Red State, a film by Kevin Smith

Red State (2011) is Kevin Smith’s first and only derivation from his View Akewniverse, and probably for good reason. Smith skillfully creates an authentic world filled with realism in violence and characters devoid of true white hats while successfully avoiding the heavy rambling dialogue of his prior work. And while the atmosphere, acting and mise-en-scene are superbly imparted, the film ultimately suffers as a soaking mess in terms of plot and structure.

Fascinating characters are the heart and soul of Red State. Smith seamlessly shifts the focus between central cast members without disrupting the plot. Minimal effort is required to reveal the rich inner lives of the characters (which is to be expected, given his prior work), even though there are “few redeeming characters” (filmmaker’s words).

Smith’s use of unknown actors lends gravity to the authenticity of the film, but this decision is a double-edged sword, making the introduction of famous actor John Goodman halfway through the film jarringly intrusive. Had his character been introduced at the 17 or 30 minute mark (or even as the protagonist) this could have been averted.

While Goodman’s performance proved to be one of the least interesting in the whole film, actor Michael Parks portrays his character with absolute brilliance. His performance is perfectly and fully realized, charismatic, and utterly entrancing, the true gem of the film.

While the director demonstrates his usual strength as a character-oriented storyteller he also describes his grave lack of ability in plot development. The story is handled clumsily, going out of its way to draw Waco parallels at the expense of an organic plot. In a failed attempt at richness, Smith fails to juggle multiple storylines, each being underdeveloped and poorly communicated, the confused cluster finally crashing into a smoking heap by the end. Other problems stem from this failure, such as numerous payoffs with no accompanying setups (including a key piece in the plot’s final moments), frivolous character deaths, and far too little much “telling” through monologues instead of “showing.”

In the end, this reviewer felt that the film should have been about the cult, not the outside interlopers. More material was to be gained by doing so and would provide the audience greater understanding of each faction in the film. As it is, even the title "Red State"is an ungainly play at immature political commentary.

Rating: 2 / 5

The Last Airbender, a film by M. Night Shyamalan

by James Gilmore

M. Night Shyamalan’s The Last Airbender is nothing short of a fiasco. Watching Airbender is like watching a group of kids play make believe on a $150m budget. Of its scant virtues are a solid midpoint with an interesting twist and beautiful cinematic scenery, neither of which are enough to save this film from ridicule and oblivion.

The plot is a series of anticlimactic events wherein few sources of conflict come to a head in a do-or-die confrontation. The acting lacks any sense of urgency, even at the most critical of moments, and most of the characters appear to have only a narrow range of emotions, most of which consist of being at the brink of bursting into tears at any given moment. Further exacerbating the problem, awkward, immature dialogue is almost exclusively expository and devoid of subtext, castrating every scene of any potential emotional fortitude. Although targeted to a younger audience this does not give the filmmaker an excuse to leave out basic elements of storytelling (contrast Airbender to any Pixar film and one can see the difference is not so much a disparity as a black gaping chasm).

For a director incapable of creating fast-moving action sequences to take on an action film is certainly laudable as a challenge to Night’s filmmaking abilities, but unfortunately the result is an abysmally failed experiment. While is directorial skills remain unquestioned, he should stop writing his own material and stay away from action-oriented films as his own style caters much better to the slow-moving sequences of his earlier works.

Perhaps the most fatal flaw of Airbender is its repeated penchant for “telling” the audience about the world of the film and hardly ever “showing” it. Most of the story is revealed through expository dialogue instead of showing the audience through visual imagery. He takes “show, don’t tell” to the polar opposite, telling the audience about the movie instead of actually illustrating it for us. The oddity is so extreme that one might think there wasn’t enough time/money to finish shooting these sequences, as in the climactic battle of the classical sword-and-sandal epic Cleopatra.

Through his restrained intensity and confident subtlety, Aasif Mandvi is the acting highlight of the film and just about the only positive element in it.

M. Night Shyamalan’s The Last Airbender is a fantasy epic that falls far short of its grandiose aspirations, ultimately coming across as a very expensive B movie (like his previous film, The Happening). It’s safe to say that we won’t be expecting any blood-pumping thrillers or teen heartthrob sensations out of Shyamalan anytime soon—or ever.

Rating: 1.5 / 5

Conan the Barbarian, a film by Marcus Nispel

By James Gilmore

Don’t go into Marcus Nispel’s Conan the Barbarian expecting an expert remake of the 1982 classic by John Milius.  You won’t get it.

The 2011 Conan is an action-soaked bonanza without any pretense at storytelling depth.  Nispel bombards our senses through an orgy of stylization and violence in an attempt to mask its slender content, but no amount of polished veneer can obscure the shallowness beneath.  The storytelling is clumsy and repetitive at best, hyper-extending itself to stretch a thin 60-minute perfunctory plot over two painstaking hours in an endless string of action vignettes in which the audience is whisked through time and space to a number of noncontiguous historical eras.

(Let’s not mention the fact that the acting and poorly written dialogue are enough to make you want to run for the hills.)

Visually, Conan is a gruesome mishmash of every other fantasy film ever made, numerous elements being ripped almost directly out of better, more fulfilling constituents of the genre (which shall remain unnamed).

As for the character Conan, he is barely a character at all.  Employing the oft-overused-in-Hollywood cliché as his template, this impetuous hot-headed central character is more an excuse to paste the screen with gore than a true protagonist.

The only accomplishment worth lauding Conan for is the duping of Hollywood into spending $70 million on what is essentially an expensive-looking B movie.  And Hollywood executives wonder why audiences won’t pay up at the box office to see piles of sugar-coated poo...

(Meanwhile, thousands of excellent scripts waste away on shelves, unread.)

So if you’re up to stuffing a handful of dollar bills down the garbage disposal or want to watch actors don ridiculous costumes and douse each other in fake blood for an evening, pick up a copy of Marcus Nispel’s Conan the Barbarian.  If you are a fan of his kitschy horror resume then you will probably take this bloated little number in stride.

Otherwise, see aforementioned garbage disposal.

Rating:  1.5 / 5

Eight Hundred Leagues on the Amazon, a novel by Jules Verne

By James Gilmore

Among the great works of literature by Jules Verne are such classics as Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, A Journey to the Center of the Earth, Around the World in Eighty Days and The Mysterious Island.  What you will not find nested among those works is a novel called Eight Hundred Leagues on the Amazon (La Jangada is the original title)—and for good reason.  One wouldn’t be so surprised at the quality (or lack thereof) of the novel had it been Jules Verne’s first attempt at the craft, but it mystifyingly appears at the very heart of his career alongside the greats.

Despite pretense of adventure, 800 Leagues is for all intents and purposes a family melodrama with only trace amounts of “adventure.”  The novel is a dull read and hardly believable.  Sorely lack in conflict, the text is often insultingly redundant, the author reiterating known facts in such a fashion that the reader can’t help but feel like he is trying to fill space in a balloon filled with hot hair.  This effectively reduces the pacing of the novel to that of a dying snail.  The linear, predictable story submarines the uneventful plot with rare exception.  Any changes in the story occur entirely by means of deus ex machinae, which leaves the hands of the characters out of events almost entirely, save one or two instances, scuttling their raison d'être.

Overshadowing the weak dramatic impact of the book is the fact that it reads like a pedantic love letter to the Amazon River, like a wan excuse to wax poetic about this illustrious body of moving water.  Although informative, it reduces the novel’s literary value to a mere historical survey of Amazonian river tribes who would cease to exist a century later.

The characters in the novel tend to be shallow in depth and over dramatic.  The antagonist is the most interesting and compelling of the cast.  Unfortunately, his presence is minimal.

Despite some interesting tangents concerning facts about the Amazon River and a few florid descriptions, the novel is thin, flat, artificially contrived and obvious.

A caution to all who tread here: Eight Hundred Leagues on the Amazon is Jules Verne’s worst.  Despite a 5-star rating (from 2 reviews) on Amazon.com at the time of this writing, place this novel on your list of “books to avoid at all costs.”  Feel free to sample the free Kindle book (if you dare).

Rating: 1.5 / 5

Exterminating Angels (Les anges exterminateurs), a "Quickie" review of the film by Jean-Claude Brisseau

by James Gilmore

Exterminating Angels (Les anges exterminateurs) by Jean-Claude Brisseau should have been a short film.  Bloated with too many shenanigans and not enough story, the film contains all the elements of a deep story but fails to take the necessary steps required to achieve its goal or to adequately explore its thematic material.  In short, it doesn’t provide a qualitative, coherent examination of the subject matter.

Not to downplay the surrealism of E.A., but many of the film’s elements are completely superfluous while the plot is not as solid as it needs to be.  Instead, it seems to act as a vehicle to justify extended scenes of sexual indulgence.

Brisseau makes an attempt at unraveling the ambiguity of sexuality and sexual love, but the result is shallow despite its proposed depth and, if anything, comes across as simply old-fashioned.  One can’t help but feel like the filmmaker thought he was being clever while sending a personal message of defiance directed toward his critics.  However, the result is incoherent and superficial.

Rating:  2 / 5

Iron Man 2, "Quickie" Review of a film by Jon Favreau

by James Gilmore

Tony Stark's character is well-rounded, but the others are cardboard.

Rating: 2 / 5

I Love You, Man, a film John Hamburg

by James Gilmore

Too many shenanigans, not enough story (common problem in feature comedies).  While Paul Rudd is extremely likeable, he does not have the presence or ability to carry the success of an entire feature on his back.  Great concept, adequate execution, some funny bits, but otherwise not worth the time.

2 / 5

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, a film by David Yates

by James Gilmore

In what should have been one of the greatest climaxes of modern film, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 falls very short of its mark.  While Part 1 transforms the worst segment of the Potter novel series into the greatest film of the series, Part 2 manages to insult the best portion of the novel series with nearly the worst filmic experience in the series.  The film is not without a few traces of remarkable moments, but nothing more than a trace.

It is perplexing how director David Yates and screenwriter Steve Kloves managed to create such a remarkable Part 1 and a pathetically deflated Part 2.  Part 2’s story somehow lacks the robust emotional presence, subtle character, the visual acuity, and skillful storytelling of Part 1.  The writing barely suffices to tell the plot of the story and proves completely insufficient to do anything more.  It lack the thematic material warranted by such an epic series conclusion.  Despite the intensely emotional situations involved in the story, every scene feels drained of emotional power, and is frequently absent altogether.

The main characters are robbed of their greatest gems, especially Snape, Hermione and Ron, all of whom receive little to no actual development on screen although they are ever present in the background.   Snape, for whom Part 2 is the apex of his character, is completely blunted as a character by the writing and direction to point that the incredible twist associated with his character is treated as a mere afterthought.  The loveable secondary characters are used liked doilies, thrown into the story whenever required but serving little to no purpose except to have a few minutes of face time before they are again forgotten.  The death of the Weasley brother, a moment of intense catharsis for the audience, is glossed over like the death of a background extra.  Only Narcissa Malfoy and Neville Longbottom are given any character work worthy of remembering.

Quite deadly to the film is its ending, or lack thereof.  Although there is a cute “years later” scene to conclude Part 2, the real conclusion which precedes it is barely a conclusion at all, consisting mostly of the main characters walking around with vacant stares.

Somehow, Daniel Radcliffe managed to break through the stunted storytelling to illustrate his grown maturity as an actor.

Overall, Part 2 feels unfinished, unsatisfactory and rushed, as if irreverently composed of mostly B-footage.

 

Rating: 3 / 5

Strange As This Weather Has Been, a literary novel by Ann Pancake

by James Gilmore

Aside from being slammed in the face with a sledgehammer labeled "Mountaintop removal mining is BAD" every paragraph, Strange As This Weather Has Been delivers strikingly eloquent characters and prose with unparalleled craftsmanship.

Many elements illustrate or elaborate the themes in the novel quite well while far too many seem to serve no other purpose than redundant milieu. For those who relish character work and language this is the book for you, but general readership will find it a work of willpower as they struggle to overcome breathtaking boredom due to a near-complete lack of forward story progress.

Although an enviously gifted writer, Pancake should consider serious outlining before writing her next novel or stick to her specialty: literary short stories about Appalachia.

Rating: 2 / 5