Inception

Don Jon

Sex comedy.  Like, is that a real thing, a legit genre?  If not, I just made it up – because that’s the best way to describe Don Jon, an entertaining movie that was all at once a farce, satire, romantic comedy, and character study.

I recently found myself zealously defending J. Gordon Levitt (Looper) on Twitter to someone who saw him presenting an award at the MTV VMAs and quipped, isn’t that the guy from Third Rock From the Sun, has he done anything since then?  I replied with Inception, The Dark Knight Rises? Hello?  Levitt is quite the gifted, young actor in my estimation.  He brings a quiet, emotive sensitivity to his roles, and that vulnerability makes his characters more human and relatable.  That sensitivity resonated in movies like 50/50 and 500 Days of Summer, which featured emotionally compelling lead characters.  Well, Don Jon is a departure from those emo, heartwarming flicks for sure – though the ending may surprise you.

Don Jon marks Levitt’s debut as a writer/director, and I think viewers will find his style humorously authentic.  Levitt stars as Jon, a young man who looks like he could’ve been on Jersey Shore.  To my point, the movie is set in New Jersey and Jon is young, Italian, obsessed with his physique and always DTF (down to uh…let’s just say ‘fornicate’).  At first blush Jon is a walking cliché: a young man obsessed with his sexual conquests and women in general.  He and his friends go out prowling, and more often than not Jon is successful, at least in terms of “scoring.”  By any other metric, Jon is lacking, though he is oblivious to his emotional ineptitude.

You see, Jon’s sexual identity and habits are largely shaped by the world of digital porn.  His affinity for porn borders on compulsion.  He’s like a walking boner –  finding visual stimulation in the most innocuous of places, including the check out aisle of the grocery store.  However, lest you think Jon lacks even a modicum of substance – his lifestyle departs from vapidity when we glimpse his love of church and family, which is hilariously juxtaposed with his sexual exploits.

Sometimes it takes a particular experience or person to help us achieve self-actualization in certain aspects of our lives.  For Jon, meeting Barbara (Scarlett Johansson, Hitchcock) inadvertently changes his world.  To say that Barbara is alluring would be an understatement, and her physical appearance draws him in immediately.  Johansson and Levitt had magnetic chemistry, more than any pair I’ve witnessed recently.  Initially Jon is content to bask in Barbara’s sheer hotness, but most relationships that begin with such aesthetic adulation end in disappointment, and Jon begins to question his perceptions about dating and intimacy.  I don’t want to give away too much about the plot, but Julianne Moore (Crazy, Stupid, Love) is featured in a supporting role and perfectly adds to Jon’s character development, contrasting completely with Johansson’s more overt appeal.

I enjoyed Don Jon, because I thought it had a little more substance than people may give it credit for.  Sure, it’s funny and a little raunchy.  But it was also thoughtful, reflecting a depth of character that wasn’t readily apparent.  J. Gordon Levitt has given us a peek at his wheelhouse, and I want to see more.  This movie would make for a great date night, and unlike the typical rom-com: you won’t have to drag your man kicking and screaming.  Grade: B+

Looper

Every self-proclaimed movie buff has a favorite genre and type of movie.  My favorites are suspense thrillers or crime dramas.  I also like movies that feature intersecting storylines.  I think the best movies are “high concept,” meaning that the storyline is uniquely original and it features a refreshing central idea.  Some examples would be Inception, In Time, and Minority Report.  All three of those movies were unlike anything that preceded them.  Looper was such a movie, a high concept tale characterized by an inventive storyline.

J. Gordon Levitt (Inception) has matured into a fine young actor.  He has been impressive in everything I’ve ever seen in him, most notably 500 Days of Summer.  In Looper he stars as Joe, a young criminal in the desolate future of 2044.  30 years from that in 2074, time travel will be possible.  It is ultimately outlawed, used only by criminal organizations in secret as a way of eliminating unwanted offenders.  Joe is a looper, a person who executes people who have been sent back from the future.  Criminals in 2074 send their victim (always another criminal) back in time to 2044, where they are immediately shotgun blasted out of existence by a looper.  There is now virtually no trace of the person ever having existed.  It’s a sad and efficient way of dispensing with an enemy.  Occasionally a crime boss will want to get rid of an employee, even a looper.  When this happens, the looper will make the requisite kill, only to remove the pillowcase from his victim to discover that it’s him or herself (in the future).  This is called “closing your loop,” which means that your future self no longer exists.  The worst thing that a looper could do is fail to close his loop by letting his future self escape.  An open loop means that a future and present version of the looper co-exist in the present.  It also means that they haven’t been removed from the future yet.  It would be like 33-year-old Tanya and 63-year-old Tanya chilling right now in 2012.  Bugged out, right?  Exactly, that’s why it can’t happen.  As crazy as it must seem to put a bullet in your future self, that’s what a looper must do, if necessary.  Joe doesn’t lack the resolve to do it, but he bungles a hit on his future self (Bruce Willis, Red) when the time comes.

Of course, being a looper, Future Joe (Willis) knows exactly what is going to happen when his bosses try to send him back in time.  He prepares for it and outsmarts Present Joe easily, overpowering him and escaping.  I’m just going to refer to Future Joe as Bruce Willis, for simplicity’s sake.  Once his bosses find out that Joe didn’t close his loop, they send a bounty hunter (Jeff Daniels, The Newsroom) back in time to eliminate both Joes – the young one for botching the job and the old one because he was the target in the first place.  Joe himself is also very committed to killing himself, stopping at nothing to track Bruce Willis down.  There is a curious dynamic between Young Joe and Bruce Willis, as their agendas are wildly divergent.  Bruce Willis wants to make sure that his life plays out, as it should, the way he knows it.  He already knows what his version of the future holds, because he’s lived it.  He has a wife that he’ll never meet if Young Joe somehow alters the course of their lives.  Young Joe wants to make his own way in the world and cares nothing for a hypothetical future that he knows nothing about.

Looper was an intriguing movie.  Its high concept premise lured me in, but there were several enjoyable elements.  The casting was great.  Bruce Willis was fitting as the grisly older man who is one step ahead of his younger self.  He really looks like an older version of J. Gordon Levitt, which was especially noticeable in one scene where both actors were shown in profile.  Emily Blunt was also featured, and I think she’s very versatile.  Here she showed a vulnerability and sense of love and compassion that I liked very much.  Her performance was both emotional and convincing.  Levitt always simply does whatever is required of him, and he does it very well.   Looper was nearly flawless, and I hope that Levitt continues to challenge himself with great scripts like this one.  Grade:  A

 

The Words

I first noticed Bradley Cooper in The Hangover as the wisecracking but loyal Phil.  It wasn’t too long before Cooper got his chance at top billing, starring alongside Robert De Niro in last year’s Limitless.  He proved in that movie that he could be relatable and endearing, and I knew that I’d be seeing much more of him.  Similar to his role in Limitless, Cooper once again portrays a struggling writer in The Words, a very thoughtful movie from writer Brian Klugman in his directorial debut.

The first thing that struck me about The Words was its interesting and novel structure.  Inception introduced us to the concept of a dream within a dream, within another dream.  Perhaps Klugman was inspired by that format, because The Words featured the unconventional concept of a story within a story within another story.  The movie begins with a narrated look at an ostensibly successful, award-winning author, Rory Jansen (Cooper).  Jansen has penned a critically acclaimed work of fiction called “The Window Tears,” a book that took him from obscure writer to literary sensation.  Rory has an adoring wife Dora, ably portrayed by Zoe Saldana (Colombiana).  When we first meet them they are off to an awards banquet, of which Rory is the guest of honor.  They are a beautiful couple, young and glamorous.  Rory is at the pinnacle of his career on what should be one of the happiest nights of his life, but there is a self-deprecating hint of sadness in his eyes that belies his staggering accomplishments.  It turns out that Rory’s conscience won’t fully allow him to enjoy the spoils of success, because his gains were ill gotten.

Any aspiring writer can tell you that their existence is characterized by a constant battle between their ideal and actual selves.  Am I good enough?  Will I ever be?  These are the perennial questions that plague any artist who struggles with finding inspiration or handling rejection.  Before releasing “The Window Tears,” Rory was beset by doubt and frustration, as the rejection letters mounted.  But his life would be forever changed by his honeymoon in Paris.  While strolling around a Parisian backstreet, Rory and Dora happen upon an antique shop where Rory finds a charming old leather briefcase.  Weeks later he discovers an old manuscript in one of the briefcase pockets and begins to read.  It’s an enthralling tale, and Rory is pained to know that he’d never be capable of producing such a work of art.  Deeply frustrated by his own limitations, he lashes out at Dora.  She believes in him but is wounded by his apparent dissatisfaction with his life, of which she is a huge part.  He begins to transcribe the manuscript verbatim, living vicariously through its anonymous author.  The tale is one of love and loss, set against a post-war Parisian landscape.  At first Rory’s actions seem harmless, but that all changes when he comes home one day to find Dora in tears.  Fearing the worst, he implores her to tell him what’s wrong.  It turns out that she read the manuscript, naturally believing that Rory wrote it.  She’s deeply moved, more than she has ever been by anything he’s written.  She unwittingly sets the stage for an incredible act of cowardice, as Rory takes credit for the story.  Eventually he publishes the manuscript under his own name, calling it “The Window Tears.”

The Words was a unique, emotionally rich movie.  It featured a wonderfully unconventional, non-linear storytelling approach about which I am purposefully not elaborating.  The layered approach made the movie fresh and intriguing, although the concept faltered a bit in the movie’s final act.  Additionally, I would have preferred more concrete resolutions to certain plot points, but these were only minor detractions.  One of the more successful aspects of the movie was its cast, who sucked me into their worlds.  Bradley Cooper was both endearing and compelling as the morally conflicted writer.   His scenes with Zoe Saldana were rife with chemistry, and she was picture perfect as his doting, supportive wife.  Jeremy Irons was wonderful as the Old Man who confronts Rory for stealing his story of love and loss.  He explains in vivid detail the life that inspired such a wonderful tale, each memory a piercing indictment of Rory.  His character was resolute but broken, having been robbed of everything that Rory now enjoys: notoriety, happiness, and true love.  The Words probably won’t make a big splash in theaters, but I thought it was a touching and original drama well worth seeing.  Grade: B+

This article first appeared here at Poptimal and was reprinted with permission.

The Dark Knight Rises

Whenever I review movies that the fan boys love, I have to issue disclaimers.  As I’ve stated before, the only thing I claim to be passionate and knowledgeable about are movies.  If a movie was based on a novel, I may or may not have read that novel. That being said, I didn’t grow up reading comic books.  So I don’t approach The Dark Knight Rises as a person who is checking for accuracy or wants to make sure director Christopher Nolan “gets it right.”  The only measuring stick for me is other movies: other “superhero” movies and the first two Batman movies of Nolan’s trilogy.  I was looking forward to it because The Dark Knight, Nolan’s last edition – was simply outstanding.  It’s one of my favorite movies, and I saw it three times in the theater.  I also think that Christopher Nolan (Memento, Inception) is brilliant, so I’m inclined to see nearly anything he’s attached to (within reason).

When we last saw the Caped Crusader (Christian Bale, The Fighter), he was allowing Harvey Dent to live on in the hearts of Gotham as a hero.  Although Dent devolved into the nefarious Two-Face and held Commissioner Gordon’s son at gunpoint, Batman sacrificed his own reputation rather than shatter the city’s image of its fallen district attorney.  Sacrifice is the recurring theme throughout the trilogy, as Batman selflessly gives his all for Gotham’s residents, though the city doesn’t always appreciate him.  Eight years have elapsed since that fateful night where Dent and Batman swapped destinies, and Bruce Wayne has been a recluse ever since.  Having lost the love of his life and been vilified by many, he has been holed up in his mansion, and Wayne Industries has suffered significant financial losses.  This is where we find our hero, down and quite possibly out for the count.  The time is ripe for any one of the comic’s infamous rogues gallery to emerge and wreak havoc while Gotham is vulnerable.  The city passed The Dent Act, which resulted in the incarceration of many dangerous criminals – but the drop in crime lulls Gotham’s residents into a false sense of security.  That coupled with Batman’s prolonged absence leaves Gotham vulnerable, setting the stage for our latest villain.

Enter Bane (Tom Hardy, This Means War, Inception), successor to The Joker and Two-Face as Gotham’s newest tormentor.  Bane can best be described as a wrecking ball with legs.  He is simply massive, and ably portrayed by Tom Hardy in what is probably his most brutal role since his turn as a notorious British prisoner in Bronson.  Bane escaped from prison and subsequently organized a coup, funded by American businessman John Daggett, a competitor of Bruce Wayne.  Daggett brings Bane to the United States so that he can obtain a clean energy reactor held by Wayne Enterprises and turn it into a nuclear weapon.  Bane’s plan will come to fruition unless the Batman ends his self-imposed exile and more importantly proves himself a worthy adversary of the most physically imposing villain he’s ever faced.

I don’t want to fall into a recitation of the entire plot; nor do I want to give away too much.  There were many plot twists and turns, and several very good performances. The Dark Knight Rises delved deeper into Bruce Wayne’s psyche.  He wasn’t just reacting to things happening around him, rather we see him in a prolonged state of despair, pain, and defeat.  I felt like we journeyed with him as the familiar senses of justice and duty were rekindled within.  This time around we are also treated to Catwoman, played by Anne Hathaway (Love & Other Drugs, The Devil Wears Prada).  Hathaway is a very good actress and I thought she balanced the role perfectly.  Not too campy and corny, strong enough to help Batman instead of merely requiring his rescue.  While I didn’t grow up reading the comic books, I did watch the cartoon series that aired in the 90s.  I remember that Catwoman was a bit “on the fence.”  She wasn’t always Batman’s ally, but she wasn’t out to foil him at every turn, like The Riddler or The Joker.  The same was true of Catwoman in The Dark Knight Rises, as she betrays Batman one minute and saves him the next.  Also featured were strong supporting roles by Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Inception, 500 Days of Summer) and Marion Cotillard (Contagion).  Gordon-Levitt plays an idealistic young police officer that was orphaned as a youth, much like Bruce Wayne.  He instinctively knows Batman’s true identity and gently implores him to help Gotham.  Cotillard was effective as Wayne’s business investor, brief love interest, and…I won’t tell you anything else about her.  You’re welcome.

The best thing about the film was the way Nolan captured the atmosphere of a city on the brink of anarchy.  It always felt like something big was about to happen, at any minute.  But brace yourselves, because this was not “the best movie ever,” as people born in the 1990s might have you believe.  Pump. Those. Brakes.  This wasn’t the best movie made or even the best superhero movie ever made, because it wasn’t superior to The Dark Knight, in my opinion.  How can you be the best movie ever made when you’re not even the best installment of your own trilogy?  The Dark Knight had a more complex villain with a richer backstory and a more layered performance.  I’m not knocking Tom Hardy, and I’m not saying there is anything more that he could or should have done.  Nor am I saying there’s anyone who could have done it better.  I’m just saying it was different, that’s all.  Additionally, The Dark Knight explored deeper psychological themes, and I thought Two-Face nearly stole the show.  Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Tom Hardy came close, but there was no secondary performance that really jumped out at me.  But you know what?  Forget all of that, I can give you a very simple complaint that I had with the film: I couldn’t even understand what Bane was saying the whole time!  I know I’m not the only one who strained to decipher the dialogue when he spoke.  I liked the inflection of Hardy’s voice, and I noticed an almost imperceptible West Indian accent creep through.  When I researched his role after the movie I discovered that he did draw on his Caribbean (who knew?) heritage in the interpretation of the part.  That’s impressive, and it didn’t go unnoticed – but I couldn’t always understand what he was saying!

Of course I think you should go see The Dark Knight Rises, what are you stupid?  Nothing should stop you from seeing it; it will probably be the biggest movie of the year.  Some movies just feel big.  They feel like an experience.  I’m sure it will obliterate existing opening day records, despite the tragic shooting that took place at the midnight screening in Colorado earlier this week.  Now that the trilogy has concluded (Nolan’s not doing any more), I can safely say that it’s probably the greatest trilogy.  But don’t confuse that with me saying that The Dark Knight Rises is the greatest movie.  It’s not, for the aforementioned reasons.  But it was damn good. Grade: A.