The Iron Lady is one of those flashback retellings of a life that is just a little too constructed and non-contextual for my taste. We meet Maggie Thatcher in her last days as she is suffering from dementia and wandering around talking to her dead husband (Jim Broadbent). As she putters around the house alternately dealing with her many handlers, her grown daughter, and the ghost of Mr. Thatcher, she looks back over her political life, and her rise to become the first and only female Prime Minister of England. She begins as a very working class girl, the proverbial shopkeeper’s daughter who gets into Oxford and then scratches her way into the male dominated political field and all the way to the top. Along the way, she marries and has twins, but mostly they are peripheral. The conspicuously missing piece is what drove this woman and what was really happening around her. Why were they rioting in the streets? Why did she hate unions? What was it about the Falklands that was worth having hundreds of young men die? I think this may be one of those scripts that assumes the audience knows the history. (We Yanks did not.)

There is a scene near the end where she is so over-the-top horrible to one of her long-time political allies that she turns the whole party against her, but we don’t know why. Was it the early onset of dementia or was she drinking? Or maybe she was just a bitch? The film has lots of little moments that don’t quite make sense. You also have no sense of what is historic fact and what is total fiction. I think there is probably a great story to be told about Thatcher. Sure, I hated her politics, but she was charismatic and intelligent enough to make it to the top despite her class and her sex, and to stand among the most powerful people of her time. Sadly, The Iron Lady does not do her justice. Meryl aside, I’d skip it.

As of this writing Meryl Streep has been nominated all over the place and won the Golden Globe for her performance.

The assassination took place just as the bloody Civil War was winding down, and so the Northern sentiment was still strongly anti-Rebel and a battlefield mentality still prevailed. With Lincoln dead, Secretary of War Stanton (Kevin Kline) stepped into the power vacuum and decided that the trial should be in a military court with the outcome pretty much predetermined by a community reeling from the death of the President.  “Revenge,” as her lawyer puts it, “not justice.”  Surratt ran a boardinghouse, where John Wilkes Booth and the others met to plan the murder.  Surratt’s son was a part of the conspiracy but escaped, and so the film suggests, they were using her to get to him.

Aiken is a young Union officer, just back from the fighting, and returning to his law practice, when his boss lays the job of defending “the traitor” in his lap.  He doesn’t want to have anything to do with it, but comes to see that she is probably innocent, and that the powers that be are not interested in the truth, only in “getting this behind us.”  In fact, it was this case that forced the government to mandate civilian trials for non-combatants.

It is an interesting and little-known story, but The Conspirator suffers from a script that is a way too thinly veiled and heavy-handed political allegory.  Think Gitmo and Arab-Americans in post-9/11 America. I’m all for nice political dramas, but the “hammer over your head” approach just doesn’t do it for me.  Despite wonderful casting, the characters are mainly one-dimensional and the script totally lacking in nuance.  We all know Redford can direct a wonderful movie (Ordinary People), but he totally misses the mark on this one.

(An interesting footnote at the end tells us that after Aiken left the law, he went on to become the first editor in chief at The Washington Post.)

The trailer promised a light-hearted chick flick. But it took less than ten minutes for most everyone at the relatively small press screening  to realize that we’d all been hoodwinked. As a romantic comedy, it was neither romantic nor funny.

Here’s the gist: Anna Faris plays Ally Darling, a promiscuous twenty-something who freaks out after reading a magazine article that claims anyone who’s had more than 20 relationships has missed their chance at true love. Ally hires her (even more) promiscuous neighbor, Colin (Chris Evans), to track down her 20 ex-boyfriends and one-night stands so she can revisit their romantic potential.

I wish I could say “spoiler alert” before letting you know that Ally and Colin fall for each other, but you’ll see it coming from a mile away. The script is so predictable – and bad – that it’s almost funny.

Bottom line: the only number you should concern yourself with in relation to this movie is 106… as in 106 minutes of your life that you’ll never get back.

I went into the movie armed with Kleenex and sunglasses and expecting a coming-of-age Terms of Endearment. But it just didn’t move me, despite its heartbreaking premise.

The film stars Mia Wasikowska and Henry Hopper as Annabelle and Enoch, kindred spirits who meet at a funeral that Enoch has crashed. Annabelle helps the recently-orphaned Enoch reconnect with life even as she faces imminent death from brain cancer. The film has some sweet moments and some strange ones too. For instance, Enoch’s best friend is the ghost of a Kamikaze fighter pilot named Hiroshi (Ryo Kase). Still not sure what that’s all about.

Anyway, it’s possible that Restless is one of those indie films that works on some deeper and more profound level than my brain was willing to process… kinda like The Tree of Life (except, thankfully, Restless does have a story with an obvious beginning, middle and end). But as cancer movies go, I suggest you take a pass on this one and wait a week for 50/50, a poignant movie about cancer that will make you cry, and laugh a lot too.

Hanks plays Larry Crowne, an affable, hard working, middle-aged guy who loses his job at a Walmart-esque store, ostensibly because he never got a college degree. When his neighbor (played by Cedric the Entertainer) tells him to “get some knowledge, and you’ll be fire-proof”, Larry decides to enroll at the local community college. There, he develops a crush on his public-speaking teacher, Mercy Tainot (Roberts) who, somewhat inexplicably, begins to fall for him as well.

The movie doesn’t offer anything fresh. As a romantic comedy, it’s neither romantic nor funny. As a drama, it is simply uninspiring. And the subplots are a superficial mess. One of them revolves around Larry’s newfound friends – a “gang” of students who like to cruise around town on their scooters when school lets out. (Yikes, I just had a flashback to Grease 2!).

Anyway, my favorite scenes in the movie don’t have anything to do with Hanks or Roberts. The real scene-stealers are Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad) as Mercy’s obnoxious (soon to be ex-) husband, and Geoge Takei (of Star Trek fame) as Larry’s economics professor.

Hanks directed the movie and co-wrote the script with Nia Vardalos (My Big Fat Greek Wedding) so it’s a triple whammy in the disappointment column. Larry Crowne aims to say something poignant about second chances, life after corporate downsizing, yadda yadda. But it misses the target completely. The setting and the cast of characters make it feel like an extended episode of the TV show Community, only not as funny. My suggestion: take a pass on Larry Crowne, and catch a few free episodes of Community instead.

This time around it’s Stu (Ed Helms) getting married. He and his improbably beautiful bride-to-be are having a destination wedding in her home country of Thailand. Of course, the other guys – Phil (Bradley Cooper), Doug (Justin Bartha) and Alan (Zach Galifinakas) – all make the trip for the wedding and of course, despite Stu’s attempt to just have a quiet bachelor brunch back in the states, things go horribly, horribly wrong in Thailand.

They gather on the beach for an innocent enough bonfire along with Stu’s soon-to-be 16-year old brother-in-law. The next thing you know Stu is waking up in a seedy motel in Bangkok with the now infamous Mike Tyson tattoo. Phil and Alan are there too but the kid brother is missing. Sounds familiar of course, only this time there’s a cigarette-smoking monkey instead of a tiger and “international criminal” Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong) is along for the ride by choice this time. (His more prominent role is one of the more amusing aspects of the sequel in my book. “Holla! City of squalor!”) Once again, the boys remember nothing and must retrace their steps to figure out what happened the night before and track down the misplaced brother-in-law-to-be. 

Their journey back through the previous night of debauchery is mildly amusing in parts, just gross in parts, and too similar to the original throughout. I know it’s a sequel so you can expect it to carry on the theme but really they could have worked a little harder to switch it up. It’s like one too many nights out doing tequila shots. The first time around you feel bad, but oddly satisfied by the good time you had. This time around the hangover really isn’t worth it.

Somewhere

Somewhere, the latest from writer-director Sofia Coppola, stars Stephen Dorff as rich, bored, hard-partying movie star, Johnny Marco, and Elle Fanning (Dakota’s little sister) as his 11-year old daughter Cleo. Fanning gives a lovely performance. You can see that talent definitely runs in that family. But the real stars of the movie are the city of Los Angeles and the Chateau Marmont hotel, where Johnny takes up residence between movies. As a former LA resident, I can say the movie captures the look and feel of the city in an authentic and beautiful way. In fact, the visual imagery in the film is gorgeous, but for me, that didn’t make up for what it lacks in dialogue and plot.

The plot, what there is of it, focuses on Johnny’s ennui and how a surprise visit from his daughter forces him to reexamine his life.  But as Johnny is wondering “what’s the point of it all”, I was wondering the same thing about the movie. I don’t mind a movie that makes you think and I understand the concept of “less is more.” But sometimes less is less. I’d say wait for this one to come out on DVD and then watch it when you’re having a hard time falling asleep.

Little Fockers

I can cut Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson and Jessica Alba a bit of slack because my expectations for them tend to be somewhat lower. Okay, much lower. They always seem to play just slightly different versions of the exact same character, especially Wilson, who I had just seen the night before in How Do You Know?.

I could waste a lot more time and space filling you in on the characters, the plot lines, and the reasons the audience did occasionally laugh out loud, but seriously, why bother? It’s a sequel. If you saw and liked the first two Focker flicks (Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers), then you may not dislike this one quite as much as I did. But if you’ve never seen a single installment over the past decade, don’t make this the first.  The Little Fockers may appeal to its fan base – particularly those in the mood for totally sophomoric humor (like De Niro suffering the long-lasting side-effects of a new drug for erectile dysfunction…. Hoffman flamenco-dancing his way through “manopause”… or eye-candy Alba finding some excuse to take her clothes off and jump into a mud pit.) Teenage boys should have a field day. But if you have any doubts at all about paying good money to see this one, go with your gut. Skip it.

My seven-year-old movie buddy was completely engrossed. He loved this movie and walked out of the theater practicing his “Airbender” moves. For me it was just okay. It had a nice environmental message for the kids and borrowed elements from martial arts and Eastern philosophy. But the performances were not very good and the storyline was disjointed, jumping from scene to scene with little cohesiveness.

The movie takes place in a world with four nations: Air, Water, Fire and Earth. In each of these nations, certain people have the power to manipulate or “bend” an element. But only one individual has the power to “bend” all four elements. That person is the “Avatar.” But he disappeared a century ago just as the fire nation launched a brutal war against the other nations, completely wiping out the Air Nation. At the beginning of the movie, the Avatar reappears after being frozen in a kind of state of suspended animation and it turns out he is a boy from the Air nation – the last Airbender – who doesn’t realize he’s been missing for the last 100 years or so.

As the movie progresses, he begins to accept his responsibility as the Avatar and with the help of a young brother and sister from the Water Nation, sets out to restore balance in the world and avoid being captured by the Fire Nation along the way. But this is going to be a long and difficult journey for the young Avatar and this movie is just the first in a trilogy so don’t expect any resolution at the end – expect it to set up part two.

If you’ve got a young boy who enjoys marital arts and stories about fantasy worlds, or who is a fan of the Nickelodeon animated series, then by all means take him to see it. Otherwise, there’s no reason to go.

Oh and footnote: we saw it in 2D and from what I’ve heard from others who’ve seen it, that’s just fine because it was not originally shot in 3D and was converted after the fact. Apparently, this makes for murky 3D and there have been a lot of complaints about that with this movie.

The White Ribbon reminds me of Ingmar Bergman; the stark visuals create a sense of foreboding and you are sucked into a bleak world filled with dark mysteries. The entire film takes place in a pre-World War One German village lorded over by The Baron on his estate. In the first scene, the Village Doctor falls and breaks his collarbone because “someone” strung wire across the road to trip his horse. And from this opening scene until the end, bad things happen at every turn. Children are tortured. People die in accidents or suicides. Barns burn. Relationships fall apart and people are generally brutal to one another. And it is all shot absolutely gorgeously in black and white.

The central mystery is who hurt the children and the doctor. The multiple villagers’ stories are narrated by The School Teacher. It is his view of these dark happenings that is told many years later looking back on it all. The one light storyline in the film is his courtship of a young woman who is the nanny to the Baron’s twins.

Much was written about this film depicting the society that created fascism and how the children of the film would be ripe to turn on the Jews because of being raised in this strict Protestant mode. And while that may be true, you are left at the end with more questions than answers. The film is more a series of scenes than a full story. Call me old fashioned for wanting a screenplay to have a beginning, middle and end. Perhaps the ending is implied – the fascism that followed. But at the end of this 145-minute film, I was expecting to find out who done it, or why it was done or something more than was delivered.

The White Ribbon is a film you definitely need to be willing to work at seeing. Be prepared for a disconcerting, depressing two and a half hours and a pretty unsatisfying ending. As arty as I am, and I do love a good Bergman film, I think this film is highly over-rated.

(Viewing note: if you are semi-blind like me, make sure you have a BIG screen to watch the DVD because for some reason the subtitles on this one are really, really small.)