Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit Review

MINOR SPOILERS:

What does it take to make a reasonably acceptable and middling action thriller nowadays? Step one: Insert blandly charismatic good-looking actor. Step two: Insert a villain from some foreign country and give him a silly over-the-top accent. And finally, step 3: Throw in a generic semi-plausible plot to destroy America to tie it all together and you got yourself Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit.

Well-known and respected in theatre and film circles, 5-time Oscar nominated Kenneth Branagh helms Shadow Recruit as he continues his foray into passionless crowd-pleasing commercial fare after the success of his 2011 film, Thor. With Shadow Recruit, Branagh takes on directing and acting duties and does an adequate job in both regards. And that is the perfect word to describe this movie: adequate. Everything is sleek and stylish but none of it resonates and none of it is engrossing or involving. With a vague title that sounds like it was plucked from some shoddy cheaply made video game, Shadow Recruit is one of those confounding movies that is very smartly and professionally put together and yet at the same time, is incredibly dumb. 

To rush through the plot much in the same way the film chooses to hurtle through it, Jack (Pine) is a young and gifted Economics student who decides to join the army after witnessing the events of 9/11. Next moment, he’s in a helicopter in Afghanistan that gets attacked by a Mujahideen missile. A moment after that, Jack is struggling to walk again at a rehab facility while also proceeding to fall in love with a medical student who may or may not be deathly anorexic (that might just be what Keira Knightley normally looks like; the movie never makes it clear). At the same time, he promptly gets recruited as an analyst by shady CIA operative Harper (Costner) and is tasked with monitoring Wall Street for traces of terrorist financing. All this, of course, is character-building at its finest. Fifteen minutes or so of rushed exposition in and we still have no clue who Jack Ryan is but no worries, we won’t know who he is by the time the movie’s over anyway. 

To specify what’s wrong with a movie such as this and pinpoint why exactly it is a failure, it all begins and ends with the characters. As Jack Ryan, Chris Pine does what Chris Pine always does in his films but very little of his natural charisma or charm comes through in Shadow Recruit’s script. A safe and insipid hodgepodge of characteristics, this edition of Ryan lacks the relatability or personality that Harrison Ford and Alec Baldwin managed to give the role in the past. The same criticism can be levelled at the other principal characters in Shadow Recruit. With Russians being the designated villains this time around, Kenneth Branagh does his best (read cartoonish) impression of a Russian accent as Victor Cherevin, a character with hazy and unclear motives of revenge and a plan to plunge America into a second Great Depression. With a penchant for classical music and a love of Napoleon (which is used in the oddest way possible as a hint at his future plans), Cherevin has as much depth as a villain you’d find in a B movie. To give you an idea of the crude subtlety of Shadow Recruit, the film chooses to introduce Cherevin to the audience by having him beat the crap out of some hapless random guy within about 20 seconds of introducing him. Why, you may ask? Well, how else are we supposed to know he’s a bad guy?! As Jack’s long-suffering girlfriend Cathy, Keira Knightley can do nothing with the weak and simplistic significant other role she’s stuck with. And although the film does spend a surprisingly considerable (and excessive) amount of time on the relationship element, do not be fooled: she is there solely as a plot device and to raise the stakes when she predictably and duly finds herself taken as a hostage. One of the main subplots of Shadow Recruit is Ryan’s struggle to reconcile the secrecy requirements of his job with being in a committed relationship but all of it is done without much conviction and it’s all something we’ve seen many times before (James Cameron’s True Lies does it best). The film also misses a golden opportunity as it commits the unforgivable crime of casting creepy looking go-to villain character actor Colm Feore and then proceeding to not reveal him to be a double-crossing traitor. 

Equipped with such characters and with a second-rate storyline that clearly got converted into a Jack Ryan vehicle, Shadow Recruit doesn’t demand much attention as it soon devolves into a disinterested series of events. As a result of this, the action set pieces, although solidly constructed, are completely neutered and fail to pack an emotional punch. Being a Jack Ryan movie, the film needs Ryan to propel the plot and to be at the forefront of all significant moments in the story but this requires a level of contrivance and silliness that simply cannot work if its scenes are played as straight as Shadow Recruit chooses to play them (a ludicrous motorcycle chase scene is one of many examples). In a moment of overly patriotic cheesiness, the completely unprepared Ryan luckily survives an assassination attempt and is told he made it out of there because he is a “marine”. And in what would be a comedic scene in a different movie, Ryan manages to crack Cherevin’s plot in less than a minute as he directs a group of analysts working feverishly on computers. Even the now-rescued and thus redundant Cathy has her moment to shine as she pitches in with her own bit of detective work. 

Verdict: As far as franchise revivals go, Shadow Recruit falls somewhere right smack dab in the middle of the pack. Instantly forgettable and completely devoid of personality, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit is one of those unique movies that leaves you struggling to remember details of it the moment you step out of the theatre. 

C

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 105 minutes

MPAA Rating: PG-13

Cast: Chris Pine, Kenneth Branagh, Keira Knightley, Kevin Costner

Director: Kenneth Branagh

Screenplay: Adam Kozad, David Koepp

Cinematography: Haris Zambarloukos

Her Review

SPOILERS:

It is the future. Technology is much more advanced and self-aware artificial intelligence has become a reality. In the realm of cinema, most would associate such a premise with evil sentient machinery, big action scenes and general mayhem, death and destruction. But in oddball director Spike Jonze’s very capable hands, that premise is the starting-off point of Her, a sweet and unconventional romantic film that tackles the surprisingly touching relationship between a man and an artificial operating system.  

While this may seem ridiculous at first glance, remember that Her comes from a director who took an exceptionally bonkers idea in Being John Malkovich (a movie based around a room that leads you to a portal into actor John Malkovich’s mind) and turned it into a very insightful film about the meaning of self and identity. Her is much more accessible than Jonze’s debut feature and is equally as effective as it takes place in a quirky futuristic Los Angeles where technology has inescapably attached itself to every facet of people’s lives. And aside from the characters’ bright and colorful wardrobes and laughably high beltlines, this is a world that isn’t very far off from the one we exist in today. People frequently contact each other via instant messaging or through the numerous social media platforms that have quickly become universally popular. Especially amongst younger people, this form of contact has become a significant part of a relationship and face to face interaction has consequently taken a hit for that very reason.

And our portal into this eccentric uniquely Jonzian world is the slightly odd Theodore (Phoenix), a man who has recently separated from his wife Catherine (Mara) and has subsequently fallen into a seemingly endless depression. Although he isn’t a completely anti-social recluse, Theodore is a loner stuck in a day to day routine of drudgery and misery. Perhaps motivated by boredom and almost on a curious whim, he purchases an artificially intelligent operating system that’s the latest new-fangled flashy product available in the market. And to his (and the audience’s) surprise, he soon strikes up a friendship with the perennially inquisitive and immediately endearing system that calls herself Samantha. Even more surprisingly, that initial friendship soon turns into something much more substantial. 

The handling of that blossoming relationship and the self-awareness of the peculiarity of it all is definitely the strongest aspect of Her. Jonze wisely doesn’t pass judgement on this relationship and we see the characters that Theodore encounters react to it in different ways. Theodore’s ex-wife is appalled and repulsed while it is seen as a norm and nothing too unusual to his best friend Amy (Adams). Everything is familiar but distorted in some way, much of it to humorous effect. Samantha has insecurities that most women have about their bodies, but in her case, her insecurity stems from the fact that she doesn’t have a body. They have silly arguments and awkward moments much like a typical couple does but there’s nothing typical about them. Little things Samantha does begin to annoy a frustrated Theodore, except in “her” case, it happens to be things like her habit of breathing heavily when she’s flustered despite the fact that she has no need for oxygen. And all credit is due to the actors for making such a relationship believable. Scarlett Johansson does a great job of giving the Samantha character a genuine quality of sorts and Joaquin Phoenix conveys a subtle and layered relationship with what is basically just a disembodied voice with amazing ease.

Even though this film is primarily about Theodore and Samantha, it focuses on the difficulties people have in establishing a connection. Theodore has an ill-fated date with an actual woman and his friend Amy’s long-term relationship falls apart. Frequently throughout the film, we witness other characters in Theodore’s world passing him in the streets and they’re all lost in their own gadgets, perhaps each with their very own Samantha. It is at this point that we arrive at what is a deceiving contradiction. Although all these people do not even talk to each other and seem isolated, they’re not. They all seek and crave connection with someone, with anything. And Theodore’s choice of profession is no random choice or coincidence. Theodore is a man who spends his days writing personalized letters that clients pay for to send to their relatives and significant others. It is a profession that captures the sadness of the state of what people’s interactions have become in this new world but at the same time, it sheds light on an inescapable fact: these people still care about each other and still desire meaningful relationships. Therein lies the paradox of Theodore’s character: although he is capable of conveying all this emotion and love in his day job, it is not his love that he is expressing, and thus he is separated and detached from it. 

And that is where we come to the pivotal question that this film raises: does the fact that Samantha is an artificially intelligent entity make their relationship any less real or their feelings any less genuine? The stroke of genius of this movie is that it doesn’t give an easy or simple answer. Jonze presents a number of obstacles throughout and although Her starts to drag as it treads on some old and worn stages in a typical movie relationship, the whole thing is still fascinating to watch as we find parallels between the dissolution of Theodore’s marriage and his doomed relationship with Samantha. Theodore witnesses his ex-wife grow and change over the course of the years and isn’t able to bridge the gap between them anymore. And the exact same thing happens with Samantha except at a much accelerated level; the constantly and exponentially advancing Samantha eventually grows too complex to be content with loving just Theodore and leaves him behind, perhaps never to return.  But the key difference is that after his experiences with Samantha, Theodore has learned to overcome his past issues and open himself up to having a true connection with someone else. In the end, we see that the broken man we meet in the beginning of the movie has moved on and turned a new page.

Verdict: Although not the strongest or most memorable Spike Jonze effort, Her is an effective film that takes the old and drawn out relationship movie concept and turns it into something that is both refreshing and exceedingly topical.

B

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 126 minutes

MPAA Rating: R

Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johansson, Amy Adams, Rooney Mara

Director: Spike Jonze

Screenplay: Spike Jonze

Cinematography: Hoyte Van Hoytema

Inside Llewyn Davis Review

With 4 films and 3 Best Picture nominations, the Coen brothers enjoyed an incredibly productive period between 2007 and 2010 and experienced some astounding success with True Grit (a movie that went on to become the second highest grossing Western of all time). Since then however, the writing-directing duo have been relatively quiet and after a 3 year long hiatus, they have finally returned with Inside Llewyn Davis, a film that comes with minimal box office appeal and an obscure subject matter to say the least.

New York City. It’s 1961 (yet another Coen film set in a very specific year) and down on his luck folk singer Llewyn Davis is going through one hell of a week. With no permanent address and perennially bouncing around the couches of various friends and family members, Llewyn’s records also happen to not be selling very well and his incompetent manager isn’t much help either. And what proceeds to unfold is a chain of events that are all seemingly pitted against him. Facing a return to the dreary life of a sailor on a merchant vessel, Llewyn is slowly and steadily coming to the realization that his unlikely dream of becoming a successful musician may be proving to be a bust. Throw in a lost cat, a constant lack of money and a general overall sense of the inevitable and you quickly get the feeling that Llewyn’s world is crumbling all around him and he’s helpless to do anything about it.

This film has a great cast and even Coen regular John Goodman makes a brief appearance but this is the story of Llewyn Davis and this is Oscar Isaac’s show. Audiences may recognize him from his brief appearance in Nicolas Winding Refn’s Drive or as the villainous orderly in Sucker Punch but his work here is clearly a major breakthrough. He’s a natural in this role and blends in nicely; it feels like he’s been a Coen brothers regular for years. What we have with Llewyn Davis is a critique of the quintessential long-suffering and misunderstood artist. Far too caught up in his own tragedy, Llewyn is clearly a gifted and talented musician but he just doesn’t have what it takes to become a success. Giving up everything to pursue his passion as a folk singer, he is desperate to find some way to resuscitate his dream, and amidst that struggle, we get glimpses at what made him the despairing figure he is in the film. Many of the characters he meets and encounters are essentially just tourists in the melodrama that is Llewyn’s life. Or perhaps, he’s the tourist drifting through their lives; it’s all a matter of perspective really. The tragic fate of his former partner is mentioned from time to time and while Llewyn doesn’t explicitly say so, it clearly has had a profound effect on him. He harbors a love for a taken woman who doesn’t particularly want to share in his dreams or in his love. He sees his father, a sad and senile old man unaware of his surroundings and drifting around aimlessly waiting for death and fears the same for himself. 

While this isn’t the greatest or most thematically rich and complex example of the Coen Brother’s work, it still makes for an an interesting if not compelling character study. Much like other Coen brothers films such as The Man Who Wasn’t There and A Serious Man, a seemingly endless series of misfortunes relentlessly keep piling on and on the protagonist but in the case of Inside Llewyn Davis, Llewyn seems to be the cause of his own undoing and the source of all those misfortunes. Llewyn is cold and flippant with people, rude and brazen at times when he shouldn’t be and he frequently says what’s on his mind with very little sensitivity to the person or the context of the situation. He simply doesn’t know how to treat people well and yet expects something different in return. He exhibits an unpleasant air of superiority about his work and his talent and frequently experiences pangs of jealousy when it comes to other musicians. When Llewyn gets saddled with an unwanted box of his albums, he subsequently finds an eerily similar box of albums of the work of a fellow musician whom Llewyn considers to be a talentless joke (perhaps a painful reminder that he isn’t that special or that different from the people he looks down upon). A jaded man who is tired of life and tired of resisting what appears to be a ceaseless tide fighting against him, you still can’t help but root for him inspite of his general unpleasantness. All that plagues him in his personal life seems to be what plagues his music career as well: his failure to make an emotional connection with others. We catch glimpses of opportunities at success or perhaps simply at happiness throughout that fateful week, but Llewyn chooses not to capitalize on them or just fails to see them at all. 

Even though this isn't a prototypical Coen brothers film, Inside Llewyn Davis shares many themes and parallels with the rest of their work. Their trademark black humour is present in little snippets and moments but for the most part, this is a detached filmgoing experience, even by Coen standards. There’s very little levity or sunshine to be found here. It’s a cold and heartless world and Llewyn Davis, try as he might, just can’t find a nice and safe spot to call his own in it. It’s never a certain thing with a Coen brothers movie, but more or less, this film is about the often crushing inevitability of life and its lack of interest in your dreams or your own petty struggles. Everything recedes and all your hopes and worries become nothing but a single drop in one big uncaring world. But in the middle of all this bleakness, what this film also shows is that we ultimately have the choice to make the most out of the cards we're dealt and find some happiness in life. This is a choice that Llewyn continually fails to make, thus becoming the latest in a series of Coen film protagonists who can't comprehend their lot in life and who refuse to acknowledge their power in influencing it.

And while this film does have a pretty straightforward narrative, it does go along at a meandering pace that may frustrate some and bore others. However, the appeal here isn't the narrative. If someone were to ask this writer what was most memorable about this film, it wasn’t really a single scene or one bit of dialogue. Rather, it is the general forlorn tone and mood that sticks with you and haunts you. Although the cinematography wasn’t the work of Coens’ regular Roger Deakins, it is definitely one of the mood-setting strengths of this film. Dark blue tinged hues dominate the environs of Llewyn’s world and perfectly capture the tone of this story; it is the middle of a cold and unforgiving winter in Llewyn’s life both literally and figuratively speaking. The folk music that the characters play quite regularly throughout this film is catchy and very melancholic and gives you a very immersive feel for the bleakness of Llewyn’s world as well. 

Verdict: Navigating the folk scene of 1960s Greenwich Village was never going to appeal to everyone and this film has a select audience that will enjoy it and even fewer who will love it but for all its limitations and drawbacks, this is still a well made and well told story that may resonate with some and give some food for thought for others. 

B

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 104 minutes

MPAA Rating: R

Cast: Oscar Isaac, Carey Mulligan, Justin Timberlake, John Goodman

Director: Joel & Ethan Coen

Screenplay: Joel & Ethan Coen

Cinematography: Bruno Delbonnel

The Wolf of Wall Street Review

SPOILERS:

Wall Street: Greedy bankers, immoral brokers, big stakes and even bigger falls. An old movie subject that has been covered time and time again but with The Wolf of Wall Street, Martin Scorsese brings us a story that is very current in its themes and refreshing in its presentation. A cautionary tale that is both timeless and poignant, The Wolf of Wall Street is about much more than just the wrongdoings of a few people manipulating stocks. Scorsese’s latest is based on the real life escapades of Jordan Belfort (DiCaprio), a Wall Street stockbroker who got rich and then lost it all after allegations of fraud and corruption eventually took him down.

Fresh faced and newly married, the naive Belfort learns the ropes of the trade from eccentric mentor Mark Hanna (McConnaughey) and also quickly learns what it takes to succeed in the cutthroat crazy up and down world of Wall Street. After the crash of 1987 results in him finding himself unemployed, Belfort is desperate to get back in the game as a stockbroker and sees a way in with the barely regulated penny stocks market. Surrounding himself with seedy salesmen and drug dealers and utilizing his savvy and know-how, Belfort exploits a gap in the market and begins making some serious money. Suddenly all the doors that were once closed are flung open and Belfort begins to have a lot of trouble not sampling everything available through all of these new openings. Discarding his old wife and bagging himself a new and improved one along with a mansion, yacht...etc, Belfort begins to lead a life of shocking indulgence that starts to get the attention of FBI agent Patrick Denham (Chandler). 

What Scorsese has done here is simply a remarkable achievement. This film is relentless and bombastic, the energy onscreen is contagious and it all makes for a truly great cinematic experience. And while this isn’t an outright comedy like After Hours or The King of Comedy, this might also just be the funniest movie of Scorsese’s career. Much of the humour (a lot of it improvised) is derived from some great dialogue and scenes involving Belfort and his fellow cohorts, and lots of laughs come from a sense of shock at the unbridled excess on display. But amidst the laughter, Scorsese asks difficult questions from his audience and puts our own terrible capacities and impulses at the forefront. He delves deep into the dark hidden recesses of human desire, of the insatiable wants and needs that we all have but are afraid to admit exist. By following the story of Belfort, this film asks what kind of person you have to be to find success in his world and whether or not that success and lifestyle is worth it. What Scorsese then proceeds to show us is that living like Belfort has a price and takes its toll. 

Tired of being poor his whole life, Belfort accepts his new lifestyle wholeheartedly and vows to never look back. But as repulsive and repugnant as his behavior is, lots of credit is due to DiCaprio for giving Belfort a likeability and affability of sorts. And while the motivational speeches he makes for his brokers throughout the film are ugly and almost animalistic in their narcissism and capricious greed, they are also oddly inspirational. Belfort is a man who flouts many of society’s norms and conventions but possesses a freedom in doing so that many people secretly desire. He does what he wants and satisfies every carnal urge and every craving and impulse but it is at a pivotal point of this film that we realize how addictive and destructive that lifestyle is. His love life and relationships are hollow and empty for the most part. Belfort’s brokerage is a snake pit of competition and deception; it’s all about self preservation and getting yourself the best deal possible. Belfort reaches his moment of truth when he can win and walk away from it all but he just can’t bring himself to do it and we groan when he makes that fateful decision. Why should the rollercoaster every stop running? Why stop when you can have more, more, more?!

One argument that has been leveled against The Wolf of Wall Street is that its main character doesn’t have as compelling an arc or as spectacular a fall as one would expect in this story. Structure-wise, it doesn’t stray very far from the template Scorsese utilized in Goodfellas and Casino. In those films, we follow the rise and fall of protagonists who live unconventional lives unapologetically and ultimately reap what they sow. People are fascinated with stories of criminals who live outside the law and violate cultural taboos of right and wrong because they secretly fantasize about doing so as well. The difference here is that, for all intents and purposes, Belfort pretty much gets away with it.  A deeply flawed and out of control character, Belfort loses his wife and children and goes to jail (albeit a white collar one) but you never get a sense that Belfort truly gets his comeuppance or learns much of anything. But perhaps that’s the point Scorsese is trying to make. This film has gotten criticism from many circles about how it glorifies and almost gleefully revels in the actions of Belfort and his cohorts but those making such an argument are missing the point of The Wolf of Wall Street. It should also be noted that while there is some truth behind this story, this movie isn’t too interested into sticking to the actual facts. This movie is more a statement about a society where men like Belfort can thrive and find success than about the machinations of Wall Street itself. People like him are condemned and demonized but they will always possess currency and value in our society because they have a secret that many people want to get in on. We live in a society where people hate and revile the elite 1% but at the same time, the rest of the 99% are desperate to join their ranks. After an article paints Belfort as a “Wolf” preying on the gullible and weak, any fears of negative publicity prove to be unfounded as the notoriety and promise of riches attracts even more people to his supposedly “immoral” institution. Get rich by any means you rationalize as acceptable is the message here. It is a rationalization that many people will find sickening and deplorable. But in practice, it is a very easy one to make. 

This brings us to the ending. The last image of this film packs a wallop and imparts a deeply biting criticism. By putting up a mirror on us, the audience, we are put on trial as well. We live in a world where motivational speakers and get rich quick schemes are all the rage. As Belfort exclaims in one of his speeches: “I want you to deal with your problems by being rich.” And this is the mentality that many of us, whether we want to admit it or not, have. In the very end, despite his chequered past and his bilking of countless people, everyone is hanging on Belfort's every word. Cut to FBI agent Denham, an upright man who seeks justice and does the right thing but ends up exactly where he started off: taking the long subway ride home. 

Verdict: With The Wolf of Wall Street, Martin Scorsese, perhaps the greatest American director still working in Hollywood, adds another masterpiece to a filmography that is already chock full of them. Throw in perhaps the best and most natural performance of Leonardo DiCaprio’s career and you have the makings of what might just a modern classic. 

A

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 159 minutes

MPAA Rating: R

Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Jonah Hill, Margot Robbie, Kyle Chandler

Director: Martin Scorsese

Screenplay: Terence Winter

Cinematography: Rodrigo Prieto