Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008)

/

(this is a quick and lazy review - I saw this movie a week ago and forgot to write it up)

I did a quick check of Judd Apatow movies (both as a director and as a producer) over the last few years. Here's what it boils down to: ANCHORMAN, 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN? Loved 'em. SUPERBAD and WALK HARD? Liked 'em. TALLADEGA NIGHTS? Okay (thank God for John C. Reilly). KNOCKED UP? Sorry, I hated it. And having never seen an episode of How I Met Your Mother, Undeclared or Freaks and Geeks I had no opinion of Jason Segel. Well shame on me, because FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL may turn out to be my favorite of the bunch, thanks in no small part to a great script and performance by Segel.

The bones of the story may be a cliche from a hundred other movies - girl breaks up with boy, boys meets new girl, things get complicated - but Segel brings enough warmth and laughs to make it seems fresh. He's helped by an amazing cast, which is the true strength of any Apatow production. Every single cylinder fires. Kristen Bell, who in an alternate universe is still doing Veronica Mars and is coincidentally married to me in a polygamous relationship with my wife takes a huge left turn from her normal roles to play the title character, and it's to her credit that by the movie's end we see her in a different light, even if we're not rooting for her. I've never really liked Mila Kunis in anything I've seen her in. But here it's like someone replaced her with the HAWESOME version of Mila Kunis, because she is absolutely fall-in-lovable as the "new girl" Segel's character, well, falls in love with. Paul Rudd again proves he's the go-to guy in comedies, and Jonah Hill basically does what he does, and since it's used sparingly in SARAH MARSHALL it works fine.

Crap. I forgot to mention that that guy Kenneth from 30 Rock is in this. And he is frickin' hysterical.

I wish I could go into detail about all the other great roles played by the hotel staff, but then I wouldn't have room to talk about Jason Segel and his penis. Because that seems to be what everyone talks about when talking about this film. So I knew going in there was going to be full-frontal from a CBS sitcom star. And I still laughed out loud when it happens. Besides writing a pretty tight script, Segel's performance works on multiple levels, fleshing out (sorry) what might have been a paper performance in the hands of someone else. Yes we root for him to find ultimate happiness, but our perception of him also changes as the film runs, and maybe find he's partly to blame for the breakup.

All this plus Muppets and a rock and roll musical about Dracula. FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL was a crap-load of fun and a definite recommendation for anyone looking for a good comedy that doesn't involve Harold or Kumar (but does feature another member of How I Met Your Mother).

The Forbidden Kingdom (2008)

/

If there's a overlying theme to the issues in THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM, it's that the potential was there for so much more. The fact that the film is a light, enjoyable confection almost feels besides the point. Yes, I left the theater happy. Yes, the long awaited fight scene between Jackie Chan and Jet Li is great. But I couldn't help feeling that with only a few changes this could have gone from an enjoyable confection to a great modern fantasy adventure film.

Michael Angarano plays Jason, the scrappy young hero obsessed with kungfu a la the Shaw Brothers and Bruce Lee, making frequent trips to his local back alley Chinese antiques shop to pick up bootleg films and make friendly conversation with the wizened proprietor (played by Chan in one of two roles). Of course he doesn't actually know any kungfu. When forced by some thugs help rob the shop, he comes to possess a magical staff that belonged to the fabled Monkey King (played by Li in one of two roles). He takes a nose-dive off the top of the building trying to escape and falls square into ancient China, where he bands together with a drunk immortal (Chan), a traveling monk (Li), and a young woman thirsting for revenge (insanely beautiful Yifei Liu) in order to return the staff to the Monkey King and restore order to the Three Kingdoms.

That's it. Shades of THE WIZARD OF OZ and THE NEVERENDING STORY filter what boils down to a modern US-friendly retelling of Journey to the West. Jackie Chan looks like he's having more fun in an American movie than he's had in years, especially when tossing out some fan favorite Drunken Boxing. The fight choreography by the legendary Woo-ping Yuen is amazing and plays with a lot of classic martial art forms and movie moments. Everything is beautiful and there are plenty of good laughs, so what's the problem?

Well, let's take 'em one at a time, starting with the bookend scenes that take place in the modern world. Do you remember the bad guys from Jackie Chan films like RUMBLE IN THE BRONX, where it's obvious that the inner city "hoods" are so unrealistic as to be laughable? Same problem here - I thought the main villain was going to break out in a number from WEST SIDE STORY at any moment. I know it's too much to ask, but I would had loved to see a these scenes done Scorsese-style, circa TAXI DRIVER: the grit and dirt of a more realistic portrayal would have been a much better contrast to the beautiful dream-like quality of the scenes in China.

Rob Minkoff's last directing job was the Disney adaptation of THE HAUNTED MANSION starring Eddie Murphy. Does this fill you with confidence? There's no personality to the directing at all. That may not be a huge hurdle when you're basically letting effect and spectacle tell the story, but when you have two of the most popular action stars in the world fight together for the first time, you want to make those scenes sing. Instead all the fight scenes, while brilliantly choreographed, are filmed with the typical Hollywood polish that doesn't allow the grandeur and grace of the movements to show through. I've yet to find a Western director who could really film a martial arts sequence (maybe the Washawskis or Luc Besson?) with the same passion that Ang Lee or Yimou Zhang demonstrated in their modern wuxia films.

I don't want to make too much of a deal about the script, except to say the first words that come of Jet Li's mouth are "No, FOOL!" 'Nuff said.

Understand: NONE of this hampered my enjoyment of THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM. Jackie Chan displays a charm and warmth sadly missing from such dross like RUSH HOUR 3 and ably holds his own in the fight scenes, showing more chops then most people half his age. Sure, in a perfect word this would have been co-directed by Martin Scorsese and Yimou Zhang, but when you're working against films THE TUXEDO and AROUND THE WORLD IN EIGHTY DAYS, I'll take the lightweight fun of THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM any day.

The Happening (2008)

/

You can't glance sideways without finding someone extolling how horrible THE HAPPENING is on the Web. Cries of rage mix with clamoring to burn M. Night Shayamalan in effigy. Is the movie is that bad? Or is it that past efforts like THE SIXTH SENSE and UNBREAKABLE compel us to expect more from the heralded "New Master of Suspense"? The were a few (very few) people who defended it. Roger Ebert gave it 3-stars and admired its quiet, deliberate pacing. And some guy from a men's website called Mansized (?) called it a "minor classic" which may be a little much, but the site's called "Mansized" so, there you go.

I wouldn't call THE HAPPENING a horrible movie, but it is a bad movie, and it's a maddening movie, because Shayamalan is incapable of making a movie completely devoid of value (yeah, I liked LADY IN THE WATER) and it's those fleeting moments in this film that make you so frustrated, because the rest of the movie sits there like a rock.

In brief: An "event" begins early in the morning in Central Park. People space out in the middle of whatever they're doing, walking the dog, playing in the park, reading a book. Then, slowly and very deliberately, they find the easiest available method and kill themselves. Mass suicide, and over the course of the day it gradually expands to envelop much of the Northeast. What's happening? Why? The movie follows a high school teacher and his wife as they attempt to flee Pittsburgh and find a safe haven from the inexplicable threat.

The scenario, and the explanation behind it is a great hook for a story, and if you're one of the few people left unaware of the "secret" I won't ruin it for you here. Besides, Shayamalan ruins it within the first 15 minutes of the film, thanks to a screenplay that repeatedly beats you over the head with its message. In a bizarre turnaround from the usual "trick ending" that seems to have been a staple (for better or worse) of Shayamalan's previous work, the audience is instead bludgeoned with the explanation multiple times throughout the movie. Was the thought process that the explanation was so unbelievable the audience wouldn't buy into it until it was too late?

Much of the wonder and merit of his earlier films come from the quiet, intimate moments between characters. The relationships and motivations of the characters is what allows us to buy into whatever conceit Shayamalan is selling (i.e. ghosts, invincibility, aliens, etc) - the only reason SIGNS turned out as good as it did was for the wonderful character moments. My wife will still say that she leaves half-empty cups of water around the house because "they're contaminated." In THE HAPPENING we get none of that subtle magic, we're instead treated to bland, rote conversations and flabby exposition, which is weird when you consider the movie is less than 90 minutes.

Mark Wahlberg plays Elliot, the teacher on the run and he does the best he can saddled with inane dialog and wearing a worried, helpless look the entire time. I don't fault Wahlberg for this, anymore than I fault John Leguizamo, who plays Elliot's best friend, a fellow teacher who along with his eight year old daughter Jess is separated from his wife and is desperate to get to her. He's probably is the best thing in the movie, which is a shame since he's only in a handful of scenes. I think Zooey Deschanel is cute as a button, but lifeless in the role of Elliot's wife, a woman with trouble expressing her feelings. You know this becuase she says "You know I have trouble expressing my feelings." I'm not asking for Shakespeare here, but Shayamalan is capable of better than this.

Well, maybe the story and dialog aren't that great. At least we can fall back on some wonderful visuals, right? I mean, if nothing else we've seen countless evidence that the guy can frame a scene, can't he?

Hello?

There ARE some truly eerie moments in THE HAPPENING. The opening scene that sets the stage for how the threat manifests itself is classic reminiscent of later Alfred Hitchcock. Early in the film is an uninterrupted take following a series of deaths tied to a pistol. Everyone is filmed from the knees down, and it's beautiful in how it leads you along an inevitable path from which you can't look away. The ending, although telegraphed from miles away is still effective because it's such an odd visual. And the pacing of the film, the constant quiet, is a nice contrast to what's usually out in the market as a "horror" film. Everything else? Shocking. Poor camera choices, weird framing that does nothing to expand or highlight the story, and a lack of any real menace or threat to make us care about the protagonists.

And I think that is what's making everyone so angry - the seeds of a disturbing film are all in place, there are small moments of beauty (e.g. somewhere someone already mentioned this, but there's an amazing moment with Leguizamo when he leaves his daughter with Wahlberg and snaps at Deschanel, "Don't take my daughter's hand unless you mean it.") and small moments of menace, but the rest is so ineptly handled you want to kill someone because now this conceit is ruined for a better person to try.

I don't think I'll ever count M. Night Shayamalan out as a filmmaker, I just wish he would have taken the time and craft to make this the classic it should have been.