PaleyFilms

On Christmas, New York cop John McClane (Bruce Willis) travels to California and visits his estranged wife, Holly (Bonnie Bedelia), attempting to make a reconciliation with her. John visits Holly’s office building, where she and her many co-workers are enjoying a Christmas party. After an attempted conversation between the couple leads to an argument, things go from bad to worse; terrorists break into the building and take everyone as hostages. Luckily, John evades being captured, and runs off. When head terrorist Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) sends out henchman to search the building, McClane uses his skills as a police officer to try to take down the villains and save the hostages.

From director John McTiernan, Die Hard is a very enjoyable and well made action thriller. Willis is a total bad-ass one-man army, and gives a very enjoyable performance. Alan Rickman is also terrific, making his one-note character utterly watchable. The rest of the cast ranges from good to terrible, with a few giving cringe-worthy performances. While this is less of an actors movie than it is an action movie, chemistry between McClane and Gruber is good enough to make up for the sub-standard supporting cast.

Given its (then) pretty high budget, the film is surprisingly campy. The screenplay is pretty standard, with a lot of cheesy lines thrown in. Most of the lines are pretty funny, though the ones that don’t work sound silly. Thankfully, many of the script’s bad elements are given to the bad actors; most of the hilarious stuff goes to Willis. After killing one of Gruber’s henchman, McClane dresses the corpse in a Santa Claus outfit and sends it to Gruber with the message: “Now I have a machine gun. Ho ho ho.”

McTiernan seems more intent on making the action good than smartening up the story. Many of the film’s characters fall into generic categories. For example, the villains are completely evil, the LAPD is mostly incompetent and interferes too much with McClane’s attempts to save the day, and the FBI agents come off as overly smug. Even McClane, who holds the story’s emotional arc, is a bit too skilled to be fully believable.

Despite its flaws, however, the film succeeds at being an action movie. Most of its action takes place in a single building, making for some thrilling and claustrophobic set-pieces. To have so much conflict happen inside a confined space is a commendable choice on the filmmakers’ parts. We get shootouts, suspenseful moments, and explosions: all ingredients that a good action flick takes advantage of.

Die Hard is an above average entry into its genre. While somewhat lacking in its acting and screenplay, the film has enough bad-assery from its protagonist to compensate. Add to that a fun bad-guy, proficient direction, and thrilling action, and you get an exciting joy ride. It’s campy as hell and plays out like a high-budget B-movie, but knows how to have fun. Die Hard may not be the greatest action movie ever made, but it surely set a standard for lots of subsequent films, and holds up on its own as fine popcorn fare.

After surviving a boat explosion that killed 27 people, con-man “Verbal” Kint (Kevin Spacey) is brought to a police station, where he is interrogated about events leading up to the deadly conflagration. Kint tells cop David Kujan (Chazz Palminteri) a story involving drug deals and corruption, which examines a group of five criminals, including Kint, himself. Through flashbacks, we see what transpired and ultimately led up to certain destruction. Along the way, mystery erupts about the identity of mob boss Keyser Soze, engulfing the film’s characters and viewers in a sea of suspense. The appearance of a mysterious lawyer (Pete Postlethwaite) complicates things even more, until no one is sure what is what and who is who.

The Usual Suspects is a one of a kind, masterfully constructed film. Its plot structure alone is brilliant, cross cutting between present day and flashbacks. Kevin Spacey’s voice-over is one of the few examples in cinema of good narration. The narration successfully bridges different points in time, while also building character development. Tight editing holds the movie together, making sure it doesn’t burst open at its seams from over-plotting.

Some of the freshest screenwriting and acting can be found here. Christopher McQuarrie won an Oscar for his script, a well deserved win. Working together with the film’s unique narrative structure, McQuarrie’s screenplay has amazing dialogue that gives the actors lines that fit their characters. Additionally, each main character is fleshed out; we get some back story for every one. Spacey is excellent, as are the actors who portray his criminal partners, including the talents of: Stephen Baldwin, Gabriel Byrne, Benicio Del Toro, and Kevin Pollak. Supporting actors Pete Postlethwaite and Chazz Palminteri bring more to their roles than one would expect, mainly due to the movie’s clever writing.

As good as the film’s dialogue is, McQuarrie’s greatest accomplishment is his story. This is a true thriller, featuring plenty of suspense, mystery, and twists. From opening shot to mind-blowing final sequence, the movie keeps you hooked with its strange situations and 360 degree plot turns.

Talk to any Alfred Hitchcock fan, and you’ll learn that a good thriller needs a great director. Bryan Singer takes on the tough task of directing such a complex film, and succeeds with flying colors. Singer precariously drives the Usual Suspects vehicle, never crashing, never stopping for rest. The movie’s 106 minutes zooms by like a rocket, a result of near-perfect direction, combined with John Ottman’s editing. By the way, Ottman is also responsible for the film’s (severely underrated) score, a cinematic component that deliciously merges with the rest of the film-making.

The combination of the acting, direction, and writing, results in Bryan Singer’s masterpiece. This is one of the best movies of the 1990s, and one of the most effective and well made thrillers of all time. It is a fantastic creation that works on a whole different level than other films of its kind, and gets even better on repeat viewings. Perhaps the greatest praise that can be given to The Usual Suspects is that it takes its title from a line in Casablanca without being blasphemous.

The exploration of human relationships is the main focus of Amores Perros, a film made up of three intertwining story segments, each featuring a dog (or dogs) owned by the main character(s). Each dog’s relationship with his owner, foils a human relationship in the movie. Not only do the pet-master bonds make for some interesting sub-plots, they also help to reveal correlations between how we treat one another, as opposed to how we treat our animals.

In the first segment, Octavio (Gael Garcia Bernal) makes money by entering his dog into dogfights. He also kindles a relationship with his sister-in-law, deals with his abusive brother, and is taunted by a rival dogfight trainer. The second segment is about Daniel (Alvaro Guerrero) and his supermodel girlfriend who face domestic issues after moving into an apartment together. The final segment follows “El Chivo” (Emilio Echevarria), a hit man who attempts to reconnect with a daughter he abandoned years ago. These three story-lines are determinedly different from each other, yet eventually converge during a horrific car crash.

Director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu deserves the utmost praise. Though this is his directorial debut, Inarritu manages to take on three stories and converge them into one movie. His style is incredibly entertaining; the very first scene grabs you in and doesn’t let go. Slower, more touching parts are handled with as much care as fast paced scenes, making the film very well balanced and adeptly made. The only major problem Inarritu falls victim to is ambition. At over two and a half hours long, an entire plot line could have been taken out. Easily the most forgettable segment is the second one, which doesn’t fit into the mood of the rest of the film, and therefore feels like filler material. The section takes away from the momentum built up by Octavio’s story, and as a result, hurts the film’s pacing.

Overall the acting is great, Bernal being the standout. This is Bernal’s breakout role, and he does just as well, if not better than he does in later films such as Y Tu Mama Tambien and The Science of Sleep. Octavio is written as tough but compassionate, character aspects that are amplified by a wonderful performance.

The recurring motif of people’s relationships with dogs must be mentioned. The dogs represent many themes, such as loyalty and companionship, and show what lengths one will go to for the sake of a pet. Additionally, the fact that people are horrified when anything happens to their dog(s), but do terrible things to other human beings, says a lot about the way individuals sometimes treat each other. Props to the screenwriter and director for keeping man’s best friend consistently in the film’s fray, up through the very last (beautiful) shot.

Amores Perros is one of the best directorial debuts of the 2000s. It is extremely well made, with top-notch direction and acting. Inarritu clearly has a knack for weaving stories together in unique and though-provoking ways. Though it feels overstuffed in the middle, the film does astonishingly well on the merits of its first and last acts alone. The movie shows that we live in a dog-eat-dog world, and some things are just out of our control.

After being fired from his job as a doorman, failed author, Harry Levine (Al Pacino) visits his photographer friend, Jake Manheim (Jerry Orbach) to collect an unpaid debt. Over the course of a night, the two have heated discussions and arguments about money, love, work, and friendship. Information begins to unveil about Harry’s latest manuscript, leading to wordy confrontations.

Adapted from Ira Lewis’ play, Chinese Coffee is Al Pacino’s feature directorial debut. It is clear that Pacino is better suited to be in front of the camera than behind it, as his direction here is very flat. Competent? Yes- but it is visually dull. As a movie made up primarily of talking, this isn’t such a big problem; however, it leaves the viewer thirsty for more.

Where the movie does create huge problems for itself lies with the script. Don’t get me wrong; much of the dialogue is brilliant, relentless, and emotionally damaging. The screenplay’s main issue is how it is structured. We see numerous flashbacks throughout the characters’ conversations, often while discussion is still going on. These flashbacks occur far too frequently, and are sometimes misused. Lines of dialogue will be referred to, and then actually shown in a recollection. Not only is it unnecessary for the viewer to hear lines spoken twice, a lack of trust is shown on the filmmakers’ part. Tell or show; don’t do both.

Each of the two lead actors gives an independently good performance. While Orbach plays his part well, Pacino has a slight return to form. He is closer here to the complex “Dog Day Afternoon Pacino” than to the growling, shallow “Heat Pacino.” Harry Levine is wonderfully portrayed as a “creature of the night”- an artist kept up by countless thoughts and cups of coffee, who would rather write a book than get a financially comfortable job. The most irksome thing that can happen to two great performances, therefore, is for the actors to lack chemistry with each other. Yes, Pacino’s almost revelatory turn is stifled by his lack of onscreen connect with Jerry Orbach. Consequently, a lot of the film’s witty dialogue feels forced, a major flaw when a movie relies almost completely on conversation.

At 99 minutes, the film goes on 10-15 minutes too long. Its bookends can easily be taken out, as can a few minutes of pure exposition. Talking can be very interesting, but one needs to know when enough is enough.

Chinese Coffee is a mixed bag. On one hand, you get an excellent Al Pacino performance, marred by lackluster chemistry. On the other hand, the middling direction is decent enough for this movie, while the good dialogue is weighed down by annoying flashbacks. I would only marginally recommend this to Pacino enthusiasts, as they may be disappointed by its lack of quality. For an actor turned director’s debut, it’s not bad; however, it’s not good, either. Chinese Coffee might be made with most of the right ingredients, but it still leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.

In Depression era Mississippi, Everett Ulysses McGill (George Clooney) and his partners Delmar (Tim Blake Nelson) and Pete (John Turturro) escape from prison. They embark upon a journey to find hidden treasure, encountering many friends and villains along the way. Some of these people include: George “Baby Face” Nelson (Michael Badalucco), a one-eyed con man (John Goodman), Everett’s wife (Holly Hunter), Ku Klux Klan members, and a satanic sheriff (Daniel von Bergen).

This Coen Brothers’ film, while a pretty funny adaptation of Homer’s epic poem, the Odyssey, is never as consistent as it should be. Supporting characters are often introduced on a scene-by-scene basis, rather than playing vital roles in the story as a whole. Even the characters that come back in the end, do so in underdeveloped ways. Many actors are wasted, especially Hunter and Goodman.

Except during one sequence near the end of the film, I never felt suspense for any of the characters. This is a big problem, because the movie contains many scenes that are clearly trying to be suspenseful. Since most of the characters are written as flat as cartoons, it is extremely difficult to suspend disbelief and relate with them. Roger Deakins’ digitally enhanced cinematography, while technically perfect, doesn’t do anything to help this situation. The main actors are shot in such a flawless manner, they sometimes look fake. It is hard to feel tension when your protagonists look like video game characters.

The film’s ending tries to be profound by throwing in a religious message. If the ending was not so utterly implausible, he message may have worked; instead, it adds an unnecessary and contrived plot line.

The humor here ranges from silly to very funny, and is one of the film’s saving graces. Sadly, the comedic scenes leave more to be desired, as they feel very episodic and often do not flow well with the movie’s poor pacing. Nevertheless, the comedy is well handled and makes for a good romp.

Chemistry between the three leads is potent, and gives the film some of the much-needed humanism that the script and direction lacks. Clooney gives the weakest performance out of the bunch, though he is still very watchable. Turturro’s facial expressions are fun to watch, and Blake Nelson’s child-like antics are incredibly funny and subtly touching.

No review of O Brother, Where Art Thou? would be complete without mentioning T-Bone Burnett’s soundtrack. While it gets slightly overused in the film, most of it works. In one scene, the lead characters record the song “I Am a Man of Constant Sorrow,” which sounds absolutely terrific.

O Brother, Where Art Thou? is not one of the Coen Brothers’ stronger films. It has heavy pacing and directing flaws, not to mention, clearly identifiable digital enhancement. Still, the acting is pretty good, with excellent chemistry on the part of its leads. The movie succeeds at being both a comedy and a musical, as it is fairly funny and has great songs. Less than the sum of its parts, but never truly bad film-making, it is both fun and frustrating.