Act of Valor, a film by Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh

By James Gilmore

Act of Valor is a ballad of the unsung heroic deeds of Navy SEALs in clandestine operations.

Although neatly structured the film feels less like a coherent story than a series of military reenactments with a few specks of story spliced in between action sequences. Valor is generously laden with fan service for military aficionados, but at times the ultra realistic use of military jargon crosses the line from necessity to extraneous masturbation. Action sequences deliver impressive intensity and speed while skillful POV camerawork immerses the audience inside each mission, lending a sort of video game feel to the advancement of the plot.

The acting is as wooden as it gets and not just in terms of line delivery—no surprise, considering the principal characters are played by real Navy SEALs and not professional actors. Unfortunately this means that emotional tangibility with the main characters is difficult to establish, even with the repeated use of artificial filmic constructs employed to build personal empathy.

Actor Jason Cottle’s uncanny intensity makes his performance stand out among the cast.

If Act of Valor teaches us anything, it’s that “actual” does not equal “dramatic.” For a stellar example of how dramatizing reality improves its filmic qualities, see Seal Team Six: The Raid on Osama bin Laden. In spite of its painful dialogue and feeble plot, Act of Valor is a realistic, tense experience that military and action enthusiasts will love.

Rating: 3 / 5

Argo, a film by Ben Affleck

By James Gilmore

Ben Affleck’s Argo takes a clumsy script and transforms it into a seat-riveting filmic experience.  He and his skillful editors successfully impress artificial tension upon the audience in spite of the script’s many shortcomings.  Script problems magnify when translated to the big screen, and such issues become very evident as characters reveal their lives to each other in standalone cutaway scenes that serve no plot purpose.  Affleck’s protagonist character, Tony Mendez, is poorly written, making him too weak and impotent in comparison to his fellow cast members.

The audience will feel a sudden jolt as they are thrust into and out of a tongue-in-cheek Hollywood sequence that is not in keeping with the tone of the rest of the film, and ultimately comes across as a series of inside jokes among Hollywood types more than a cohesive story segment.  The final confrontation between protagonists and antagonists proves to be the most artificial construct of all, where editing alone creates the tension, not the clash of goal and obstacle, desire and counter-desire.

In short, Ben Affleck should quit acting and direct full-time, but he needs to learn to push the script to a final polish before jumping into making the film itself.  With such spectacular directing talent it is a waste to not use equally judicious judgment in finishing the screenplay, as is evident in both Argo and his feature film directorial debut, Gone Baby Gone.  Still, audiences eagerly await his next work.

Rating: 3.5 / 5

1632, an alternative history novel by Eric Flint

By James Gilmore

Eric Flint’s 1632 is an alternative history science fiction novel about a small town in present day West Virginia that is suddenly transported back in time to Germany during the devastating Thirty Years’ War in the year 1632.  At its heart, 1632 is a romantic view of classic American ideals clashing with and conquering those of the oppressed, war-torn 17th century continental Europe, pushing normal small town folk into extraordinary circumstances.

Eric Flint executes the unusual and exceptionally difficult premise with marvelous ease and methodical reasoning, exploring the promise of the premise with detailed thoroughness.  Despite reviews which misleadingly describe the book as “action packed”  1632 is mostly a relationship-oriented piece with a few periods of intense action counterpointed against extended laconic sections of blossoming romance.

The plentiful characters populating the novel surprise the reader with their variance, color, and very human likeability, which makes the exploration their relationships a pleasure, even if the story does get bogged down in a disproportionate amount of romance during the second act.  The large cast prevents great depth in character development.  Regardless, it’s obvious to the reader that Flint is an author who genuinely loves his characters.

One of the greatest shortcomings of 1632 is its failure to live up to the high stakes generated by the premise.  Main characters have things pretty easy and rarely (if ever) actually lose anything of value, while any obstacles that do arise are circumvented without great difficulty.  Greater challenges and higher stakes conflict are needed in a world where innumerable dangers lurk in the shadows.  Unfortunately, the dangers threaten but seldom actually emerge from the periphery.

Eric Flint’s 1632 may be an acquired taste for most, but don’t hesitate to pick up a copy if you are in the mood for something new, unique and quasi-historical.

Rating:  3.5 / 5

The Fighter, a film by David O. Russell

by James Gilmore

The Fighter is not so much a story about one boxer trying to make his way in the world as a story in which every character is a scrappy fighter in their own respect, each trying to achieve his or her dream in a gritty, realistic world bristling with testosterone and raw emotion, unstained by the airbrushing of Hollywood gloss.

This modern day Cinderella story appears to be about boxing on the surface, an inspiring underdog story about a man who literally never quits.  But in truth the film is much, much more.  The pseudo-documentary style and directing create an unglamorous world which examines poverty, family, loyalty, love and, of course, boxing, all with a humanistic eye.  At the core of the film’s strength is its impressively detailed peek into the complexities of family and family politics.

Acting performances in the film deliver an array of raw emotion in a steady one-two of jabs and thrusts without the forceful injection of artificial drama, while its bold, aggressive characters allow Amy Adams and Christian Bale to thrive in their best acting roles to date—an impressive achievement considering both actors’ extensive experience.

The Fighter, obviously more a labor of love than a labor of money, proves itself to not only be one of the best boxing films ever made, but one of the greatest family dramas of all time.

  

Rating:  5 / 5

Ironclad, a film by Jonathan English

by James Gilmore

In my first random pick for review, I selected a film I’d never heard of based on its cast of superb actors.

Ironclad is an exciting action film with a rich, gritty palette and bravely executed combat scenes filled with gore and glory.  Well-designed, efficiently made for its modest budget, but I wouldn’t say well-directed.  ‘Adequate’ is more appropriate.  The film lacks requisite directorial intimacy in pivotal scenes while exposition is handled more like a dialogue-heavy Shakespeare stage play than a filmic story with keen visual moments.  However, the director excels in presenting intense battle scenes—the highlight of the film—much to the viewer’s benefit.

This Westernized remake of Kurasawa’s Seven Samurai has a rocky 30 minute start, after which it drastically—thankfully—improves with steady progression for the remainder of the film.  Unfortunately, Ironclad pales in comparison to the stability, complexity or thematic material inherent in Kurasawa’s version.

While it is refreshing to see Paul Giamatti play the villain and, in juxtaposition, Brian Cox as a good guy (their roles are usually reversed), the protagonist (played by James Purefoy) remains inexorably weak.  Without any sense of the proactive goal-seeking or depth required to drive the story, the first act feels directionless and unhinged.  Unfortunately, the protagonist’s deficiencies never correct themselves.  Every character ends up having more depth than and goal-orientation than the protagonist, who presents himself as the classic reactive type, acted upon instead of pro-acting to advance the plot.  His only element of character turns out to be an artificial construct which neither enhances nor develops the story.  Purefoy portrays his character just as weakly, like a beaten dog who tries to shrink into invisibility in order to avoid further beatings.  He is a non-character, and the weakest link at the core of story.

Despite its shortcomings, Ironclad is worth a look if you are in the mood for a superficial action film and aren’t afraid of a little graphic violence.

Rating: 2 / 5