ABOUT TIME

Jesse's Rating: ★★★ ½

Director: Richard Curtis

Year: 2013

Cast: Domhnall Gleeson, Rachel McAdams, Bill Nighy

Genre: Comedy/Drama/Sci-Fi

MPAA Rating: R

        Time travel flicks sometimes give me a headache. They are interesting and involving, but they also make you think too much. When About Time (the film I'm reviewing) ended, I was satisfied with it. At the same time though, I was mulling over many of the scenes in my mind. What began as a love story between two people eventually turned into one man's journey through adult life. As I viewed this London-based product from the director of the publicly treasured Love Actually, I couldn't help but over analyze the concept of the main character going back into the past and even in the smallest moments, changing things when vaulting back into present day. Trust me, when you see this thing it will drive you nuts because it never quite gets that part right. Therefore, in order to enjoy what's on screen, you have to not look too deep into the whole time travel concept. You basically have to enrapture yourself in the heartwarming vibes from the characters in it as well as the fact that it didn't deserve an R rating (a couple of cuss words shouldn't keep this from being a family film). You also have to believe that time travel isn't totally necessary when it comes to living a full and happy life. Those are my rules when taking in what I believe to be one of the best films of 2013.

        Resembling a sort of toned-down version (sans violence and escapist entertainment) of time travel oddities like The Butterfly Effect, Back to the Future, and, to an extent, Groundhog Day, About Time chronicles a young man's adult endeavors through the art of human transportation. The lead character being Tim Lake (played by a future Hugh Grant in Domhnall Gleeson, son of acclaimed actor Brendan Gleeson), is told on his 21st birthday that all the men in his family can travel back in time (it isn't explained why this is possible but there might as well have some mystery involved). Bill Nighy, perfect in his role as Lake's father, explains to him that all he has to do is venture into a dark space, squeeze his hands, and boom, he goes to the exact moment that he imagined in his mind. For me, the centralized and loving relationship between Tim and his father puts this thing over the top (in a good way). It sells the whole exercise formidably. Added to that, 75% of About Time, has a forwarding narration by said lead. It initially feels out of place only to emerge as a touching follicle toward wrapping things up.

        Now to be frank, I was initially put off by the fact that Tim wanted to do this to, you know, just get a girl to go out with him. But as the movie unfurled, he helps people on the side (friends and his sister to name a few) and builds a sort of solid foundation for a family dynamic. Let me put it this way, this movie is only a little over two hours long. However, there is an epicness that inhabits the proceedings and you get more than what you bargained for. I felt like I had been in the theater for over three hours, but believe me, I wasn't bored. Of note, though, you might have to ignore the fact that no one ages a lick in this exercise (it spans somewhere between 7-10 years I'm thinking). It's a minor oversight and shouldn't keep you from enjoying it.

        Also of note is the gist of Tim's time traveling plights becoming a little muddled when it comes to the workings of the plot. Thankfully, this is masked by a cast that delivers acting in the first class department. This is especially evident in Rachel McAdams as Mary, the object of Tim's affections. As expected, McAdams is effortlessly charming and fancy free. Two words describe her: glowing, radiant, eye twinkling (that's three words, oops). Along with the previously mentioned Billy Nighy, she adds leverage to the extreme likability factor embedded in About Time's character makeup.

        When you put it all together, About Time is a great holiday film, a serviceable date movie, and even possibly something you can take the whole family to (ignore the R rating, trust me). It's breeziness is accompanied by the affable people in it. In scene after scene you sense that they deserve the utmost level of happiness. And that for me, is the reason why I recommend this motion picture so highly. If you cry easily during romantic comedies (this one is more like a dramedy) then bring a slew of handkerchiefs. To put it mildly, there is no doubt that About Time is a keeper. If you haven't seen it, it's "about time" you get to the multiplex!

-Written by Jesse Burleson

LAST VEGAS

Jesse's Rating: ★★ ½

Director: Jon Turteltaub

Year: 2013

Cast: Michael Douglas, Robert De Niro, Kevin Kline, Morgan Freeman

Genre: Comedy

MPAA Rating: PG-13

        About a week before viewing this uneven flick concerning the exploitation of senior citizens hosting a bachelor party (in Las Vegas, where else), I saw its four stars (check that, four Oscar winners) promoting their film on a high end news station (The TODAY Show I believe). They looked grumpy and didn't really want to be there. But I thought to myself, maybe these guys aren't too confident about the product they are selling and they're just you know, going through the motions. I don't blame them. Besides the fact that this exercise becomes a tad darker and deeper emotionally toward its conclusion (the trailer is misleading), it's still disposable and somewhat hard to sit through. Last Vegas (the film I'm reviewing and talking about) brings together actors Robert De Niro, Kevin Kline, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Douglas. These guys are all screen legends and there are two reasons why they might have decided to appear in this individualistic cringe fest. One reason could be that they had never been on screen before and the opportunity although mediocre, presented itself. Another reason could be that they got paid handsomely. Anyway you slice it, they dent their reputations as actors ever so slightly. In the end, I think that, considering each of their track records, it's commonplace that they'll probably recover. I did, as a critic, but only after "Vegas" was almost saved by a solemn, feasible second half. There is some moral cleansing between a father and son along with a believable love triangle that lends itself to a 58 year friendship. Yes, this movie boasts itself as a comedy. However, it fails as one with jokes that are bland, lightweight, and familiar. And the overall theme got annoying as well (they're old, we get it). The fact that Last Vegas changes gears (by becoming mildly dramatic) almost makes it recommendable. I heavily stress the "almost" part.

        Containing a scene which almost caused me to walk out of the multiplex (the four 70+ plus year olds judge a bikini contest poolside) and directed by a guy who furthered Nicolas Cage's action star career with the National Treasure movies, Last Vegas examines four best friends (since childhood) who have somewhat grown apart and live in different parts of the country. When Malibu hotshot Billy (played by slickster Michael Douglas who in almost everything he's in, has to get with a woman half his age) decides to get engaged, he calls his buddies to get together in Las Vegas for the typical male debauchery. Paddy (played by Robert De Niro who is in just about every movie out in 2013) is a widower who lives alone in New Jersey. Then there's Morgan Freeman's character Archie, who had a mild stroke and is being taken care of by his overbearing son. Finally, we have Florida resident Sam. He's played by Kevin Kline who with shades of his comedic brilliance in the past, gives the flick's strongest performance. Kline's character has been given the OK to cheat on his wife (by his wife) so he enthusiastically tags along.

  

        Last Vegas, despite what you might have heard from other critics, didn't remind me of The Hangover (not in the slightest expect for the whole location aspect). That film was outrageously funny and edgy. Plus, there isn't much of a sense of danger going on here like there was with the characters in The Hangover. "Vegas," with its automated sense of situational comedy, made me chuckle a couple of times here and there. But in a way, it wasn't that amusing because the jokes were constantly aimed at the adage of old age. The filmmakers seemed to want to shovel this notion down my throat. After a while, I was a little put off and felt internally bloated (no pun intended).

  

        Honestly, I can name a ton of films that are worse than Last Vegas. But there's gotta be something more challenging or more rewarding than this considering the talent involved. Its strong points: the title (Last Vegas just roles off the tongue, why not), the cast, and the somewhat interesting premise taken to task. Its weak points: the way this vehicle stereotypes people of a certain age, the jokes that fall flat more than 50% of the time, and the fact that all the funny parts happen to be in the trailer (I'm sure it was a blatant marketing tool to get people into the theater). So to end this review, I'll leave you, the moviegoer, with this piece of sage advice: if you choose to attend a showing of Last Vegas, make sure that it's not the "last" time you'll hit the theater in 2013 (that's a nice way of saying that there are other, better films out there).

-Written by Jesse Burleson

THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (1974)

Cole's Rating: ★★★

Jesse's Rating: ★★★★

Director: Tobe Hooper
Year: 1974
Cast: Marylin Burns, Edwin Neal, Allen Danziger
Genre: Horror
MPAA Rating: R

        When I discovered that my friend held, in his possession, a copy of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) I avidly begged him to borrow it. This is understandable, considering how the multiple media stores I visited over the Halloween month failed to provide a copy of the seemingly rare DVD. But alas, my friend came through (I lent him The Color of Money, we’ll chalk it up as a fair trade), and I got my hands on the classic horror film that “Did for meat-eating what Psycho did for shower taking”(Marylin Beck, Hollywood). 

When several young adults travel down south in a van to a destination that is apparently murky to them, they come across real trouble in an act of desperation: a family bound by incestuous and reasonably sick morals. One or two of them go missing in a hunt for gasoline, and, from then on, it becomes a helpless situation that feels palpably real.

To be sure, this film is terrifying. The situation that the protagonists are in is concocted so brilliantly that it, automatically, gets my recommendation. Concerning the plot, what anchors it down is the harshly unnecessary dark comedic element that left me with a bad aftertaste.

Beyond that, the structure of this 83 minute movie really perplexed me. Director Tobe Hooper filmed this motion picture rather subtly, dragging the viewer along for the first (dare I say) rather dull 30 or so minutes, which he spent setting up the inevitable. As for the climax, it’s absolutely effective. It’s horrifying and totally involving, but then, Hooper doesn’t wrap it up well either. It’s as if he didn’t want to do the film total justice. That’s what’s so confusing about “The Massacre”.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was remade in 2003, and I can’t tell you how happy I am about it. The original is no masterpiece, to put it lightly. It’s structured awkwardly, and doesn’t boast itself as much as it needed to. But the remake does. It’s directed steadily, it’s longer, more protracted, more real-life, more serious, and more detailed. Ultimately, it’s a better film. For the first time in horror history, I discovered why exactly horror flicks are remade. They’re (or at least this one’s) purpose is to expand, correct, and update. While I believe that the original is definitely a landmark in horror filmmaking, I think that it is faulted, and it was remade for good reason. To that, I say job well done, horror enthusiasts (this time).

-Written by Cole Pollyea

Jesse's Thoughts:  Brilliantly horrific, imitated but never duplicated, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre represents the purest form of terror known to any cinema buff. Thousands of countless ripoffs and average remakes have tried to capitalize on its success, but with minimal gore and a grainy, sadistic edge, the original 1974 "Chainsaw" is untouchable. The fact that an unknown director (Tobe Hooper), a cast of nobodies, and a shooting schedule in 100+ degree Texas heat could produce a horror flick light years ahead of its time is a miracle in itself. Give credit to actress Marilyn Burns who coined the term "scream queen" before Jamie Lee Curtis could even get her hands on it. Let me just put it right out there, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of the greatest films of all time. It will haunt you for days after you view it. Guaranteed.  

THE COUNSELOR

Jesse's Rating: ★★★

Director: Ridley Scott
Year: 2013
Cast: Michael Fassbender, Brad Pitt, Javier Bardem, Cameron Diaz

Genre: Crime/Drama/Thriller

MPAA Rating: R

        Every aspect of the 2013 release The Counselor (minus the philosophically damned script), tells you that this is a Ridley Scott film. If you enjoy the way he carefully directs by bringing scenes to a slow creep and then having things interrupted with an act or two of brutal violence, then this will satisfy you, the fan of said director. I have to say that, initially, I had become bored with the first 30 minutes or so of this slick, trashy (might as well throw in stylized) sort of two hour resembling of a cable TV drama (rated for mature audiences of course). It started off as pretentious and self indulgent. You have actors constantly engaging in conversations with each other that go on longer than needed. And the dialogue is all about the meaning of life and such. Therefore, I kept thinking to myself, why does everyone in this vehicle have to be so smart? Although the performances were substantial (with the exception of the continuously miscast Cameron Diaz), it seemed as though the script required almost all the cast members to be Socrates (the supposed founder of Western philosophy).

        Brought to life by rookie screenwriter Cormac McCarthy (his novices shows in his screenwriting even though he's a well accomplished novelist) and dedicated to Ridley Scott's brother (famed director Tony Scott) who committed suicide during filming, The Counselor examines a lawyer who, on the side, gets involved in drug dealings with the Mexican cartel. Hoping to get a huge return back and taking different angles of advice from a drug kingpin named Reiner (played with a goofy stature and an even goofier haircut, by Javier Bardem), "Counselor" (he has no name, this is what everybody calls him) eventually gets in way over his head. He is warned by a middleman named Westray (played by Scott veteran Brad Pitt) that such a deal might be the wrong path to be taken. Furthermore, it doesn't help that he puts his, I guess, pregnant wife (Laura played by Penelope Cruz) in harm's way throughout. Let me put it this way, I found myself more embroiled with "Counselor's" fate as every other character began to die off. I read a separate review that said this motion picture was sort of a dark neo-noir. By definition, neo-noir films deal with social ramifications so I guess that critic pretty much got it right.

        Anyway, if you can get past the gnawing characteristic of the aforementioned tainted screenplay, then you'll find that this movie barrels along by becoming more intriguing and more involving. You realize that Scott knows that there is a problem with the script (he didn't write it), but he decides to be in complete control of the camera anyway. He directs with confidence and funnels little nuggets here and there from his other movies, plastering them into this one. His cast is vast and diligent (a couple of cameos by some notable screen talents). He films sequences either from a long distance away or close up with two actors trading words in a small, claustrophobic space. Last but certainly not least, he puts a relatively unknown yet well seasoned Michael Fassbender in the lead role. Known in this flick as simply "The Counselor," he is able to carry the whole two hour running time quite well. He's in almost every frame (Fassbender looks a little like a young Jeremy Irons and has Ewan McGregor's manneristic smirk) and goes toe to toe with some big name actors (Brad Pitt) that seem to fade in and out of the proceedings. In the end, you don't quite know what the future has in store for him. But you get a sense that his character is the type of person who falls prey to the notion of bad things happening to not so bad people.

        All and all, The Counselor, as a movie, likes to leave little tracings of symbolism here and there (especially in the opening scene). Its intentions are to let you know that it has deeper interludes that extend far beyond the simple art of a drug deal. Yes, there are little flaws that are evident (some of the dialogue is borderline laughable and cringe worthy) but in the end, it still comes off as weirdly sophisticated. It's for the moviegoer who can hold his or her attention span and not harbor to all the disposable drivel that's thrown in year after year (stuff like remakes of classics which I've been ripping on since March). To be honest, I don't know if I would put this thing on my top ten list of 2013. However, it resonates with you minutes after you see it. And that's something I look for when I want to garner a recommendation. It also has the type of ending shot that I like where the camera focuses on a main character's face and goes suddenly to blackout (without any type of fading). With The Counselor, you get a mostly trademark Ridley Scott film and heck, usually he's incapable of making anything mediocre. Halfway into the second act when things get dangerous, Brad Pitt's character states, "I'd say it's pretty bad, then multiply it by ten." Yeah, I'd say this flick is not so bad, so I'll just give it three stars.

-Written by Jesse Burleson