|
Connect with Facebook
|
By devon, on November 24th, 2010
The Kids are All Right (2010)
By Devon Gilbert
The Kids are All Right is a well-made movie about marriage. In a lot of ways it is a basic movie about the subject. For example, one partner doesn’t have enough time for the other because of work and one partner is having a fling with somebody else, just like any movie about marriage. In this movie, the couple going through the normal trials of marriage is Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Julianne Moore). Both Nic and Jules used the same donor’s sperm to get pregnant, so they have raised two children together. Though they are a lesbian couple, they don’t seem much different than any other marriage. Their kids, Laser (Josh Hutcherson) and Joni (Mia Wasikowska), seem to also view their parents as perfectly normal too. However, Laser is interested in meeting his donor father, Paul (Mark Ruffalo), so he gets Joni to set up a meeting since she is now 18 and can request one.
Right off the bat I will say the premise is very routed in real human emotions. It’s very understandable that no matter how much the kids love their moms, they would be curious about their sort of father. It’s also understandable that Paul might really take to the kids and feel sort of like their father, because technically I guess he is. Finally, it’s understandable that Nic and Jules will feel threatened by this because it could potentially disrupt their family unit. And let’s face it; the premise for this movie is only going to become a more common one in America as time goes on. It is nice to see a comedy that has its head grounded in reality, though this movie’s more like a dramedy. There are some funny parts and parts that just make you smile, but ultimately the movie gears more toward drama. Though to be fair, the movie is never sad and it’s certainly not heavy.
In some ways I wish the movie had gone for more of a comedy vibe or gone the opposite route and gotten more serious with the material. There are some humorous situations and funny lines but mainly the movie focuses on how Paul’s presence is breaking down Jules’s family, though mostly because Jules sleeps with him. Without this being a straight comedy I would have expected some serious issues to be addressed. For instance, I mentioned before that the kids were all right with their parents being lesbians (and indeed the title of the movie acknowledges this) but you’re telling me they don’t get teased at school for it? And honestly, Laser wouldn’t ever get mad and say something about them being lesbians? I doubt it. The movie should have dealt with that but my biggest gripe is how director Lisa Cholodenko treats Paul.
Paul seems like nothing but a nice guy and a positive father figure in the lives of Laser and Joni. Many scenes of the movie even show the positive aspects of having a father figure for the children, like how he lets Joni live a little by riding on back of his motorcycle or how he plays basketball with Laser. Yet in the end the movie treats him almost like a villain, essentially saying Nic and Jules family was perfect before he came around. I found that outrageous, especially since the worst (and really only) bad thing he did was have sexual relations with Jules. The sex was totally mutual and instigated by Jules (who is the one betraying a spouse and so is obviously the more guilty one), yet in the end the kids and Nic are madder at Paul. That felt a little off and I would have at least liked an explanation. And did Nic and Joni really never discuss how having a father figure seemed to be a good thing for the kids, or were they too selfish? Or could the movie not handle the discussion without ending the movie with the message it wanted to end with.
Ultimately I think The Kids are All Right is a good movie, but no masterpiece. The acting by Bening, Moore, and Ruffalo is excellent. The dialogue and pace work well too. And as a movie about marriage and its hardships, it’s also a winner. The movie is light, the characters likeable, and there is room for thought afterward. I just wish the movie had tackled its subject with a little more honesty. Clearly the point of this movie was to show that two lesbians could raise a family just as well as any heterosexual couple, thru good times and bad. That point would be stronger had they not ignored the idea of fathers in the lives of children, especially since this movie seems to show that it is good to have a father figure only to ignore that fact because it didn’t fit into writer/director Lisa Cholodenko’s PC message that lesbians can raise a family too.
The Kids Are All Right: B
By devon, on July 8th, 2010
Legion (2010)
I wonder why so many biblical horror movies turn out so boring? Movies like The Omen (the remake, though I won’t even go near the old one because I know that’ll be boring), Stigmata, and definitely The Reaping. It seems like the Bible, with all its huge fantastical happenings and the struggle between right and wrong, would make excellent horror movie fodder. Of course, some times it does, like with The Exorcist. And religious themes make it into horror all the time (for example, crosses killing vampires), but I’m talking about movies directly centered on religious mythology.
I bring this up because the movie Legion, by first time director Scott Stewart, had lots of possibilities but falls short. The plot centers on the fallen Archangel Michael (Paul Bettany) trying to protect a pregnant woman Charlie (Adrianne Palicki) in a grungy diner located in the middle of the New Mexico desert. He is protecting her because God’s lost faith in humanity and has basically decided to destroy the human race. Of course, Charlie’s baby will bring salvation to mankind even though I never really found out why. The diner is filled with normal horror movie characters. For instance a black gangster (Tyrese Gibson) who we learn has, surprise, never actually shot someone, a rich white family, and a father (Dennis Quaid) who has issues with his son (Lucas Black.) The stereotypical characters didn’t bother me though, the lack of creativity did.
With the exception of a crazy old lady that climbs on the ceiling and a creepy looking ice cream man (both ruined by commercials), God’s plan to annihilate humans is by sending zombies after them. Freakin’ zombies. I like zombie movies, and am looking forward to Resident Evil 4, but they are getting a little old. Especially in a movie like this, which shouldn’t even have zombies to begin with. So I would say the majority of this movie is a barely mediocre, tame zombie flick. True, Michael’s enemy the Archangel Gabriel (Kevin Durand) shows up ready to kill, but it results in some okay fight scenes leading to the end of the film. The plot is really too silly, implausible, and stale to overcome mediocre scares and fight scenes.
The cast is good for a horror movie of this caliber, which it should be considering most of the cast has plenty of experience. The story could have used a lot of work, especially in the creativity department. There really aren’t any scary parts and the action scenes are just okay. If you go into this movie with very low expectations, you might enjoy it as a better than average TV movie. Legion is far from the worst the horror genre has to offer, but it offers little reason to watch it.
Devon says: C-
By devon, on July 8th, 2010
Edge of Darkness (2010)
Edge of Darkness is an old-fashioned revenge movie that feels like it was made in the 80’s but has the look of a modern movie. That’s a compliment though. It feels nice to watch a film that was intelligently made but wants to do nothing more than entertain. It feels even better that it was made for adults when it could have easily been converted to a PG-13 film. I would say it’s director Martin Campbell’s (famous for GoldenEye, Casino Royale, and the Zorro films) most mature film.
The plot of Edge of Darkness moves forward a bit slowly and seriously, but it has bursts of action that are exciting. Mel Gibson plays Thomas Craven, a Boston homicide detective that loves his daughter but has drifted apart from her over the years. When Emma (his daughter) comes for a visit, she is murdered in front of him on his front steps. So of course, it’s time for Craven to figure out why and kill whoever’s responsible. His investigation into her death uncovers a conspiracy involving a weapons company (the fictional Northmoor), teenage activists, radiation poisoning, and a shady clean up man. The movie runs thru the thriller motions in a basic fashion, but the plot feels intelligent and logical. The very well written dialogue didn’t hurt either. Nor did the totally awesome and bloody climax.
This movie had several strengths. Mel Gibson is excellent as a vengeful cop with nothing to lose, which is to be expected. So is Ray Winstone as the clean up man Darius Jedburgh. Jedburgh is more of a mystery than Craven, and in a lot of ways more interesting. I was forced to wonder what kind of person Jedburgh really was whenever he was up on screen, though I felt Craven was a more entertaining character. The few times when both are on screen are some of the movie’s best scenes. I liked the serious feel of this movie too, it makes everything feel more realistic. I really loved the shoot ‘em up, bloodly yet realistic ending too.
My only real problem with this movie would be that it is kind of slow in parts. There seemed to be more quiet talking scenes than action scenes, though some of that dissapointment might be from hearing it was an action packed movie from several film critics. I also would have liked to learn more about the bond, or lack of one, between Craven and his daughter throughout the movie. That would have added some more emotion to the preceddings.
All in all, I think this is a solid thriller with good production values that is best to view only once. I’ve never seen the mini-series it’s based on (which has the same name and director) but I have to believe the movie’s better. I mean, why stretch the story out longer? Plus, the main character doesn’t kiss his daughter’s dildo, which he actually does in the mini-series.
Devon says: B+
|
Recent Comments