Limitless

Limitless is a movie that takes us to a place where there are no limits for a new mind drug. Not only do we see the classic pitfalls and ills of using drugs but we see a strange new side, dare I say a positive side. A new drug that allows one to utilize 80% more of her/his brain is discovered by a burnt out writer who puts it to good use. As he keeps using the drug he realizes that there are drawbacks to that much brain usage. Somehow he learns to use it to his advantage.

The film was directed by Neil Burger who’s other work includes the Illusionist with Edward Norton. Limitless includes quite a few big names but the biggest are Bradley Cooper and Robert De Niro. The film has amazing visuals reminiscent of Inception. It has a decent script that takes the viewer on a wild ride from beginning to end. While the visuals move fast however, there are some scenes throughout that tend to lag on. It’s as if they wanted to monopolize on special effects at the expense of keeping the story rolling at a palatable pace. This is one of the only drawbacks in the pace of the film. It is worth waiting out though because the ending delivers a smart and noteworthy conclusion.

Limitless is an excellent film that doesn’t have to be in reality so it isn’t. There are metaphors to real drug use. It opens up a lot for discussion and I recommend it.

Inception

Inception-movie-posterThis is not my usual review format, I simply want to list a few things that bother me about this movie. Inception is a film I really didn’t want to write about because my opinion seems to be in the vast minority. However, after all the 5 star reviews are scrolled past, I found on IMDB and on Yahoo! Movies that there are many folks out there agreeing with me. Inception is a smokescreen of deceptive marketing and not much more.

To borrow David Spade’s SNL satire: I saw Inception last weekend. I liked it better the first time as The Matrix. (audience laughs). That’s basically my beef. This movie is harder to untangle than a wet mass of kite string. The worst part is that it follows no rational premise. It is a long film at 148 min. Unfortunately none of that time is spent developing characters or a plot of any logical substance. By placing the movie in a dream, anything can be done and anything can be said. Nothing can be challenged because it’s got neat cgi once in a long while. Believe me, they make you wait for it. The best part? They leave it open for a sequel. What will be new in it, a beach and some dreams of atv racing? Not a good movie experience for me, I recommend you go see Despicable Me instead.

Vantage Point

This post I wrote was first published at Blogcritics.

I just saw Vantage Point at the matinee with my wife and really liked it. This is director Pete Travis’s first film. His recent television work includes Omagh (2004), a true story about a car bomb that killed many innocent people, and the 2003 television series Henry VIII. One was about a bomb, the other was criticized as being untruthful.

The bomb theme together with an unbelievable story is sort of what Travis brings us in Vantage Point. Nonetheless, the plot is original and clever, along with the editing. Plus certain humanitarian elements played out by an all-star cast make the movie enjoyable. The cast includes: Dennis Quaid as Thomas Barnes, Matthew Fox (of Lost fame) as Kent Taylor, Forest Whitaker as Howard Lewis, Sigourney Weaver as Rex Brooks, and some other fine actors who are sure to be up-and-comers.

When I say the plot is original and clever, I am being quite literal. I have never seen a movie that plays the same scene over and over again this way. It is reminiscent of 1999’s Nick of Time, starring Johnny Depp. In that film the scenes are done in “real time,” so it is a little different. Most of Vantage Point takes place in a Spanish town square where the President of the United States is shot. The 20-minute scene of the shooting is played over and over again, each time revealing new facts as seen from a different vantage point.

This would be a stellar idea for a movie, but the facts as they unravel are way too planned to have been random, and the parts of the “plan” that unravel are just too perfect to be believable. For example, the terrorists know exactly what room the President will escape to after the shooting, and what about an ambulance? We don’t see one. Another example is when thousands of Spaniards are running through the street and Howard Lewis happens to see and save a little girl whose ice cream he spilled earlier in the square. You must suspend your disbelief to enjoy this film, but it is still riveting to see the different vantage points played out. My wife said it made her a little queasy at the beginning seeing the same things over and over, but she agreed it was an original concept and in the end we both enjoyed it.

Obviously a terrorism/political movie is going to be very suspenseful. The camera running through the crowd keeps you on the edge of your seat. There are some relationship themes developed in the film, such as the one between Howard, who has left his wife and kids and ends up saving the young girl, and his family. After he saves her, he is moved by the experience to go back home to his estranged family in the US. Another one is Thomas Barnes’ dedication to protecting the President, so dedicated that he throws his own body in front of a bullet to save him.

The twist at the end is very predictable (my wife had it solved in the first scene) but as I have said, despite the unbelievability of it all, the ride is still worth the admission. There is a feeble attempt at making a statement about how terrorism will “always be with us.” That was an interesting thread running throughout and it would have been nice to see more done with that. As it is, it is only developed as a shadow of a theme.

It was also interesting to see how terrorism is enabled by blackmail and kidnapping. The primary assassin in the movie does his killing because his brother has been kidnapped and the terrorists use him as a puppet to do the sharp-shooting, promising his brother’s release once he does the killings. There is also a suicide bomber who we see checking his text message before exploding and it reads: “Make us proud.” But these are short scenes that don’t make up much of the movie. The majority of the movie is made up of playing the same scene over and over and that is obviously what the director hoped would make the movie a unique success.

My final word on Vantage Point is that it is a great suspense/action ride that lacks believability but makes up for it in creative editing and plot as well as some very humanitarian themes woven throughout. Go see this one.

Devil

One of Director M. Night Shyamalan’s stories was adapted into a screenplay and made into a movie. This is a different way to market something of his because he usually writes, produces, and even acts a small role in everything he makes. This time, he just gets the producer credit.

image

Devil is a combination of light horror (PG-13), mystery, and thriller. It’s hard to believe all three of those can be pulled off from inside an elevator but they are.

Devil is directed by John Erick Dowdle who recently directed Quarantine and The Poughkeepsie Tapes. He’s created a movie that looks smart and interweaves all three genres previously mentioned to make a scary, engaging movie that adolescents and adults will love. This film is not for kids. There are some bloody scenes that kids shouldn’t see. Having said that, it is pretty tame material for 13 and up.

The premise of this movie is that the Devil has entered an elevator at a metropolitan high-rise. The people locked in the elevator all have one shared flaw: they refuse to take responsibility for their mistakes in life. In each person’s case, the mistakes have caused death or other harm to befall innocent people. The Devil delivers justice in clever ways. There is a twist, as in all of M. Night’s movies. The twist reveals the mystery and so ends the movie.

The acting is top notch. The cast is a set of relative newbies. A notable performance however is given by veteran actor Jenny O’Hara. All the acting in this movie is given with a visible purpose and it makes the mystery all that much more fun to try and figure out. You feel like the characters are so real, you have a chance at figuring out what the end point will be. I find it incorrect that the movie is being marketed as a horror movie. I almost missed it because of such marketing. It is more than that. It reminds me of Rod Serling’s short Twilight Zone episodes. We can take a moral element from it and that is rare in today’s sound byte movie culture. So, to do my part for my blogging ‘compadres,’ I’m clearing up the misconceptions. This is a smartly crafted film. There are a lot of movies out there that are scary, but not many that leave you deep in thought as Devil does.