When steadfast certainty collides with unrepentant righteousness, a doubt is born. And in the hands of a skilled author, such conflict makes for one hell of a film. John Patrick Shanley has exploited this situation–and done it beyond compare–for a his magnum opus, Doubt. The plot is elegant, yet simple.

An old guard nun perceives a transgression by an up and coming priest involving one a middle school students under her supervision. When she questions the priest, the sparks fly.

Had any other actors besides Meryl Streep and Phillip Seymour Hoffman attempted this material, it would have been larceny. God bless them both for A-plus performances. Believable and credible, Meryl and Phillip deliver the goods.

More impressive than the acting, the movie transcends the usual snares that derail play adaptations. Namely a key plot point that sets the story in motion occurs off-stage, “before” the story. Often the genesis–when it is revealed–proves more interesting than anything in the production, which is why I dislike most plays. Good casting and direction often compensates for such mangling of plot; however this is generally a distraction, clever though it may be.

There is no such ruse at work in Doubt. It delivers the goods, scene after scene.

What works about Doubt:

1) Cast. Hoffman deserves an Oscar and a Golden Globe.

2) Direction. Kudos for making something that appears on the surface religious, so secular and universal.

3) Texture. Lots of little subtleties develop and demonstrate character.

What to keep in mind:

1) Like a play, there are less scenes than in a typical movie. At the same, those scenes trend on the longish side.

Verdict: Theater full-price. Buy the DVD. Oscars all around.

A well constructed horror film works in any language. Creepy is after all, creepy. Written and filmed in Spanish and set in South America, The Orphanage proves that precept mightily.

It’s a simple premise–a woman purchases the orphanage she grew up in as a child for the purpose of raising a few physically challenged children. But then things start going wrong. Strange, unsettling events. Her adopted son’s imaginary friends suddenly don’t seem so imaginary. An intruder runs away from the shed with a shovel in the middle of the night. Her son disappears without a trace. Less than twenty minutes in, my poor Spanish skills stopped being an obstacle; the narrative took me away.

The Orphanage is terrifying. Yet the movie also enlightens, because there is a point to the tale–a reason for the madness. Better still, the characters follow their internal script in a believable and engaging fashion. And for all the terror, in a strange sense, it ends on a very bittersweet note. Very satisfying.
What works:

1) Direction. Creative and expert use of narrative story-telling. Shot after shot added to the tension.

2) Story arc. Original and entertaining.

3) Scare factor: If the intensity could be measured on a tachometer, the film continually red lines.

Challenges:

1) Language barrier. Since it is shot in Spanish, reading the subtitles took some adjustment. However, the awkwardness quickly passes.

Verdict: Catch in the theater, full price. Or DVD purchase.

Jack Nicholson still has the unflinching ability to make me laugh hard enough to spew water from my mouth. Fortunately, as with another Nicholson opus, Something’s Gotta Give, there was no one in the seat immediately north.

The Bucket List is his latest film, and it’s a tour de force. A touching comedy about a serious issue, this film ponders the question, if you knew when you were going to die, what would you do about it? And I’m delighted to say, the answer is live every second with purpose.

Morgan Freeman and Jack Nicholson are roommates in a hospital Jack owns. Together as they battle their cancer into remission, the shared experience forges an unexpected friendship. When Jack discovers a discarded list of items Morgan wanted to accomplish before he dies, he convinces Morgan to not only finish writing the list, but do as many of the things as they can immediately.

And so the two elderly cancer patients skydive, race classic cars, go on Safari, and travel the world, taking the audience on a great ride and a heartbreaking conclusion.
The Bucket List is funny and moving and has a great message. Above all it’s a great film.

What works:

1) Cast. Come on it’s Uncle Jack and Captain Morgan! What more does a film need?

2) Story Arc. Believable and well-crafted.

3) Rob Reiner can direct a great film. After nearly twenty years of half-ass flops, this is the narrative bookend to Stand By Me.

What needs improvement:

1) Maybe you have not seen The Bucket List yet. Yeah, fix that!

Verdict: Theater full price and buy the DVD.

The state of the American box office lately straddles the line between tragic and unfortunate. Besides the Bourne Ultimatum, Transformers and Disturbia this year’s releases were–ahem, dare I say it–crappy and uninspired.

And so for much of 2007, I gave up on seeing movies in the theater. DVD’s were cheaper and more convenient, plus spared me from the hordes of whack-a-dus treating a darkened room with reclining seats as if they were watching the Super Bowl on a La-Z-Boy in their living room. Hence the paucity of movie reviews this year.
I set this malaise aside for American Gangster and was not only entertained, I was wowed.

Frank Lucas, a criminal mastermind who came to power at the tail end of the Vietnam War smuggling pure heroin from the Far East and unloaded smack twice as pure as the competition on the streets of Harlem. He made a lot of money, wrecked countless lives, and eventually spent 15 years in a federal prison, turning State’s evidence against former cronies.

But Frank Lucas was also a momma’s boy, who attended church every Sunday with his family, and handed out turkeys at the Holidays. He bought his mother a house the size of a football field and ran with dignitaries and sports legends. Plus his Momma chewed him out in front of other people.

Richie Roberts, a detective no one would work with because he ignored conventional wisdom on tracking the flow of narcotics. If there was anyone who could take down a drug dealer above the Mafia, it was his team. The work took a toll on his private life; he was an absent husband and father. These were complex men on a collision course. Which makes a film based on true events of his life so interesting.What works about American Gangster:

1) Casting. Absolutely critical. If it was anyone but Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe, this movie would not work as well.

2) Pacing. Never a dull moment.

3) Story Arc. Though the director takes liberties with actual events, the dramatic license pays out handsomely. The conflict sizzles on the screen.

Recommendation: If you like crime movies, this is a must, plus own on DVD.

When the San Francisco Police Department pulled resources away from the first media driven serial killer investigation in history, author Robert Graysmith began his own inquiry. Over the course of a decade plus journey, he chased clues and witnesses all over California. Sometimes he worked against the police, sometimes with them. Relentless. Fearless. And in some way, hopeless, Graysmith paid a heavy price for his truth, losing his family to what they considered an obsession. Now his exploration forms the basis of a major motion picture. A good one, at that.

Countless producers and studios considered adapting the book for screen; only David Fincher had the nerve and skills to make it happen. I’m glad Fincher did, because in another director’s hand, this project might have degraded into the realm of the un-watchable. And it wouldn’t have been the material that caused the issue.

The backdrop, in fact, is fascinating. A lone murderer–possibly with military training, definitely with a flair for the cinematic–taunted police and the media with letters filled with ciphers, and attracted international attention. After all the time and effort, to this day no one has ever been arrested for the crimes, which may number from five to thirteen murders. The film, like the book, paints a clear picture of one particular suspect. Yet, no matter how compelling the case for this suspect may be, it does not resolve the case. Without a prosecution, the killings stand as an open wound, an affront to one’s sense of justice.

And this standoff may continue. It’s a conflict that one can live with, for one hundred and fifty three minutes of the film’s run time, and well beyond. Because that’s how it is. All who let the case affect them, are never the same.
What works about Zodiac:

1) Great cast. Robert Downey Jr. is brilliant, and Jake ( as Graysmith ) does the obsessed writer thing to a T.

2) Aesthetics. Impossible camera angles and shots make Zodiac an interesting film to watch.

3) Believability. Taking Graysmith’s account as an honest recreation of facts, the story arc is plausible.

What needs improvement:

1) A little less investigation into the Zodiac, a little more Zodiac in action. But then, that’s how it happened. Lots of time and effort chasing a ghost.

Verdict: For Fincher/Zodiac noir fans, theater full price / DVD purchase. For the casual observer, DVD purchase.

Rented 2 DVD’s this weekend, films that I skipped purposely in the theater, because they were better suited for an in home viewing. First up: Lady in the Water.

Admittedly, I am a M. Night Shyamalan admirer, one who wanted to like this movie, because his previous 4 films ranged between quite good and excellent, and I enjoyed each on a multiplex screen. Enough peers warned me off this flick, so I passed, and waited for the DVD. I watched it carefully, and will make only one observation. The real problem with this movie was the form; it needed to be a book. Interesting characters, a workable situation and a reasonable paced plot, Lady could have been a great read. A classic fairy tale, even. Some imagery plays well mentally, yet translate those same ideas for screen, and it falls short. Also, because the medium lacks the depth to bounce between a number of characters thoughts, complicated story arcs get lost, or dampened. Both compromises happened here. Chalk it to an extremely ambitious concept executed with the right intentions, but unfortunately in the wrong media.

Hollywoodland suffers from a different–and oh so similar–problem. This concept was the stuff of a made for television movie, twenty years too late. As a twelve-year-old, I might have liked this one as the Sunday Afternoon Million Dollar Movie. Alas, it surfaced in 2006, fifty years after George blew–or someone blew–his brains out across his bedroom wall. Ben Affleck did better than I expected, and Adrien Brody is a talent of note, but otherwise this could have been done for a lot less scratch, and for similar results. The storyline offered countless possible explanations for the former Superman’s death, yet very few reasons to care about the characters, why someone might want to kill him, or why he wanted to die.

Verdict: Lady, rentable; Hollywoodland, flushable.

Based on a true story, Breach follows the tail end of a massive internal investigation of FBI agent Robert Hanssen, who was arrested for treason and espionage in 2001. And interesting as that sad chapter in American intelligence might be, the biggest problem weighing down this thriller is that everyone already knows how the story ends at the outset. Unlike other fictional recreations, like Titanic, here we don’t root for survivors, or the heroes trying to save the children.

Perhaps for security purposes very little of what happened can be shown, and the director wanted to honor real events which meant pulling punches. Maybe the story arc did not lend itself to a visual adaption. But if either is the case, going for the dramatic would have been acceptable, and a lot more entertaining. A bit of artistic license goes a long way. Ultimately there is not much story to Breach.

What works:

1) Tight, zinger based dialog keeps many of the scenes afloat.

2) Chris Cooper. Great actor caught in a mediocre movie, yet he makes the best of his sentence.

What needs improvement:

1) Ryan Phillipe. He’s just cursed.

2) The script. Going for inspired by a true story, i.e. keep the names and the fact that Hanssen got arrested and invent the rest, would have unleashed a cosmos of drama and entertainment. Instead, I got warm milk and stone cold cookies.

3) The concept: In the wake of 9/11, do audiences really want to see the FBI in an unflattering light? Because they look bad here. Just awful.

Verdict: Cable.