Author: Alton Williams

Bad Lieutenant ****

Another film to arrive in my cinema late – bad film distributor. Though Bad Lieutenant (or to quote its full title as released in the states The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call – New Orleans) shares its name with the 1992 film directed by Abel Ferrara and starring Harvey Keitel, and has been even been called a remake on several occasions, director Werner Herzog has made it clear that this film is not intended to be a remake of the 1992 film, Herzog never having even seen it. This is something that is reflected in the change of setting from New York to New Orleans and the somewhat different nature of the central character, although, remake or not, both this film and the 1992 one are clearly connected to the basic idea of following a drug addled and violent cop facing encounters with crime and sex. So, comparisons to the original are probably unfair and unjust (not a problem, I haven’t seen it yet anyway) and the film should be taken entirely on its own merits, of which it has plenty.

Terence McDonagh (Nicolas Cage) is a New Orleans police lieutenant with a reputation for courage. When he suffers an injury while rescuing a drowning man, McDonagh is forced to take prescription painkillers to keep himself functioning. Caught in a nightmarish downward spiral of addiction, McDonagh becomes a rogue detective, relentlessly devoted to scoring drugs while playing fast and loose with the law. Stalking his ruined city in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, McDonagh now thinks nothing of shaking down criminals for drugs and money. As his increasingly reckless behaviour leads him into the realm of a murderous gang boss, McDonagh’s life is complicated further by Frankie (Eva Mendes), a woman as compromised as he is. Can these two damaged souls find redemption together, or will the dark road they’re on lead only to death?

Bad Lieutenant manages to clearly distinguish itself from the many other cop movies that have been made over the years, with director Werner Herzog wisely avoiding all the clichés that plague the genre. Together with screenwriter William M. Finkelstein, he has made a film that, firstly, places the focus entirely on the central character rather than the case he is investigating, and, secondly, is based around a character that doesn’t conform to the much seen stereotypes that have become extremely repetitive. The central character here – one that cannot be described as either protagonist or antagonist, instead being somewhere in between – is not exactly a corrupt cop but he isn’t a good one either, being a very morally ambiguous individual, the kind of character whom we can both love and hate, cheer for and feel sorry for and still completely believe as a credible realistic anti-hero type person. Of course, none of this would count for much without the right actor but in Nicolas Cage they have the perfect person for the part. In recent years, Cage has often wasted his acting talents in films completely beneath him, where he was more a performer than a serious actor and many have begun to doubt his abilities as an actor as a result, but his performance here should set aside any doubts you may have. Following an impressive performance as Big Daddy in Kick-Ass, Cage is once again superb, delivering what is without a doubt one of his finest and most powerful performances to date. He plays the role with a fiery intensity, easily shifting between damaged and broken individual struggling with the physical pain of his injury while going about his increasingly difficult job and borderline psychotic madman whose drug addictions are starting to take over his life, and his natural on-screen charisma means that his performance is every bit as charming as it is convincing. We really can feel his character’s pain and completely believe the manner in which he descends into a complete psychopath at times. The supporting cast is also strong but it is Cage who the film truly belongs to. The film’ success isn’t entirely attributable to Cage, of course, but also to Herzog, whose low tech cinematography proves to be a great asset to this film, as opposed to the hindrance it can be in some cases. As the camera moves around the devastated post-Katrina New Orleans – which looks completely authentic and makes a great change from the much overseen locations of New York – the handheld shaky camera style creates a sense of raw realism, almost as if we are watching live footage, and helps to create a sense of the troubled environment in which the central character is living and working. Some of the low tech camera work could very well seem amateurish in the wrong hands but Herzog effectively and stylishly applies it in the hallucinations scenes to create a sense of the disorientation and confusion that the character is feeling. If the film is far from perfect, however, it’s because, for all its strengths, it is occasionally quite hard to watch, the plot doesn’t flow as well as it could and the final pay-off fails to be entirely satisfying. These are only minor gripes though and Bad Lieutenant is a film that is worth seeing for Nicolas Cage’s performance alone.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

Letters to Juliet ****½

Director Gary Winick is no stranger to the romantic comedy genre, having previously directed both 2004’s 13 Going On 30 and 2009’s Bride Wars, and now he is adding another romantic comedy to his resume in the form of Letters to Juliet, the second romance film to star Amanda Seyfried this year after the Nicholas Sparks adaptation Dear John, although this time with her in the leading role rather than a too little seen supporting role. Winick’s track record to date in the romcom genre, though, is very hit and miss. Of his two previous romcom directorial efforts, the former, while hardly being an original film, proved a truly delightful slice of Hollywood escapist fluff, the kind of film that was undeniably clichéd but made it work in its favour, being superbly romantic and full of charm and warmth (and a personal favourite of this critic). The latter, however, was one of the first of the recent slate of Hollywood romantic comedies to completely miss the mark. In its case any clichés present were not translated into the warmth of the former but rather bogged the film down. The big mistake, though, and one that has been repeated in a number of romantic comedies during the last year, was the failure to deliver on the romantic aspect of being a romantic comedy, the film not actually being about romance at all but rather a petty rivalry between two brides that was difficult to actually care about. Suffice to say, the film was very poor. Letters to Juliet has provided an opportunity for Winick to put the mediocrity of Bride Wars behind him and return to the success of 13 Going On 30 but does he achieve this and avoid creating yet another dire Hollywood romantic comedy?

Sophie (Amanda Seyfried), a young American writer, travels to Verona in Italy – the city where Romeo met Juliet. Here she finds a wall where heartbroken lovers leave letters to Juliet asking her advice in matters of the heart. Meeting a group of volunteers who respond to the letters, Sophie finds and replies to a letter that has been lost for 50 years. This inspires its author Claire (Vanessa Redgrave) to travel to Italy and find her long-lost soul mate, Lorenzo (Franco Nero). Claire’s grandson Charlie (Christopher Egan) isn’t too happy about this, but Sophie asks Claire if she can join her on the search. Together with Charlie, the two women set off in a red Fiat to hunt for Lorenzo. Meanwhile, as Sophie’s relationship with her boyfriend (Gael Garcia Bernal) hits a rocky patch, she begins to have feelings for the handsome Charlie.

More a romantic drama than a romantic comedy, Letters to Juliet works so well because director Gary Winick, along with screenwriters Jose Rivera and Tim Sullivan, place the emphasis purely on romance as opposed to the lame gags that have been the focus or many romantic comedies in the last year. Sure, the film is sugary and fluffy, not to mention being very predictable and featuring its fair share of clichés (as is generally the case with most Hollywood romances) but the vein of sweetness that runs through the film ensures that romance fans won’t care about these things. The film is unashamedly romantic from start (the opening credits play over a montage of images of romances from throughout history) to finish and the beautiful Italian settings make for a perfect romantic backdrop. Also, we actually get two love stories for the price of one – that of Claire and that of Sophie – making this a film that will be appreciated by viewers both young and old. Of course, the film does portray an idealistic rather than outright realistic view of love and romance, one that may be too saccharine for less sentimental moviegoers, but delightful performances from both Amanda Seyfried and Vanessa Redgrave, and charming performances from Christopher Egan and Franco Nero make for a film that is simply a delight to sit through. The on-screen chemistries work well, us never doubting that Redgrave and Nero’s characters truly belong together, and Seyfried and Egan developing a warm chemistry as the film progresses, even if the speed in which they go from a hate-hate style dynamic to being in love with one another does stretch believability a bit. Such chemistry is not present between Seyfried and Gael Garcia Bernal, although this is clearly deliberate as from the outset their characters are obviously not destined to end up together. So, all in all, Letters to Juliet is a heartwarming and enchanting romance that will make you believe that true love really can exist. Sure, it may not be one of the most original romance movies to come out of Hollywood but it is undoubtedly one of the genuinely romantic in some time. Gary Winick (for Bride Wars) all is forgiven.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

The Back-Up Plan *

Arriving in my local cinema unusually late – a full month after it was first released in cinemas across the UK – The Back-Up Plan sees Jennifer Lopez not only returning to the romantic comedy genre for the first time since she starred in Monster In Law back in 2005 but also to mainstream Hollywood cinema for the first time in about as many years. As projects to mark a return to screen acting go, however, she could have done a lot better than The Back-Up Plan. Having already largely run its course in both the US and the UK, the film’s performance at the box office has been less than stellar, falling far short of her past successes in the romcom genre, and general word of mouth has been average at best. But, given that recent romantic comedies out of Hollywood have also been hugely underwhelming does The Back-Up Plan at least establish itself as a viable back-up plan in the case that there are no better options available for anyone wanting to see a decent romantic comedy?

For Zoe (Jennifer Lopez), waiting for the right man is taking too long. Determined to become a mother, she decides to go it alone. Then, on the day of her artificial insemination, Zoe meets Stan (Alex O’Loughlin), a new man with real possibilities. But trying to nurture a budding relationship while concealing the early signs of pregnancy becomes a comedy of errors for Zoe and creates plenty of confusing signals for Stan. Understandably nervous about revealing the reason for her unpredictable behaviour, when Zoe finally tells Stan about her pregnancy, he does the decent thing and fully commits to his new partner and her baby bump. A series of comedy misadventures ensues as the couple try to get their heads around falling in love, getting married and having a baby – but not necessarily in that order!

The concept for The Back-Up Plan is not one without potential. After all, a similar concept has already been done and successfully so in the 2008 Tina Fey comedy Baby Mama. However, while the concept does indeed have potential, this film fails to deliver on any of it. The main culprits for this are director Alan Poul and screenwriter Kate Angelo, both of whom make their cinematic debuts with this film, their only experience to date being on television (the film is produced by television network turned film studio CBS Films, which goes some way to explain why they have been given the job of doing this film) and whose inexperience really ruins this film. The decision to start the film with an animated sequence is horrifically misjudged, the sequence being cheesy and corny and failing to fit in with all that follows but this is a minor flaw compared to what is yet to come. Simply put, both the writing and the direction are dire, the story meandering from one scene to the next, so much so that it feels more like a succession of scenes strung together rather than a well constructed narrative and the film’s attempts at raising laughs amount to little more than lame physical gags, wordplay, sexual innuendos and borderline gross out humour, none of which actually manages to raise the laughs it is supposed to. Only an old folks wedding sequence towards the end raises any titters of laughter but by this point you will likely have given up on the film. It doesn’t help that the acting isn’t up to much either. While Jennifer Lopez is reasonably entertaining in her role she is far from her best and she completely lacks chemistry with co-star Alex O’Loughlin, who, seemingly cast for his hunky good looks rather than acting ability, is bland and charmless for the most part, proving to be a very weak romantic interest. Other performers, meanwhile, such as Eric Christian Olsen, Anthony Anderson, Michaela Watkins and Noureen DeWulf, Tom Bosley and Linda Lavin are just wasted. So, overall, The Back-Up Plan is an extremely poorly made romantic comedy that I wouldn’t even recommend as a back-up plan in case the film you really want to see is sold out.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

Brooklyn’s Finest **

As movie clichés go, the New York cop movie is perhaps one of the biggest. It is so easy to make a cop movie set in New York City but actually making one that is original or innovative is actually pretty difficult, this being something that has become more evident in some of the more recent NYC cop thrillers to come out of Hollywood, the best example perhaps being 2008’s Pride and Glory, a film which certainly had the credentials to be a great film but fell victim to its lack of innovation or fresh ideas. And the latest cop thriller set in the Big Apple, sadly, isn’t much different. While Brooklyn’s Finest is directed by Antoine Fuqua, who won much acclaim for his 2002 film Training Day and apparently signed on to direct this film because he was impressed by the script, it is a film every bit as cliché riddled as many cop thrillers before it.

Three doomed New York cops working in the city’s most dangerous precinct are each striving to conquer their personal demons. Tango (Don Cheadle) is a dedicated officer trapped in a deep undercover assignment where he’s losing his identity and being forced to implicate his best friend Caz (Wesley Snipes). Sal (Ethan Hawke) is a loyal husband struggling to provide for his growing family and tempted by the drug money seized by the department. Eddie (Richard Gere) is an unstable and depressed loner on the verge of retirement, having to mentor a rookie graduate fresh from the academy. The three are never destined to meet but each find themselves on a similar path to self destruction as their lives lead them towards fateful encounters with their inner demons.

It is really hard to see exactly what it was about the script for Brooklyn’s Finest that attracted director Antoine Fuqua as this is yet another New York City cop movie with little to distinguish it from the countless others that have come before it. Screenwriter Michael C. Martin deploys virtually every cop movie cliché and convention in the book and, unless this is the first such cop film you have ever seen, you will most likely have seen it all before and much better. Of course, an over reliance on cliché might not pose too much of a problem if Martin at least created an interesting plot out of it all or provided some fresh spin but, alas, such things are not to be found here. A long winded and largely uninteresting plot based around three separate stories that barely even cross paths with one another, let alone interconnect or come together in the end, makes for a film that just seems lifeless and dull for the most part, failing to really engage the attention or show any sign that Martin has genuine screenwriting talent. Being a New Yorker himself, Martin does at least manage to deliver dialogue that sounds true to life but even then he fails to provide any particularly memorable lines. What’s more, the characters largely conform to classic two dimensional stereotypes – undercover cop struggling to reconcile his cover with his real life, family man struggling to support his family and tempted towards corruption and embittered veteran cop just biding the time until he can retire – only being granted that all important extra dimension courtesy of intense performances from the film’s four principal actors. This is the one area where the film does deliver something of value. All four of the film’s leads are very good in their roles, putting in genuine grit and emotion, and delivering performances far better than this film really deserves and making it just about watchable. Sadly, though, there is little else positive that can be said about this film as even Fuqua’s work here proves to be very underwhelming, him managing to create a sense of raw, gritty realism but failing to show any visual flair that could make this into something more than what it is – generic, by the numbers and immediately forgettable, not only lacking in originality but also edge. As cop movies go, Brooklyn’s Finest is not among the finest that New York has to offer.

—————————————————————————————————————————————

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)