The Devil's Double

This is interesting. Since our last post we have discovered another Back Row Critics. They cleverly added a hyphen to their URL and a number to their twitter account. But otherwise it is a couple of guys writing reviews about movies. How spectacularly original. I'll admit, their blog is slightly more advanced than ours, and for that I say good job.

Today's movie is The Devil's Double, directed by Lee Tamahori and starring Dominic Cooper as both Uday Saddam Hussein (that's Saddam's son) and Latif Yahia, the guy hired(?) to be his body double.

Netflix: All signs point to 'yes'

Pick: Markury Poisoning

Mark:  So I guess to start, one thing needs to be addressed about this movie.  If you go into this thinking “I’m gonna learn something about the life of Uday Hussein and it’ll be neat”, just stop and delete that thought.  This is a very much fictionalized and dramatized account of Uday Hussein’s life.  Not only that, but many people have questioned the legitimacy of Latif Yahia’s claims that he was Uday’s double.

Now, speaking purely about the film's story, I thought it was very entertaining, driven by a very solid performance by Dominic Cooper in the dual role of Uday and Latif.  He handles the insanity of Uday and the stoic nature of Latif very well, though I thought he was much more engaging as Uday.  So much of this looks at the glitz and gluttony of Uday’s life and how Latif and his beliefs are juxtaposed against it.

Dylan: I’m on the fence about this one. It had some positives, but I couldn’t help get bogged down by the negatives. Maybe I sort of fell for what you mentioned there about expecting too much historical fact, but it seemed to me that Uday’s general craziness was pushed to the laughable. And I didn’t see the point in that. They wanted to illustrate how disturbingly evil and insane this guy is. Some of the shit he did in real life was more horrific than anything he did in the movie. I wish they had taken the character to a much (and more realistic) darker place, which would have made Latif's torment more believable. Instead Uday drags Latif to parties and refuses to let him leave.

However, to some extent, the theme of Uday basically wanting a clone of himself to hang out and possibly have sex with, because he is that narcissistic, and how Latif realizes and deals with this, is pretty interesting.

Mark: I agree with you.  It wasn’t until I read about the fictionalized nature of the movie, did I look back on the movie and find those over the top moments with Uday more entertaining.  The story paints Uday as just an unhinged individual, but he seems more violently awkward than evil.  Only once did I really see the evil of Uday and that was with the girl he picked off the street coming from school.  Short of that, he was a violent cartoon character.  I just thought Cooper did a good job taking that role where the director wanted him to go.  And speaking of the director, Lee Tamahori isn’t what I’d call a good director.  The man who brought us such cinematic classics as XXX: State of the Union and Die Another Day should not have been behind the camera for this one.  He focused on the exaggerated lifestyle of Uday and how out of place Latif is.  For a movie about a body double, there was very little of it.

Dylan:  True. And for the entire movie, Latif was introduced as Uday’s brother. Only at the end did he actually have to impersonate Uday and give a speech. I too thought that was weird and kind of silly. I think the real issue is that the themes were spoken instead of shown. It’s like what every high school english teacher says: “show, don’t tell.” That dude tells Latif at the beginning that the man Latif Yahia is dead and that he is now Uday Saddam Hussein (though I'll point out again that for the entire movie he was introduced not as Uday, but as his brother, and Uday continued to call him Latif). And so I wanted more of Latif struggling with his identity, and loss thereof. But I wasn’t really sold on the inner turmoil of his situation. Also, I would’ve liked to understand more about what Uday represented to Iraq. I guess I’m not an expert on that era of history. And we are told by that poor girl’s father that Uday is an embarrassment and a crappy leader -- and yea, I could have guessed that from his actions -- but I would have preferred a better explanation of how Iraq was suffering because of him.

Mark: And the movie seemed to want to create fake conflict when there was enough in the setting and characters to begin with that they didn’t use.  Sarrab, Uday’s booty call/escort/lady friend, was completely useless to the plot and served as just sexual tension between Uday and Latif.  Tamahori really seemed to just want to focus on the sexual and violent aspect of Uday instead of the far more interesting social/political tension that comes with him.  And I agree about Latif and his lack of real turmoil.  He never really seems like he’s trapped.  I mean, he is, but he’s more than willing to die to escape.  If we saw more of him being forced to play Uday and face the threat of assassination while him, we’d see more resentment and hatred from Latif, which ultimately would have created a better dynamic between the two.  And I know I sound like I’m backtracking on what I said at the beginning, but I still enjoyed this movie, for all the faults of the story, or rather what could have been a better story.

Dylan: I agree about the woman. The dynamic between Uday and Latif had so much potential, which was squandered when the conflict boiled down to the standard love triangle. It was a lazy plot device. And the whole last 15 minutes of the movie (with the exception of the very last scene) completely destroyed the tension that was building. She became an important character because the movie needed her to and that was that. Question: I realize this is based on Latif’s life story, but does the film itself come from a book, do you know?

Mark: It is based on Latif’s books about the time he spent as the body double.  Though the movie clearly says that it’s a dramatized version of that history.  A history, as I pointed out, that has been questioned and in some ways disproved.

Dylan: Yea, I was just wondering. The whole time I was watching it, it felt like more of a book than a movie. Even if it was partially fictionalized.

Mark: The movie feels distant; like it’s afraid to touch the very delicate issues and darker tones, and rather sticks with the standard affair of violence and sex.  And the ending did kind of bug me.  If people hated him so much, why wouldn’t it have happened before?  Even if the people were more afraid of retribution from his father, why couldn’t an enemy of the state have been able to do it?  The real tension was Latif being trapped by Uday, but then the end just deflates that completely.

Dylan: I will say that some of the visuals are nice. Something about pools and swanky clothes in the desert. I don’t know. But it was shot fairly well.

Mark:  Yeah, if there’s one thing Tamahori can do, it’s create very entertaining visuals and for what he was going for -- the glitz and extravagance of Uday and the world he seems to inhabit -- he did very well.

Dylan: ...I’m afraid I’m running out of things to talk about already. What other points you got?

Mark:  It’s funny how we go from real heady films like Cosmopolis and Holy Motors that get so much out of us to something that we can dissect thoroughly and quickly.  It’s nice.  And not much else.  Just to finish I’ll still say I recommend this.  It was, for all it’s flaws in what it could have done to be much better, an entertaining movie.  Once you get that this isn’t a history lesson, Dominic Cooper’s portrayal of Uday Hussein as an over the top cartoon psycho is fun.  And there are more than a few really engaging scenes throughout to keep you going.  At least there were for me.

Dylan: Is Dominic Cooper in anything else?

Mark:  Howard Stark in Captain America.

Dylan: Oh it’s THAT guy! Oh okay, interesting.

Anyways, yea I guess I would recommend this one. Maybe. Though maybe it would be better with a drink or two.

Mark: Yeah, it’d probably go better with some drinks.  But, how about a little trivia to end it off?  Now, this'll be hard cause it’s not really about movies, but I feel this has to be brought up.  Lee Tamahori was arrested in 2006.  Take a guess as to what his crime was.

Dylan: XXX: State of the Union?

Mark: Haha, he should’ve, really.  But alas, no.  He was in fact arrested for allegedly offering an undercover cop oral sex.  While dressed as a woman.

Dylan: That. Is. Brilliant.

------------------------------------------------------------------

So, in retrospect, the title of this movie is pretty misleading. But not as misleading as the blurb on the cover: "what do you get a 'prince' that has everything?" What is it, his birthday? Maybe you can't answer that, because you haven't seen the movie. Spoiler alert: It's not his birthday. That question really doesn't apply to the movie at all.

Anyways, fear not, summer is quickly approaching. And with it comes blockbuster movie season. So if you're starting to get bored with us jawing on and on about movies you've never heard of, you just wait. Soon we'll be talking about movies that absolutely everyone already knows everything about. Starting, mostly likely, with Iron Man 3. Get your towels ready.

Holy Motors

Usually you see a film and right away you know 1) if you enjoyed it, and 2) if you'd bother seeing it again. Once in awhile you get a movie that you sit through, and afterwards you just go "okay" and go to bed. But the next morning that movie is playing again, in your mind, whether you like it or not. And next thing you know, it's all you can think about. Because somewhere deep down is a whisper telling you that you missed something. That the puzzle of a movie, which seemed to make very little sense at first, actually has a solution somewhere under the surface.

I would say Holy Motors is that type of movie. It is a film by French director Leos Carax.

Netflix: Yes

Pick: Darjeeling Tea

Dylan: How strange is it that we happen upon another film about a guy driving around in a limousine, so soon after doing Cosmopolis?

Mark:  Pretty fucking strange.  And we did not plan that, this is purely by chance.

Dylan: I picked this movie pretty much because I thought the cover looked cool. I had no idea it would (seemingly) be about a guy being driven around Paris, assuming the identities of different...people, over the course of a single day. Needless to say, there are going to be many comparisons to Cosmopolis, so get ready. And if you’re still not intrigued, let me throw a few things at you: murder, alien sex, Eva Mendes.

Mark:  I’m on the fence with this one.  I’ve had some time to mull it over, really let it sink in.  And it hasn’t really gotten less blurry.  Not so much the overall concept of the movie; what with it being about a man who takes on the personas of several different people and does really kind of bizarre things, but rather, it comes down to the why.  I have no idea what the point of it all was.  Without having read anything I wouldn’t know what Leos Carax was trying to do.

Dylan: Well, first I would like to point out -- and I hope this isn’t a spoiler -- that this movie is a fantasy. And maybe it will help to view it that way when you go into it. Because even though there are parts where you think “okay, this is pretty unlikely for real life”, the actual rules of reality aren’t tossed out the window until more than halfway through the movie. And I’m thinking that if I had started it out with different expectations, I would have gotten more out of it. Where I stand now, I am still not sure what to say about it. I enjoyed it. But I am struggling to decode the hidden messages.

Mark: I think that right there is the real sticking point with me: if I started with different expectations.  I had no idea what this was about beyond some guy in a limo with odd things happening.  Then things took a turn into the bizarre and it lost me.  This movie tells you nothing in terms of the characters, who they are, or why any of this is happening.  And it wasn’t so much that I wasn’t being told this, but rather that there were so many different answers that could be right, but the movie refused to tell me which were and which weren’t.  I don’t know if he’s taking on these personas because he’s been paid to act as certain people for people, or if he’s actually doing scenes from movies since he is acting these roles out, or if he’s just a fucking nutter.  You just go along for the ride.

Dylan: Well part of that is the fantasy of it. You see that he reviews a file before donning each costume, and there is that guy there that you assume is some sort of employer. At the end you realize that there are other people like this; some sort of network of people -- perhaps all over the world (since the other woman speaks English) -- whose job it is to be other people. Are they ACTUALLY the other people or are they playing a role? I don’t know. The first scenario that really made this clear for me out was when he was the dying uncle, and then after he ‘passed away’, he got up right in front of the bereft niece and walked away. She wasn’t shocked. It was all part of some sort of natural act. So I don’t know. Is this a commentary on humanity? The soul? Maybe, I’m still working on that. But there is also the role of the old Russian beggar, which really seems to serve no purpose.

Mark:  

So why are they doing this?  I had assumed that he was fulfilling roles for people.  Hired to pick up the daughter and act as a father for her.  Hired, when I first saw this, to be the dying uncle so the woman could grieve, assuming she didn’t get the chance.  But then we find out the woman is also in a persona.  My point is it just adds to the overall confusion.  I do actually think this is playing on perception in some way.  We’re witnessing events that we know are being acted out and planned, but everyone else doesn't know that.  Or do they?  Fuck, I need a drink.

Dylan: Well, his character is clearly not human. Right? I mean, we see him putting on costumes and makeup and we get the impression that this is just some guy. But then we see things that just aren’t possible. So what is he, an angel, a fucking wizard? I think when you try to find an answer to ALL the questions, you get lost. The key is to pick and choose how you want to understand, in order to take away from it what you want/can. I mean, I sort of thought I had it down, and then there was that last scene, which threw me way off. I guess it’s frustrating to not have a solid answer. But it reminds of that map from Pirates of the Caribbean 3 (not that I'm saying that movie isn't even remotely similar to this one. This is just what comes to mind); you can rearrange the different pieces in order to show different maps and messages. There’s more than one solution, but you can’t have them all at once. Know what I’m saying?

Mark:  No, I understand you.  And let’s not bring up that final scene, cause that both infuriates me and confuses me at the same time.  And I guess that’s true, trying to focus in on everything that could be happening will lead to nothing.  And I didn’t think he wasn’t human, I just didn’t know where the line between reality and fantasy was and how much was being blurred as we went along.  There is a scene where everything starts getting blurred together as the limo moves forward.  I really think this is when we kinda realize that what’s real and what’s fantasy doesn’t matter, cause we’re not gonna know.  But just to jump off the meta narrative confusion, I really thought this was shot well, with a lot of interesting shots throughout the movie.  The best for me, which was also really confusing in and of itself, was the musical interlude.  Out of the blue, our lead suddenly takes up the accordion and begins playing as more people join in.  It’s all done in one take and is a really interestingly set-up scene.

Dylan: Oh yea, I forgot about that scene. And yea...that scene. What is the point? How does it fit into the rest of...oh god, forget it. But that also reminds me of those short bits of black and white movie footage. I’m not really sure what the purpose was there. Oh -- now things are coming back to me -- I am also trying to figure out the whole opening scene, and more importantly, why he asks the limo driver if there’ll be any appointments in the woods today. Dammit, I want to know what this movie is about!! It’s brilliant but lazy! ...Just like Spider-Man. Anyways, I’m going to re-watch that opening couple of minutes right now. In the meantime, you talk...

Mark: Look, I could go on and on about the narrative and what it’s trying to accomplish.  And I think in retrospect, that has kind of changed my view on the movie.  I still kinda hate it for having an up-it’s-own-ass narrative, but the fact that I can see so many angles of the movie and what each moment might be trying to do puts it in a better light for me.  It requires you to pay attention without focusing on it too hard or you’ll miss the broader strokes.  But focus too lightly, and you’ll miss the finer details.  Some really interesting scenes coupled with a confusing -- though not impenetrable, like Cosmopolis -- narrative leaves me saying I’d recommend this if you want something to discuss.  And I can guarantee it’s like nothing you’ve seen before.  So there’s that.  Let’s see if he’s back now...

Dylan: Okay, yea, just rewatched the first bit. It starts with a snippet of silent film, followed by a theater audience that seems to be asleep. And then the director wakes up in a hotel room, pushes through a wall with forest-themed wallpaper and winds up in the same theater. Enter a couple dogs and a child, and that’s the scene. And that’s why the forest comment halfway through the movie stuck out to me. Ah, whatever. The difference I see between this movie and Cosmopolis is that this movie makes me want to think more about it. Whereas Cosmopolis lost me five minutes in, and then never even attempted to get me back, this film managed to fascinate me. I just...can’t...say...why. So yea, I recommend it for people like me, who want a puzzle of a movie that they can chew over for a while. It’s also a movie that I would be willing to watch again, and I intend to browse the web for other people’s interpretations.

Mark:  I think I’d be willing to watch again with more people around, so I can stop and turn to someone and say “what the fuck was that about?”

Dylan: I mean, I sat through Beyond the Black Rainbow, and who knows what that 69 minute acid trip was about?

Mark: I sat through Versus and that’s a yakuza/zombie/wizard/prison escape/samurai/magical/kung-fu/post-apocalyptic bonanza of confusion.

Dylan: You make that sound like a bad thing.

------------------------------------------------------------

As you have probably already figured out, at the time I write my little intros and conclusions, the conversation between Mark and I has already been recorded. Since all that, I have scoured the web for a better understanding of this movie. And it wasn't very difficult to find one. Those guys at Fader went one step farther than we did and actually identified some of the patterns that Mark and I couldn't quite wrap our minds around. Now I definitely want to watch the movie again.

Our next film will be The Devil's Double, which, given the cover, I assume is a spin-off story about Goldfinger's son. And on that note, "why don't we take a five minute break. Smoke if ya got 'em."

The Raid: Redemption

Another day, another film. The process by which we picked this title is opposite to how we picked Cosmopolis; rather than a movie neither of us had seen or heard much about, we chose a movie we have both seen and know pretty well. This movie may be tough to get your hands on, since it's a foreign film and not on Netflix, but if you can find a way, watch it.

Netflix: No

Pick: Witch King of Angmark

Mark: I’m pretty biased.  I’ve seen this movie a bunch of times.  Hell, I own it.  For me, this represents what most Hollywood action films can’t do.  They try, but nothing really hits the frenetic, brutal, real action that The Raid does almost effortlessly.

Dylan: Oh yes. This movie definitely delivers something you will not find in Hollywood these days. Or ever. And orchestrated so fluidly and creatively. I’m not even sure where to start. So let me get my thoughts together while I write this refresher. A Detachment 88 Special Police squad (the Indonesian equivalent to a SWAT team) storms an apartment building ruled over by a vicious crime boss, with the intention of stealthily moving upward, floor by floor, capturing certain known criminals and eventually the head honcho. But when they get spotted by accident, the alarm is raised, and the building comes alive with vicious, murderous bad guys out to eradicate our heroes. Their exits are all cut off, and they realize the only way to go is up. Commence the brutal ass kickings!

And it’s the martial arts that really makes this movie stand out. It’s not your typical Jackie Chan or Jet Li movie. No quick camera shots, no playful, prancing choreography, and no ridiculous prop manipulation. I don't really know how to describe martial arts movies, but suffice it to say that you have not seen anything like this before. Literally. The fighting style they use is very rare, and noticeably unique. The intricacy of the choreography, the dynamic cinematography (despite all being shot in rundown rooms and dark hallways, and the long relentless shots of hand-to-hand-to-foot-to-knee-to-elbow-to-head-to-chair-to-refrigerator-to-machete combat that goes on and on...it’s just breathtaking. I mean, violence aside, this movie is incredibly and relentlessly physical.

Mark: To add to his breathless enthusiasm for all the fighting, what makes it all so much greater is the fact that most of the actors involved are all trained in their respective fighting styles.  And I don’t mean “they took some training classes before the film”; I mean Iko Uwais (who plays the lead, Rama) is a renowned Pencak Silat fighter and Joe Taslim (who plays Jaka) is a gold medal-winning Judo champion.  That’s just naming a few.  What I’m saying is that these men know what they’re doing and because of the way Gareth Evans directs his films, they’re being as physical as possible before someone actually gets killed.  So the brutal hits, the speed of their fists, and just the overall combat feels so much more real and this draws you in further.  And for me, the best part is that there are almost no jump shots or quick edits during the fights.  No, we see everything.  We watch them chase down enemies and watch in one fluid shot the fists and feet find their home in someone's face or stomach, or anywhere.

Dylan: It’s true. And so unique and unusual for this genre of film that you are literally out of breath by the time Rama takes out a dozen guys with machetes. Even he has to sit down before stumbling to the next hallway full of thugs. And for the most part, it is believable. He doesn’t just Judo chop each one at a time and they fall down stone dead. You can see and feel the fighter’s exhaustion as he tries to keep up his parries and kicks. He’s down. He’s up. He’s down. There are a few times when you can tell by looking at the characters' eyes that they are concentrating to remember their choreography. But I really can't hold that against them. It's either that or suffer, at the very least, a concussion.

Mark:  And we’re not even mentioning what happens when a knife or baton comes into play.  Christ, the brutality goes up a couple notches then.  But it all stays within the fluid fighting set in the movie and only adds to the adrenaline.

Dylan: And I guess I use the word ‘believable’ lightly. At some point, all of the bones in this guy’s body would be mush. You can only smash your shin against so many parts of other people’s bodies before it just gets numb and swollen. And yet that speak to the realism of the fighting. It’s not pretty, it’s not slowed down, and it’s not edited. These are actual martial arts champions pushing their bodies to the absolute limit. Again, I’ll mention the choreography, which is not only brilliant, but fun too. My favorite bit is when the bad guy jumps through a hole in the floor, but before he even touches the ground, another guy, running full speed on the floor below, tosses him out a window. It’s just like “holy shit!” And it's all one shot, perfectly timed, so that the guy above falls right into the another guy's arms and out the window.

Mark: That was a beautiful moment.  It showcases how real it sets out to feel.  The guy doesn’t drop down and have a cheesy one liner or people exclaim at his arrival.  Nope, one of the cops notices he’s coming down and tosses him out before he gets the chance to kill anyone else.  You really feel for the cops as all the killers begin closing in on them and things become more and more desperate.  Things go from bad to “we’re screwed” quickly and we as the audience are left with the same sense of dread as all of them.  But I will agree that while I love the fighting, there are a few moments when you’d have to think the guy’s bones would be powder at this point.  There’s one fight which is amazingly choreographed and brutal, but towards the end, you get the feeling that they shouldn’t even be able to breathe, let alone stand.

But, while we’ve been talking forever about the fighting, which is reason enough to watch this, I want to say that while the acting isn’t exactly amazing, it does a good job giving you an emotional context for some characters.

Dylan: I thought the acting was impressive, all things considered. I mean, I don’t speak Indonesian (in fact, we watched it with dubbing), but I thought the acting was enough to create every necessary dramatic point. Rama and his brother, the head SWAT guy’s desire for revenge, and the crime lord’s subtle craziness. And I’m sure you want to talk about the bloody violence. So go ahead.

Mark: It’s violent.  I mean, people get punched to hell, but the real beauty of it is that Evans doesn’t shy away at showing us the hell they’re all in.  Rama stabs a guy in the throat in the middle of a fight, but we watch the guy stagger away, grasping for his neck.  Another guy struggles as someone holds his head down and brings the gun up to his temple.  It all adds to the realistic feel of the movie.  Sure, it’s balanced out to a point by watching Rama beat down a hallway full of machete-wielding berserkers, but he doesn’t do it with a smile on his face.  Rama is scared and forced to do this.  It’s entertaining as hell, but keeps the tone and seriousness throughout.  Something that would almost seem impossible in modern films; to be serious but fun at the same time.

Dylan: You mentioned earlier that Hollywood can’t make this kind of movie. And I mentioned in my Dredd post how it is basically the American version of this movie. I think one statement proves the other. Dredd is a bigger, louder, more special FX-driven Raid. Not only is the plot identical, but whole scenes are virtually the same, only instead of gunfire we get head-spinning kicks and punches. I think that may be the closest Hollywood could get to making The Raid and still have it be mildly enjoyable. (Though, I could be proven wrong, since an American version of The Raid is apparently in production.)

Mark: Dredd is exactly that.  I guess when I said that Hollywood can’t make it, I meant with a film that balances seriousness and balls-to-the-wall entertainment as well as with fluid fighting throughout.  Dredd is entertaining, but it's over-the-top action hilarity and a hell of a lot of gunplay.  And I have no faith in the American remake.  What makes The Raid brilliant is, like I said, that the actors know the fighting styles and are giving their all throughout.  It won’t be the same with some beefed up Hollywood action guy trying to accomplish the same thing.  Leave me with Evans’ sequel Berandal, that’s all I need.

And just a little mention, I enjoyed the music that went with it.  It has an interesting kinda techno vibe to it, but it works at adding to the tension at points.  And fueling the adrenaline.  And if you’re wondering, it’s scored by Joe Trapanese (he worked on the Tron: Legacy score with Daft Punk) and Mike Shinoda (of Linkin Park fame).

So, basically, after this avalanche of praise and love, we’re basically trying to tell you to go watch this movie.  It’s got action you won’t see in most American movies and it’ll keep your adrenaline pumping throughout.

Dylan: ANY American movie. And seriously, I am so desensitized to American action shoot-em-up bullshit that there is no adrenaline rush there at all. And yet this movie does something so different and intense that it really is a benchmark for the genre, and it certainly kept me wide-eyed for an hour and a half.

Mark: Perfectly said.  But now, cause it’s my thing and fuck it, I’m gonna do it, trivia.  First one, before Iko Uwais got the role in Merantau, what was he?  An Indonesian porn star?  A driver for a Telecom company?  Or just a plain old action guy?

Dylan: I’m gonna go with Indonesian porn star. And side note, for those of who aren't confident in our ability to prescribe good movies, Merantau, another film by Gareth Evans, starring Iko Uwais, and featuring great martial arts actions, is right on Netflix. You can watch it as a warm-up to The Raid.

Mark:  ...ok.  Well the right answer is: driver for a telecom company.  When Gareth Evans was working on a Silat documentary, he met Iko in his Silat school and after talking with him, saw the potential in him for his movie.

But one more.  And I guess this would only be for those who’ve watched the film.  For those who haven’t, this will just show you how serious the fighting is in the production of the movie.  Which one of these characters (I’d say the actors, but that would get confusing) is also the choreographer for the movie itself?  Rama?  Mad Dog?  Jaka?  That dude with the glasses?

Dylan: Mad Dog.

Mark: Half right, cause I lied.  It’s actually Mad Dog and Rama.  Iko Uwais and Yayan Ruhian (Mad Dog) helped to choreograph the fights in this movie with Gareth Evans, and they will continue to do so in the sequel.

Dylan: Sweet. I will definitely be looking for that to come out. In conclusion, this is a great movie. You should see it. You. Yea, I mean YOU. Sitting there on your nice leather chair, eating your nasty chips. Go watch the movie. Ya son of a bitch. It's fantastic. All it’s missing is Karl Urban’s chin.

-----------------------------------------------------

Go watch The Raid. Before the U.S. version comes out and ruins it. You will not regret it. And then go watch Dredd and laugh at how similar they are. And then go to a tall building and see how long it takes you to get to the top. Whether or not you attempt to fight everyone on the way up is your choice.

"I would cut off your head, Dwarf, if it stood but a little higher from the ground." That there is a Karl Urban Chin quote. And speaking of dwarves, our next film will have absolutely no dwarves in it. At least I assume it doesn't; I haven't seen it. It's called Holy Motors. Like Cosmopolis, neither of us have seen or really know what it's about. But it doesn't feature Robert Pattinson, so it's already ahead of the game.

Sushi Girl

So I came across this movie a long while ago, but before I got a chance to watch it, it vanished.  So from then on, it was always lingering in my thoughts.  It sounded absurd, but just my kinda absurd.  A man, after spending six years in jail for a failed robbery, is released.  He finds himself at a sushi restaurant, with the four other members of the robbery who he had remained silent about.  But they all want to know what happened to the loot he was carrying when it all went to hell.  All the while this is happening, the sushi girl, who has been trained remain like a stone for the customers... need I go on?  So obviously I've been keeping my eye out for this movie to show up again.  Yeah I know I could probably find it online, but that's asking a lot of me and my internet is kinda crap.  But then it happened.  It showed up on Netflix.  So I settled in, cracked open a cold one, and hit play.

Netflix: Oh yeah
Reviewer: Hattori Marko

Seriously?  How could you pass up something with this as a poster?

So I know I cut out of the plot there, but really, if you've seen Reservoir Dogs, it's not too far from that.  But don't take that as an insult to the movie.  There's enough going on in Sushi Girl to give it it's own character and make it unique.  But the one thing is that it does revolve around the aftermath of a robbery gone wrong.  Just several years after the fact instead of right after.  And the other thing is that a majority of the movie surrounds the torture of Fish (Noah Hathaway), the man who just got out of prison.  Since he was the bagman during the robbery, obviously he'd know where the money went.  But this is when the story begins to twist and turn a bit, keeping you engaged and wondering what the fuck is happening.  You will wonder that at time, but like I said, you'll stay engaged.

I said torture above.  I said a lot of things, but the 271st word was torture and that's what I'd like to talk about.  Know how in Reservoir Dogs it was just Mr. Orange torturing the cop?  Well in this turns into a sadistic game of who can get him to talk first between Crow (Mark Hamill) and Max (Andy Mackenzie).  As the anger grows within the group at the table overseeing the torture, so to does the brutality of the torture.  It throws you really; the violence begins rather tame (at least for me) and then moves rather jarringly to bloody violent.  And we see characters crack and we see characters turn into monsters.  And that's what I found most engaging, with the characters reacting and acting with the violence.

And now a little bit on the acting.  Boom, flawless segue right there.  But really, it was a grab bag of acting all throughout the movie.  Not including the side characters, who're all pretty forgettable, the main cast is, for the most part, good.  Tony Todd, as the leader Duke, is always entertaining.  His impossibly deep voice is incredibly chilling, added with the fact his character is one of the more sadistic.  James Duval plays Francis, who they attempt to add a character arc to, what with him having a kid now, but he's just not as engaging as he should be.  Noah Hathaway really just sits there, says the odd line and screams from pain, which he does unnervingly well.  Andy Mackenzie just kinda growls through his lines, since his role is just to be very violent and unhinged.  But I know what you're waiting for.  I said his name up above.  Mark Hamill.

I don't know why I decided to go to another paragraph, but I did.  Delaying for tension I guess.  Mark Hamill is the reason I became so intrigued with this movie, since it seems way out of his wheelhouse.  But he did not disappoint, and even when the movie itself lagged, he was the reason I kept going with it.  He plays way over the top with Crow, being both hilarious and brutal throughout.  Crow is the over-enthusiastic torturer of the group, and Hamill plays it with gleeful abandon.  And while some of the dialogue can be stilted, it comes alive when Hamill goes off or when he's arguing with someone, which happens quite a bit.  It's like he's the live action version of any of the characters he's voiced over the years.  And what's more with the characters is that for the first 20 odd minutes, we just watch as all of the men come to the restaurant.  We watch them interact and reveal certain character traits and where each of their relationships lie with one another.  It does a great job setting them all up and making sure we know who they are before the blood starts spilling and the bullets start flying.  And that does a lot for the engagement of the viewer for the rest of the movie.

So in the end, I'd want you to sit down and give it a go.  The story might not be framed all the originally, since it's just a retreading of Reservoir Dogs, but it makes up for that with unique characters and a, for the most part, twisty and violent story.  Some character may be less enthralling than others, but they keep you going, all the way up to the very interesting ending, one I don't want to give away.  It's on Netflix, it's short and to the bloody point and it's good with a bunch of drinks.  Do it.

4/10

Cosmopolis

Cosmopolis. A city inhabited by people from many different countries. I had to look it up to see if it was a real word. Anyways, if the title of this post is any indication, today we talk about Cosmopolis, a movie you almost definitely have never heard of. But don't feel too bad about that, it just came out last year. It stars Robert Pattinson, Paul Giamatti, and a handfull of other relative nobodies.

Netflix: Did Han shoot first?

Pick: Markum X

Dylan: I do not like movies that make me feel stupid. And this one kind of did that. I am debating whether or not to do some research, review the plot on wikipedia, etc., to see if I missed something. Put honestly, I don’t feel I should have to do that. Some movies ask for it, like Prometheus, which I had to get a few other opinions on before I fully understood it. But this one just didn’t grab me enough to make me want to look deeper. Maybe your insight will be enough to change my mind.

Mark: Well sorry to disappoint, but I don’t think there’s anything deeper than what it tries to present to us.

Dylan: “tries” being the key word here.

Mark: Key word with flashing neon lights.  I really wanted to like this movie.  I like the author whose book this is based on.

Dylan: Ah. Who’s that?

Mark: Don DeLillo.  But having read some things of his, I had my fears for the movie, because his writings require more imagination from the readers, and in book form his writing can be more allegorical without having to have anything concrete to come back to.  A movie has to overcome the challenge of grounding his thoughts in reality.  And while some things worked, some things were lost in it’s own words.  And I agree with you, I don’t like to feel stupid when watching something.  And this movie spoke above and beyond me, but I felt there was nothing behind any of it.

Dylan: See, that’s the thing. All of the dialogue is philosophical. And we are never really introduced to the characters. And for the most part, we’re not supposed to be. Aside from Robert Pattinson’s character (and I guess his head of security, too) all other characters come and go and are never seen again. So we are forced to follow this stranger -- whose thoughts and speech aren’t even remotely relatable -- as he drives around Manhattan for one day. Not to mention the weird stuff going on outside of the limo, which is never really explained, including people running around throwing dead rats at each other.

But wait, before we move on, let me just put in a quick synopsis. Robert Pattinson plays Packer, a very rich young man. But he has reason to believe someone is out to kill him. In the back of a limo, he talks to various individuals about his life, his failing financial situation, and...his prostate. ...does that about sum it up?

Mark: Yeah, I mean, it’s a shit ton wordier than that, but it comes down to that.  And while it does take place in Manhattan, it was shot in Toronto.  From what I read, very obviously so.

But, I agree; that we start at the beginning of Packer’s day and from there we run through the gamut of people he knows and are connected with him in some way.  But it happens without any context for us, and while I usually like films that proceed like a “normal” day for a character, those usually create context; this does not.  We don’t even get a lot of time with some characters.  I didn’t realize one of the women was his art dealer; I just assumed he spoke a lot to this one, as I thought, prostitute.  I was wrong.  But I felt as though that was on the film for not illustrating that better.  But at least, the things going on outside are explained, a little bit.  He’s working his way across town, dealing with traffic created by a Presidential visit, a rapper’s funeral, and an anti-capitalist protest/riot.  The rat people relate back to them.  And sometimes the films explains it.  I understand the point behind the protests, I just wish I didn’t have to tune out the movie to figure it out.

Dylan: Ha, I also assumed she was a prostitute at first. Well, since it took place in New York and there were protesters, I thought for a second that it was somehow Occupy Wall Street-based. And then I thought about The Dark Knight Rises and how it the plot there is weakly inspired by that whole thing too. All the way down to the conversation between Packer and Paul Giamatti’s character at the end, which I saw as perhaps a better alternative to the DKR scene in which Bruce Wayne goes to Selina Kyle’s apartment. Anyways, I digress, and don’t get me wrong, DKR is a much better film. However, one piece of praise I have -- and I really hate myself for saying this -- is that Robert Pattinson was actually pretty good. He memorized his lines and everything! Granted, he had to play a pale, emotionless, dimensionless character. But that suits him, I suppose.

Mark: I’m gonna be a little kinder to him.  I also thought he was good.  Packer is supposed to represent, at least, since you brought up the Occupy Wall Street factor, the 1%.  And he did it well; really playing up the cold-blooded nature of Packer.  This is a man who’s reached such astounding financial heights at such a young age that he has no idea what the real world is like anymore.  And even though it does come off as lifeless, I think that’s exactly what is needed.  But in the same breath, when Giamatti comes into play, Pattinson is completely overshadowed.  You see the difference in their acting strength.

Dylan: Yea, true. Giamatti...I like him, but he hasn’t really done anything spectacular lately. That I know of. What did you think of his role? And the entire ending for that matter?

Mark: Well the role he plays is supposed to be the polar opposite of Packer.  At least I saw it that way.  Packer tries to see every little thing possible, to the most excruciating detail, which in a way leads to his downfall.  While Giamatti’s character is focused on the bigger picture.  His way of thinking is antiquated in the eyes of the people in power.  So while their dialogue was near impossible to comprehend, what I could make out made sense to me.  So the end scenes worked as a way to frame it all together for Packer.  However, the very end just lost me.  It just leaves us.

Dylan: I mean I can’t say I was invested enough in the characters to really care how it ended. So the cliffhanger there didn’t really work on me. I think Packer at that point had a major deathwish, so he probably wanted to die. I don’t know.

Anyways, I am ready for my final thoughts. You?

Mark: Yeah.  My last thing is just I thought Cronenberg did a good job with the directing, making the limo feel like a larger-than-life area, to fit with the character of Packer.  But really this is nowhere near the great directing Cronenberg’s done in the past.  But, as you can tell, while there were some good points, I wouldn’t really recommend this.  If you’re a Don DeLillo fan and want to see his words made into a movie, then that’s the only reason I’d say watch this.  Other than that, nothing stands out enough for me to tell anyone to see it.

Dylan: Yea, I was thinking something similar. If you are a huge David Cronenberg fan, or maybe if you’re like doing a project on him for a film class and want a movie that you can put a ton of thought into and basically get as much out of it as your imagination will allow, then here you go. But if you want to be entertained, don’t bother.

Mark:  Alright, I can give you two trivia questions.  First, who was first contracted to play Packer before Pattinson got the role? Hint: He recently starred in a remake with Bryan Cranston.

Dylan: Colin Farrel? Ferrill? Ferrel?

Mark:  Ding ding ding, we have a winner.  Yes, he actually left this film to go work on that one.  (That one being Total Recall.)

Dylan: My first ever correct trivia answer.

Mark:  I might keep doing hints, since some of these require impossible knowledge.  Now the next question: how long did it take Cronenberg to write the screenplay?

Dylan: Umm, the same amount of time it takes him to take a dump.

Mark:  Apparently that would be 6 days.

Dylan: Hey, we’ve all been there.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow, the first movie we both agreed is kind of shitty. This brings into question the very title of this section of the blog, "Good Movie Reviews". I suppose I could change it. I originally just made up "Good Movie Reviews" and "Bad Movie Reviews". But the latter got changed to "Drunken Critic Recap". Now I got a section that promises good titles, and a shitty movie that I don't know what to do with. But if I change it, then I gotta retag all the other ones, and switch some settings so that the new tag is displayed and the old one isn't and ugh, all that clicking and typing, no thanks. In theory I suppose we could just not put up movies we think are bad. But then again, I'd hate for someone to go and watch Cosmopolis and hate it and then blame us for not warning them against it.

Alas, it is a quandary. Is it weird if I say I'd rather watch Viggo Mortensen naked wrestle two hitmen in a sauna than watch this movie again?

(That, of course, is a reference to the movie Eastern Promises, also directed by David Cronenberg. Try to keep up.)

Our next movie will be The Raid: Redemption. It's a good'n. Go watch it. Or don't. What do I know? I'll tell ya, "I don't know nothin' 'bout birthin' babies." And if you can figure out how THAT quote connects to this movie, man, you're good.

Dredd

Mark and I had a fun, movie-filled weekend. So over the next few days you'll be getting a number of reviews, some good and some...well hey, this is the Drunken Critic Recap section, is it not?

For those of you who don't know, Dredd (technically titled Dredd 3D, though I prefer Mark's idea of calling it Dreddd) came out last summer around the same time as Looper, and has a disturbingly similar setting (dystopian future in which some people have mutant powers). It is a remake/reboot for the Judge Dredd character that was first adapted for the screen by Sylvester Stallone in the 1995. This one stars Karl Urban as Dredd, Olivia Thirlby as his partner Anderson, and Lena Headey (Cersei from Game of Thrones) as the villain Ma-Ma.

Netflix: 'fraid not
Viewer: Down the Hatch

For your basic shoot-em-up sci-fi movie, I found Dredd to be quite enjoyable. First of all, the movie has the exact same plot as The Raid. And if you haven't heard of The Raid, fear not, that is one of the other movies Mark and I watched this weekend and will be discussing later this week. The idea is: there is this skyscraper with like 200 stories, filled with poor, degenerate drug dealers, drug users, and just lousy people that we don't mind seeing vaporized by big guns. On the top floor is the drug kingpin, Ma-Ma. On the bottom floor is the badass one-of-a-kind future cop, Judge Dredd (and his partner). When Dredd decides to take on Ma-Ma all on his own (with his partner), she goes over the loudspeaker and tells the residents that there is a reward for whoever eliminates the judges. And...let the games begin.

There are a lot of these movies that just turn out being awful. If you want an example, go read my review on Equilibrium. And the original Judge Dredd was just idiotic. But this one, while not offering anything in the way of interesting character development or edge-of-your-seat plot twists, certainly delivers what it promises: action and violence. It even added some neat FX we haven't seen before, in the form of the side effects of the new drug Ma-Ma hs been pushing, called Slo-Mo, which makes the user see the world at 1/100 its normal speed. This makes for a few interesting scenes where Dredd bursts in on a bunch of users and takes them apart in severe slow-motion gory detail.

Of course, with this genre of film, there are a few plot holes. For example, his partner is a mutant with telepathic abilities. At one point she uses her powers to mentally torture a criminal into giving up information. So clearly she is quite powerful. However, later on, when she is captured and comes face to face with Ma-Ma, she never uses her ability to escape or kill the villain. Also, the Judges are terrible at their jobs. In the opening scene, Dredd is chasing down a van full of drug addicts armed with automatic weapons. During the chase they run over a few pedestrians, and then flee the vehicle, killing innocent bystanders left and right. All because Dredd decided to open fire on their van on the middle of the highway instead of following them or calling for backup or something.

All in all, Dredd does not require a lot of thought. But it still manages to be a fun movie. The title character is the stone-cold invincible cop, somewhere between Batman and Robocop, and his partner is a gorgeous blonde trainee. This, combined with the senseless violence and lack of a story make it a must-see guy movie. I definitely recommend it.

Beer scale: 2/10 Really no beer is necessary, but it is a great movie to drink to.