Sunday, May 1, 2016

God's Not Dead (2014), The Jungle Book (2016), Harper (1966), True Romance (1993)

God's Not Dead (2014)

What to say about God's Not Dead? How about if you can't say anything nice don't say anything at all. The films thesis, as reflected in the altered Nietzsche quote that serves as its title, is to alter a quote from Mark Twain 'Reports of God's death are greatly exaggerated'. The films takes on liberalism, and secularism, the educational establishment and atheism. I think there are people involved in the production who might have had some idea that this would serve as an outreach film to persuade the unbelievers, but in reality this is a preaching to the choir movie. Your not likely to win adherents to your cause when all you do is attack your potential converts. Unbelievers in this movie are hit by cars or stricken with cancer, the one Muslim man in the film is manipulative and controlling and later beats his daughter. There is a sympathetic exchange student from China, but he is depicted as a naïve sort who upon encountering what are apparently the first arguments for the existence of God he has ever heard quickly becomes a Christian.

This film is ostensibly about arguments for or against the existence of God, as the plot centers around a Christian college kid who must engage in a series of three debates against his philosophy professor in order to pass a class after he refuses to write the words God is Dead on a piece of paper and sign his name to it. The arguments made about God in the film are none to deep and obviously the deck is stacked in terms of who will come out victorious. Full of clichéd characters this is a surprisingly mean spirited film that is not really about atheist vs. theist, but about a sub group of particularly agitated Evangelical Christians vs. everybody else. Even many who would agree with this films underlying assertion have taken issue with the ways by which its filmmakers have chosen to make its point. *

The Jungle Book (2016)

Disney's big budget live action resurrections of their classic animated properties continues with The Jungle Book, though with the amount of CGI in this film I almost hesitate to call it 'live action'. Disney's 1967 animated film is the medium through which my generation, and a generation or two before and after me chiefly came to know Kipling's stories of the man cub Mowgli and the animal denizens of the Indian jungle. On the surface there is little reason to remake this, especially given how self consciously evocative of the early Disney film this movie is, but this new/old Jungle Book really works. It's a great family film, a timeless story, perfectly paced, playful, well cast (Christopher Walken's King Louie is inspired and worth the price of admission alone) and frankly amazing looking. I saw this in 3D on an IMAX screen and it was awe inspiring visually, it's hard to believe that there are apparently no actual animals in this movie. Jon Favreau is a talented director, and you might not guess that if all you really knew him from was his supporting role in the Iron Man films, a couple of which he actually directed. A lot of movies you don't need to see on the big screen but this one you really should. ***

Harper (1966)

This was the first screenplay by the great William Goldman (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Princess Bride) to be made into a film. Adapted from the 1949 Ross Macdonald novel The Moving Target, Harper is a great little detective film, complete with that old fashioned noir vibe but with a 1960's shine added to it. Paul Newman plays detective Lew Harper (in the source material the detective's name is Lew Archer) a PI hired by a millionaires wife (Lauren Bacall) to find her oft unfaithful and now missing husband. Harper's search sends him to various So Cal locations including a swanky hotel, a jazz club, the dock's and a hill top hippie "temple", where he interacts with colorful characters played by the likes of Shelley Winters, Robert Wagner, Storther Martin, Julie Harris, and Harold Gould. Janet Leigh plays Harper's wife, and Arthur Hill his friend. Largely forgotten 60's beauty Pamela Tiffin also appears, and she is really cute. Newman is having a fun time here playing a detective who easily adapts different personas, and sometimes accents, to get the information he needs. The pace is relaxed and the tone often playful, with a resolution not to be spoiled. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, and so did audiences of the time, the film made $12 million box office on a $3.5 budget. It even spawned a sequel nine years later called The Drowning Pool, which sadly is not available via Netflix. I hardily recommend this one. ***1/2

True Romance (1993)

Tony Scott directing from a screenplay by Quentin Tarantino in a film very reminiscent of Wild at Heart, that being the David Lynch film which I actually didn't like. Like Wild at Heart from three years earlier this film is a story of an Elvis obsessed misfit (Christian Slater) who crosses country with a lovesick blond (Patricia Arquette) and becomes mixed up with some very unsavory characters (Gary Oldman, James Gandolfini). Though the movie was made before Tarantino was that well known and his writing style then considered particularly fresh, watching this for the first time now it feels really old hat. I heard once that Tarantino insists on directing his own screenplays in part because he doesn't like what other directors do with his work, if that is the case this movie has got to be one of the reasons. Perhaps Tarantino is the only person who can really pull off directing a Tarantino screenplay because something about this movie didn't work for me. I thought it was uneven with the first two thirds being kind of a drag, while the last third felt a little crowded but generally satisfying. The climax of the film is classic Tarantino. The movies cast is large and loaded with good performances from the likes of Christopher Walken, Dennis Hopper, Saul Rubinek, and even Bronson Pinchot. Brad Pitt has an amusing cameo role as a stoner roommate. While some of the parts were great the whole just didn't come together for me, or rather it just didn't blow me away like I hopped it would. I'm going to be generous to the film however, even though to quote a character from early in the story this "isn't my cup of tea" I can recognize some quality in the blend. ***


No comments: