silly degree of importance, and The Eagle is no different.

The ornamental bird that Marcus is questing for is in the possession of a crazy tribe called the Seal People who apparently can run faster than horses, and they’ve taken quite a liking to it. Captured, Marcus discovers that Esca has ties to the tribe and might just use this turn of events to gain his freedom. So, will Marcus get his gold bird back, or will he be eaten? I…I can’t tell you!

I’ve already covered much of what makes The Eagle just “okay.” A lot of the film rests on the eventual bond that forms between Marcus and Esca, although, quite frankly, I didn’t see it. One second, they’e swearing to kill each other, the next minute they’re practically cuddling. Admittedly, I did fall asleep for a few minutes in the middle of the movie, but my friend Don informed me that I, in fact, did not miss any heartfelt character-building moment between the two men. They just magically went from one extreme to the other. That’s some good scriptwriting, there.

And, again, the idea of Marcus’ quest being fueled by some dumb hunk of metal is just stupid. I know that, back then, symbols meant a lot to people, but there’s this showdown at the end of The Eagle and a lot of people die on both sides…and all for a tin eagle on a stick. Granted, nowadays people kill each other over a cigarette or a pair of sneakers, but to center a whole movie around it is just dumb.

So, The Eagle is…well, I’ve already said it, but I’ll say it one more time: it”s “okay.” You could do worse, especially if you crave a little action, but otherwise go see Black Swan if you already haven’t.

(Long Island, N.Y.)You’re heard of feel-good movies, right? Well, aside from maybe a documentary about the horrors of Auschwitz, The Company Men is the ultimate feel-BAD movie. First off, The Company Men is a very timely release. Set during the current economic toilet that our country is currently swirling downward, it’s the tale of several rich fat-cats who lose their cushy corporate gigs due to downsizing and the resultant turmoil their lives are thrown into when they can’t find new jobs. It’s a fear I think all of us can relate to, although the film does offer a disturbing commentary on just how much a part of our lives our jobs can become and how getting canned not only results in a loss of a paycheck, but a possible loss of identity as well. And, in some cases, people just can’t cope with it.

The Company Men divides its time amongst three separate character arcs, all of whom are employees of a big company that’s into some hard times. Ben Affleck plays Bobby Walker, a 38 year-old executive with a mortgage and car he can’t really afford…so, of course you know he’ll be the first on the company chopping block. His wife, the obvious brains of the bunch, insists that they curtail spending until they get back on their feet, but the cocky Bobby goes dunce and squanders his severance while looking high and low for another corporate gig. He also has a son that he doesn’t get along with (that I’m not sure is his or his wife’s from another marriage), and a brother-in-law (Kevin Costner) who runs a small construction company that Bobby ends up working for when things get really bad. Anyway, Bobby goes into outplacement services where he struggles to find work and builds camaraderie with the other unemployed folks there.

Then we have Chris Cooper as Phil Woodward, who’s probably the most annoying and least sympathetic character in the movie. He’s an older executive, not all that useful, and constantly scared of losing his job, which of course, he finally does. Passed over for jobs as too old by employers used to having their pick of young, hungry up-and-comers without families who will work endlessly, he’s still bugged by his inconsiderate daughter for a trip to Italy. He comes to a bad end but you won’t mind, as he comes across as a weak, bland character with few redeeming qualities.

Overall, The Company Men is…well, I can’t say it’s enjoyable, because it’s somber and depressing as all hell, but it IS engrossing. You really do wonder how

things will turn out for Bobby and Gene, whereas I didn’t care at all for the fate of Chris, and in fact, was neither surprised nor upset when it came to pass. You won’t either, as he’s just filler for the non-Bobby and Gene scenes.

In a film this slow and deliberately-paced, you need some fine acting to keep the audience glued to the screen, and, I’m telling you, after spending years disliking Ben Affleck, his recent work has really turned me around on the guy. In The Company Men, he plays Bobby as

arrogant at first, but as the financial hardships, rejection, and humiliation starts wearing him down, he opens up and exposes layers of emotion that really just impressed the heck out of me. And Tommy Lee Jones played it like a world-weary man beaten down by the heartless realities of big business…heck, he’s even fired by his own best friend who he started the company with. It was refreshing to see Jones play someone that was actually somewhat depressive after so many over-the-top roles.

But the thing all three characters have in common

is that, just when you think they’ve sunken as low as they can go, they get even more crap dumped on them. Soon they’re swimming in it, and you’ll find yourself getting more and more bummed out all the while.

One thing I feel I have to mention is the odd editing in one scene of this movie. There’s a part where Ben Affleck and Kevin Costner are talking after finishing a hard day building a house, and they’re surrounded by their co-workers. Then, suddenly, they’re not. Ben and Kevin are magically alone now, but they don’t seem to notice or even care. Where did the co-workers go? Did aliens abduct them for some cavity probing? Did they melt? Or was the scene shot over the course of two days and the casting director just forgot to tell half the cast to come back the second day and they hoped the audience wouldn’t notice? Who knows? But it’s freaking

weird.

So, The Company Men is a movie that will probably make you want to slit your wrists in a bathtub of warm water while dropping a few plugged-in toasters in for good measure, but nonetheless, it does give you some fine acting, a great, topical tale, and hey, it even teaches you a

lesson about how there’s more to life than just where you work and how much dough you make. That’s a lesson we probably could all stand to learn.

(Long Island, N.Y.) The Rite is all Wrong. Okay, I just had to say it. I’m sure at least a dozen or so other film critics have made the same awful joke when reviewing this movie, but based on the off-chance they didn’t, I did. Also, its 1:30 in the morning, I’m totally shot, and that’s the best I can come up with. It’s sad, I know, but that’s life.

Anyway (here’s a fun assignment for my readers: go back through all my reviews and count the number of times I say “anyway”), The Rite is a horror movie of sorts based on a book written by some guy who apparently has attended a few “actual” exorcisms. One could say this qualifies this movie for the “Based On A True Story” moniker (the film DOES start with the ol’ “Inspired By True Events” text), if one were inclined to believe in such events. Regardless if you do or don’t, Hollywood got their grubby little mitts on the book and, of course, churned out a movie version which I’m sure took all sorts of “artistic” licenses with the subject matter.

Well, here goes: Michael Kovak (Colin O’Donoghue) hates his daddy, an oppressive funeral parlor owner (Rutger Hauer!) and decides to scam a free college education by entering seminary school and renouncing his vows afterwards. Pretty slick idea, actually. So Kovak gives this a shot, but when he lays his letter of resignation upon the Father Superior, he ain’t hearing it. He threatens Kovak with a hefty bill for his schooling unless he attends a class on exorcism in Rome. Why? Who knows.

While in the class, Father Xavier (Ciaran Hinds) can clearly see that Kovak still ain’t buying it, so he offers to introduce him to a pal of his: Hannibal Lec…um, I mean, Father Lucas (Anthony Hopkins), a real pro in the field of exorcism. His current client happens to be a teenage girl and while Kovak still has his doubts, even after seeing this supposedly possessed girl do all manner of wacky, otherworldly stuff, but after she passes away while in Father Xavier’s care, some really not-so-nice things start happening, and Kovak starts to change his tune.

Overall, The Rite was just kind of flat. It’s billed as a horror movie, but it’s not really; it’s more of a drama. Sure, it’s got some of the trappings, especially in terms of atmosphere and it’s more realistic take on the whole demonic possession thing…well, as realistic as such a thing can be, anyway. It’s actually pretty creepy how, according to Father Lucas, in order to expunge the demon you have to hack away at it for months and years until the poor devil finally offers up its “real name” (Bert? Rupert? Elmo?) thus robbing it of all its power and allowing the priest to give it the boot.

But eventually, it kind of just lost me. The last act actually got fairly lame, some bad special effects started popping up, and things went all Hollywood, for lack of a better term. I don’t want to give away anything, so I won’t, but suffice it to say that this movie was quite promising when playing its subject matter straight and realistically; when it departed from that, it just got pretty stupid, clichéd, and cheap.

Still, much like bad pizza, even when he’s in a sucky movie Anthony Hopkins is still pretty good. He belongs to a rare group of actors, such as Sean Connery, or Wesley Snipes, that can raise even a mediocre effort to a watchable level just by being in it based on charisma alone.

Colin O’Donoghue as Kovak was solid, he’s a newcomer, and while he didn’t display anything that assured me that talent scouts will be beating down his door for roles anytime soon, he was good enough to ensure he at least gets a few Old Navy commercials under his belt if this whole movie thing doesn’t work out for him. Seriously, though, he did shine in several scenes. The kid might have “it.” Or maybe not.

Gee, can you tell I’m tired?

Oh, and Alice Braga plays some journalist named Angeline who’s taking the exorcism class along with Kovak as research for some story she’s writing. She’s filler, that’s all.

So, The Rite starts out decently enough, but eventually goes south and doesn’t come back. Still, it’s not a total waste, and might be worth checking out if you’re painfully, painfully bored one afternoon. Myself, I didn’t walk out outright hating it…I just had a profound sense of disappointment.

Hmm…maybe that’s worse. After all, hating a movie usually just means that it sucked, but disappointment means it had potential and screwed it up. Pity.

(Long Island, N.Y.)Last

week I reviewed sophisticated art house film The King’s Speech. This week I review The Mechanic, which is neither sophisticated nor artsy, but it does have more explosions and a much higher body count. That’s gotta count for something, right?

Younger viewers might not be familiar with the glory that is Charles Bronson. A rather ugly, hard-as-nails man who often played characters that were cold, methodical, and ruthless to the extreme, he made a living churning out various action flicks up through the 1980’s. An especially good Bronson starting point for the uninitiated would probably be his masterpiece, Death Wish 3, which would hands-down win the title of best action flick of 1985 if it were not for the existence of a movie titled Commando, starring this little-known Austrian guy.

Anyway, the reason I’m schooling you about Mr. Bronson is that The Mechanic is actually a remake of his classic 1972 tale of a reclusive hitman that specializes in making his kills look like accidents. He takes on the son of one of his marks as a protégée and starts training him in the ways of offing folks. Tomfoolery ensues. And really, that’s it, but what the film lacks in depth, it

more than makes up for in its quiet, methodical approach to storytelling and its powerful atmosphere. Hell, there’s even no dialogue for, like, the first 20 minutes or so, just Bronson scientifically setting up and eventually carrying out a complex hit on somebody. It’s absorbing.

So, because Hollywood has not one collective idea within their collective heads, they have once again gone back to the well and done a total re-tread

of a film that was probably best left alone to begin with. But, this particular remake doesn’t offend me quite so much as the 10,000,000 released just last month. First of all, the 2011 version of The Mechanic stars Brit B-movie star Jason Statham, who pretty much reigns as top of the heap of today’s neutered action stars. In other words, if Bronson and Statham met in a dark alley, Bronson would be the one walking out, but compared to clowns like Dwayne Johnson, Statham gets the job done just fine.

Another reason I’m not too offended by this remake is the fact that, given the 39 year-long gap between this and the original, using modern film-making and storytelling techniques gives the tale of The Mechanic a somewhat fresh sheen. I’m not saying it’s better than the original – it’s not – but it does come across as somewhat worthwhile and entertaining, at the very least.

The plot is basically the same as the original: Arthur Bishop (Statham) is a professional assassin who is eventually hired to bump off his mentor, Harry (played by Donald Sutherland), which he does. That’s not very nice, and afterwards he’s kinda bummed about it, which is why he ends up taking Harry’s estranged, wanna-be hit-man son, Steve (Ben Foster), under his wing, teaching him the secrets of death and destruction. Of course, Bishop doesn’t really come out and say what actually happened to daddy, but you know eventually Steve’s going to find out what really happened, putting the two on a collision course to an epic showdown.

I

like The Mechanic. The first half actually tried to mirror the slow build-up of the original Bronson offering…well, as close as modern, ADD-addled film-making can manage, anyway. Suffice it to say, the action doesn’t really kick in big-time until the second half, and by that point, subtlety is tossed out the window in favor of action, action, and more action. It’s an odd mix; the 1972 version had its adrenaline-pumping moments, but the film itself remained slow-paced and firmly rooted in reality. The 2011 version tries this approach for a bit, but eventually says “screw it” and goes way over-the-top instead. Still, director Simon West (who gave us such “classics” as Con Air and Tomb Raider) keeps things from getting too out-of-control…for example, the editing of the action scenes actually ISN’T riddled with a bazillion cuts and edits per second; this man West actually allows us to SEE what’s going on! Madness!

Jason Statham is Jason Statham…really, why else would you watch a Jason Statham movie? He’s got a fair amount of charisma, he can kick a decent amount of behind, and he even manages to display some solid acting ability. He never strays from this formula, but that’s okay with me…it prevents him from doing

stupid things like making crappy children’s movies. No, no, Jason…just stick to killing people. We need at least one modern action star who resists the need to emasculate himself just to line his pockets with yet even more dough.

Donald Sutherland does the most he can with what amounts to a cameo, and Ben Foster seriously impresses with a rather edgy performance. I don’t know who this guy is or what other movies he’s been in, if any (I mean, I’m typing this on a laptop that has internet access, so I could easily open a

browser and find out…but, I’ll admit, I’m way too lazy to do so), but maybe, possibly, he could be a star in the future. Maybe.

So, while certainly not as good as the original, the 2011 version of The Mechanic manages to be one of the few remakes made in history that doesn’t completely fall on its face in comparison to its source material. It tries to ape the engrossing atmosphere of the 1972 version at first and partially succeeds, but eventually it just goes into loud ‘kaboomkaboompowpowblam’ mode instead and becomes your typical action flick, albeit a competently-directed one. Well worth checking out.

(Long Island, N.Y.) The King’s Speech: a modern-day Lethal Weapon? No, no, no…I kid, but really, it follows the character arc established by Danny Glover and Mel Gibson in their classic cop caper flick (not to mention about a million other movies). No, Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush don’t shoot anyone or blow anything up, but as far as their interaction goes, it’s the usual “odd couple” type of thing. Two men, both from very different worlds, who don’t like each other at first, but soon grow to become close friends (well, sort of) through all manner of adversity.

And yes, this is a sophisticated British-made historical period piece I’m writing about…I don’t always just review movies where things explode, thank you very much.

Firth plays Prince Albert, Duke of York and future King George VI, and Geoffrey Rush is speech therapist Lionel Logue. You see, Al’s got a stuttering problem, which can be a bit of a bummer when you’re a member of the royal family and are expected to do things like speak in public in front of thousands of people (so yes, the film’s title is, in fact, a double entendre! How very clever). In fact, our film opens with such a scene, and the resulting embarrassment on the part of Albert drives him to seek out treatment, but after stupidly being made to read with a mouth full of marbles (what, were they out of leeches?) and almost choking, he decides to quit treatment (preferring to remain marble mouthed figuratively as opposed to literally).

However, his wifey-poo, Elizabeth (everyone’s favorite kook Helena Bonham Carter), meets with Lionel Logue (Rush, who I loved in the campy House on Haunted Hill remake) and eventually convinces Albert to try the weird Australian’s unorthodox treatments. Of course, like I said above, the two don’t get on at first; Albert isn’t fond of Logue insistence of calling him “Bertie,” but after he successfully gets him to read Shakespeare without stammering once (it seems listening to Mozart can fix just about anything), Albert begins to take his work with Logue seriously.

The rest of the movie covers Albert’s dysfunctional relationships with both his father, King George V (Michael Gambon) and his older brother Edward (Guy Pearce), and his eventual rise to the throne of England. Since this is based on a true story, you can look up all the historical facts, but the ins-and-outs make for some fascinating drama, especially considering the great lengths the filmmakers apparently went to adhere as closely as possible to fact. Of course, as any film that is “based on a true story,” there’s fabrications to be sure, but in The King’s Speech, there seems to be less than usual. I think.

A drama such as this hinges solely on its acting, especially when it comes to a story about an emotional bond between two men, and Firth and Rush deliver big-time with some great chemistry. Firth in particular was very impressive, and I love almost any movie that Rush turns up in…well, except for those Disney pirate movies he’s been slumming in lately. But hey, I guess you’ve gotta pay the bills somehow, right? Small little artsy-fartsy movies like this won’t do it, sadly.

Helena Bonham Carter is solid, but really, the breakout in this movie is Guy Pearce as Edward, Albert’s somewhat cruel brother who also just so happens to be next in line for the throne, only to eventually throw it away from some divorced American dame; never mind the fact that the throne is obviously a lot better upholstered than she is. Still, there’s no accounting for taste, I guess.

The movie can be a bit on the sappy and sentimental side at times, but always, those performances will draw you back in if you ever start to falter. The King’s Speech is an excellent little flick that’s only recently gone into wide release, so if you’ve been holding off on seeing it because you thought it was only playing at one of those snooty little art house-style movie theaters (you know, the kind where the snack counter sells disgusting things like tofu popcorn with peanut oil and wheat grass juice), your excuse has gone out the window. Besides, if you go to see this movie you’ll be treated to a scene where Helena Bonham Carter sits on a grown man’s chest as a stuttering remedy. What more could you ask for?

(Long Island, N.Y.) Wow, I kinda remember The Green Hornet, a Batman-ish like superhero who uses his wealth and tech to fight underworld criminals. Not the original 1930’s radio serial he debuted in back in the day, however…I’m talking about his guest appearance with his faithful sidekick Kato on an old rerun of the uber-campy 60’s Batman TV show back when I was a kid (he apparently also had a TV show of his own at the time, but I never saw it). Oh, and a record (yes, you remember those, right?) containing some kind of audio play episode of his show or something that someone had given to me when I was little. I remember thinking the back story (complete with pictures of the Hornet’s neat-o crime fighting gadgets) written on the back of the album were cool.

Little did I know that Kato, his Asian martial arts expert manservant was actually played by the late, great Bruce Lee, a fact that would eventually eclipse the very shadow of the Hornet himself…after all, it IS Bruce Lee! Who cares about some white dude in a stuffy green business suit?

Anyway, most people don’t know who the heck The Green Hornet is these days, but, as is the case with everything else, it’s being remade by Hollywood. But in this instance, I don’t think it’s a bad thing, given TGH’s relative obscurity to modern audiences. Of course, if you told me that pot-bellied comedian Seth Rogen would be playing Britt Reid, the Hornet’s alter-ego, I never would have believed you, but it is indeed the case. Rogen laid off the Twinkies and Ho-Hos for a few months, maybe hit the treadmill a little, and while he’s not going to be posing on the cover of Muscle and Fitness anytime soon, he’s actually somewhat believable in the role now. At least, when he’s not incessantly playing it for laughs.

Oh, yeah, first and foremost, this version of The Green Hornet is a comedy. Yeah, there’s action and some drama, sure, but it’s played for laughs the most, which is in rather sharp contrast to the original, more serious depiction. Does it work? Well, yeah, it does, actually.

Britt Reid (Rogen) is the son of wealthy newspaper publisher James Reid (Tom Wilkinson). He just wants to party, party, party, but after daddy dies he inherits his media empire and takes stock of his life. Deciding to become a superhero, he recruits Kato (Jay Chou, who is officially awesome and, quite frankly, the real star of this movie), a martial arts master who also possesses the tech skills to come up with all the gadgets and weapons the duo will it need in their war on crime.

Their foe? A crazy Russian gangster named Benjamin Chudnofsky, played by the awesome Christoph Waltz (of Inglorious Basterds fame). He has a fun little sub-plot where he thinks he’s not bad-ass enough to be running a gang, so he’s always paranoid and trying to overcompensate. He’s also planning on uniting all the gangs in the city under his leadership. Hey, that sounds pretty bad-ass to me.

Oh, and Cameron Diaz is randomly thrown into the movie as the usual love interest for the hero. Her role pretty much amounts to nothing, and wouldn’t be missed if edited out. But still, she’s aging well (but could hit the wall any day now), so who’s going to complain about a little eye candy? Not me.

Overall, The Green Hornet is basically a buddy film about Reid and Kato, two completely different people, getting to know each other and eventually becoming friends. Rogen and Chou actually have good chemistry together, with Chou’s cool and dry personality acting as a great foil for Rogan’s overall goofball antics. While Rogan manages to carry his end of the movie when it comes to the action (which is a surprise), this is truly a break-out role for Chou, who I found very entertaining, and a worthy heir to Bruce Lee’s turn in the part. Alas, this will mean nothing for the talented Taiwanese actor, as there are no roles for Asians in Hollywood that don’t involve Karate-chopping bricks in half or working in a rice paddy. It’s a shame.

As a comedy, The Green Hornet delivers its share of the laughs, but at times they can seem a bit forced, with all the rampant pop-culture references and all. But when it comes to action…whoa. Now THAT is The Green Hornet’s strong point. There are several fight scenes that really impress, including one between The Hornet and Kato which almost serves as a “bonding” experience between the two. Overall, while the comedy and action doesn’t always mix well (as was done to near-perfection in Iron Man), it works more often than not.

So, is The Green Hornet Hollywood’s next big superhero franchise? Maybe. Along with last year’s flick Kick-Ass, it fills a void left between the super-serious Batman and the light-hearted Spider-Man with its combo of humor, fisticuffs, and explosions, and it’s well worth your time if you enjoy those kinds of things. Go for it.

(Long Island, N.Y.) I’m not a huge fan of westerns, but when a great one comes along; I can’t help but sit up and take notice. Now, while most of those great films have starred Clint Eastwood – The Outlaw Josey Wales, High Plains Drifter, Unforgiven, etc. – occasionally a non-Eastwood Western comes along that I also find enjoyable. Enter True Grit, a remake of the 1969 John Wayne film and possibly the least weird film ever made by the directing duo of the Coen brothers.

Now, I’ve never really seen the original version of True Grit, which itself was based on a 1968 novel by Charles Portis, although I have seen snippets of it here and there on TV. I know it’s considered a classic, but (and I run the risk of hate mail for saying this) I was never much of a John Wayne fan. Sure, the guy is iconic, and he had loads of presence and charisma, but once you get past all the hype, you’re left with the fact that he was also one of the worst actors in history. Sorry, but that’s why I never really made it a priority to watch what many consider to be his greatest role. But now what I’ve seen the remake by the Coen brothers, which has Jeff Bridges taking on Wayne’s famous role as U.S. Marshal Reuben J. “Rooster” Cogburn, I just might have to re-evaluate my stance.

Now, you all know how disgusted I am by the non-stop glut of remakes Hollywood is churning out on a monthly basis. Remaking a film that doesn’t need it just to cash in on nostalgia simply represents the fact that the big studios are just fresh out of ideas and afraid to take risks on unproven concepts that might just break them out of their stale rut. Still, once in a while, a remake can be a good thing

if done for artistic reasons and not at the whim of the almighty dollar. The Coen brothers stated that their goal in remaking True Grit was to be more loyal to the source novel. Now, since I haven’t really seen the original or read the novel, I can’t rightfully say if they achieved that goal. My girlfriend, who has seen the 1969 film, states that many of the scenes were actually the same. However, I doubt John Wayne’s Rooster Cogburn blasted an unarmed man in the eye with his hand-cannon at point-blank range like Bridges did, so already I’m thinking a remake wasn’t such a bad idea. After

all, look how right John Carpenter got it when he remade the hokey 50’s sci-fi flick The Thing?

So, this film, like many, has a story (yes, really!). True Grit’s starts out with 14 year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) telling the audience about how her daddy was gunned down by the dastardly Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), who got clean away with the crime. Mattie wants justice (and mom’s not really of much use), so she gathers what cash she can and sets out to hire the most merciless dude she can find to bring Chaney in. Enter Rooster Cogburn, who, as played by Bridges, is kind of a fat, gross, and downright nasty old man, but, as Mattie’s luck would have it, he’s also one mean S.O.B. who always gets the job done.

Rooster takes some convincing, especially when it comes to Mattie’s demand that she accompany him, but eventually he agrees to take the job. Along the way they acquire a tag-along in the form of Texas Ranger LaBoeuf (Matt Damon), who has been tracking Chaney for some time. However, can this strange team even stop bickering with each other, let alone track down the evil Chaney in the middle of the badlands and bring him to justice?

I mentioned that this was the least weird movie of the Coen brothers’ career, and so it is. Their trademark bizarre characters and symbolism are strangely absent, making True Grit their most mainstream-friendly release yet. Of course, there was

that one wacko guy that made farm animal noises for no real reason…maybe that was the Coen brothers’ concession to long-time fans of their work? I dunno. But regardless, True Grit is wonderfully filmed with beautiful scenery and cinematography, and the Coen brothers’ talent for making actors’ bring their rather bland dialogue to glorious life is still there in spades.

Oh, yeah, the actors. There’s not one performance in this film that is in any way, shape or form bad. Or even average. In other words, everyone is flat-out amazing. Yes, even the extras, but let’s concentrate on the main cast, yes? Jeff Bridges’ cantankerous take on Rooster Cogburn really has to be seen to be believed…here’s one actor that’s not afraid of looking (or acting) ugly on-camera. Bridges manages to maintain a grating sandpaper-like voice without fail, and while Rooster is dirty and nasty and all, you still manage to see faint traces of his big heart underneath the rough exterior. When he’s not completely drunk, that is. Just a wonderful, wonderful role by a long-time great actor.

Matt Damon continues to build his legacy with a slightly comedic turn as Texas Ranger LaBoeuf. He’s a deadly serious character, but at the same time Damon adds little touches to his portrayal that bring a bit of silliness to the proceedings. For example, at one point he injures his tongue, and his speech for the rest of the movie sounds like he’s got a mouthful of cotton, which makes a heartfelt speech he delivers later on both stirring and amusing.

However, newcomer Hailee Steinfeld really steals the show as Mattie, a spunky, no-nonsense teen who’s wise and mature beyond her years. Josh Brolin is also great, even though his role pretty much amounts to a glorified cameo. Oh, and that one weird-looking Irish actor from Day of the Dead played an undertaker! Isn’t that cool?

My only real problem with True Grit is the ending, which was very abrupt, and, frankly, lame. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t need a happy ending where everything is neatly tied up and the hero rides off into the sunset with his main squeeze at his side and the Death Stars blows up and all that nonsense, but True Grit’s “Oh, yeah, this thing happened 25 years later, thanks, bye!” was pretty lame.

Other than that one minor complaint (is it minor, though? You’re supposed to go out strong…ah, never mind), True Grit is one of the best Westerns…actually, forget that, one of the best MOVIES (aside from the ending) made in ages. Go see it!

(Long Island, N.Y.) Oh, the agony I go through for my Long Island Exchange readers sometimes. I mean, there’s several near-classics out in theaters this week – among them True Grit and Black Swan – and here I am reviewing the celluloid equivalent of monkey excrement instead. I’m not sure exactly how this happened, other than an unfortunate scheduling conflict, but I’m certain that someone doesn’t like me, and that someone somehow clandestinely arranged for me to be forced into watching Little Fockers. Merry Christmas, Chris.

Anyway,

Little Fockers is the second sequel to 2000’s hit movie Meet the Parents, once again starring the comic powerhouse duo (*ahem*) of Robert De Niro and

Ben Stiller. This wretched series chronicles the misadventures of one Gaylord “Greg” Focker (Stiller) and the suffering he endures under the watchful eye of his overbearing Father-In-Law, Jack (De Niro), who’s convinced that he’s not good enough for his daughter, Pam (Teri Polo).

I suppose the first movie was somewhat cute and perhaps even humorous at times, making it somewhat bearable to sit through. However,

by the time the credits rolled, the premise had already worn thin. The second movie, 2004’s Meet The Fockers, I never watched, possibly sparing me great amounts of agony. However, I wasn’t so lucky this time around, and my fears have been confirmed: this series is pure death.

I’ll try to recap the plot for Little Fockers, but it’ll probably make no sense; there’s not so much a plot as a series of gags where characters have one silly misunderstanding after another, strung together by something trying to pass itself off as “comedy.” Added into that winning formula is every single character from the previous two movies (and there were a bunch), in addition to several

new ones, creating what can only be described as a mess.

Okay, in short: cranky old Jack is having problems

with his ticker, and names Greg as his successor as the family head. But then Jack, who is a real fickle guy, decides that his daughter Pam would be better off with her ex, Kevin (Owen Wilson), which leads to Greg doing what he can to get back into Jack’s good graces. There’s random tomfoolery with Greg’s parents thrown in (Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand, slumming along with the rest of the cast), not to mention a subplot where Greg’s sexy co-worker (Jessica Alba) is in love with him. Oh, and…well, never mind. I’ve given up trying to make sense of it all.

Honestly, while everyone involved in Little Fockers should be ashamed of themselves, no one should be feeling quite the sting of remorse quite as intensely as Robert De Niro, a man who used to be known for brilliantly melting into roles. Alas, he has taken to whoring himself out lately for anyone with a checkbook, churning out a string of horrible, unfunny comedies for seemingly anyone who asks. Guys like Stiller and Hoffman have all

made stinkers, so one more or less doesn’t really sully their reps very much. But Rob, come on. You even showed a glimpse of your acting mastery earlier this year in the acclaimed film Stone, but apparently it was a fluke. It’s a shame.

So, if you’re into pain, Little Fockers is your Holy Grail. Otherwise, there are plenty of great movies out, many of which I should have reviewed this week instead of this one.