Review: "Maleficent"

Director: Robert Stromberg
Runtime: 97 minutes

I'm sure there are loads of think pieces out there blasting Hollywood for repeatedly giving cinematographers, visual effects supervisors, and the like the director's chair for big budget tentpoles. I'm sure those think pieces make many valid points, and I'm sure they make them quite well. Yet this review only has room to target one such person inexplicably charged with directing ("directing") a major star vehicle. His name is Robert Stromberg, and he deserves to be verbally tarred and feathered for the visually bloated disaster that is Disney's Maleficent.

The latest in a line of live action re-imaginings of classic Disney fairy tales (next up: Brannagh does Cinderella! No, really. It's a thing.), Maleficent easily deserves to go down as the worst of the lot. What should be an enjoyable, even if generic, showcase for a brilliantly cast Angelina Jolie, is a sluggish, ineptly-handled attempt at summer entertainment.

As much as the camera loves Jolie as the iconic Sleeping Beauty villain (now a tragic antihero), even she can't overcome Linda Woolverton's abysmal script and Stromberg's unbearably hack-y directing. Small moments here and there work (Jolie's handling of baby Aurora's christening scene is dynamite), but they're nothing more than drops in the ocean. 

And even though Maleficent is bad, it's shocking how baffling its badness truly is on all fronts. Despite a visual effects supervisor in the director's chair, there are a distracting number of scenes with jarring, shoddy green screen work. Not helping matters are the plastic-y CGI creations, which look like rejects from 2012's Snow White and the Huntsman. 

Just as bad is the editing, which is somehow the work of two people, and not a single, overeager film student. When the cutting isn't merely getting the job done, it goes of in puzzling, risible ways. There are artificial snap zooms, "dramatic" blurry effects, as well as other trademarks of the "more is better" school of editing. 

Before I become as big of a mess as Maleficent, I must return to Ms. Woolverton and her writing. There are cliches, and there are painful cliches. Maleficent is overflowing with the latter. Worst of all is the painfully forced comic relief, which puts wonderful actresses like Imelda Staunton, Leslie Manville, and Juno Temple in some truly embarrassing situations. I can't remember the last time I felt so, so bad for a group of actors working with bottom-of-the-barrel material. May they all find their way into a Mike Leigh movie as soon as possible. 

Alas, I'm losing focus. Elle Fanning is in this movie too, though her radiant self shows up far too late to undo any of the damage wrought by Stromberg, Woolverton, and their merry band of fools. The only thing done remotely right is the reworking of Sleeping Beauty's waking from true love's kiss. It's a genuinely nice touch (albeit eye-rollingly foreshadowed) that subverts the outdated love-at-first-sight ideology of the animated film. If only it were put to use in a story that was being told with some semblance of intelligence or care (I'd say "and," but I think I'd be setting the bar a bit too high). 

In fact, Maleficent is such a wreck that I don't even want to see it remade by more capable hands. Hollywood had its chance for a Maleficent-centric fairy tale for this generation, and it has failed spectacularly. I have enjoyed all of the film's major actors on multiple occasions (I'll overlook Oldboy, Sharlto Copley), yet there's no room to give any praise that's more than half-hearted. Jolie's devilish grin is nice and all, but even all of her star wattage is suffocated by the excess of visual effects and miserable craftsmanship. 

Jolie and company are lucky that their film opened on the same weekend as Seth MacFarlane's A Million Ways to Die in the West. By being put up against that would-be comedy, they have, by the grace of God, been made to look like the lesser of two evils. Yet the lesser of two evils remains an evil, and not even of the so-bad-it's-good variety. Millions upon millions were spent upon this soul-less mess of a movie. Do your part and make sure that Maleficent struggles to recoup its considerable costs. The actors' careers will remain unscathed, and hopefully Mr. Stromberg's will meet a swift end. 

Grade: D- 

"The Tourist" - REVIEW

When Florian Henckel Von Donnersmarck's (The Lives of Others) latest project was given an earlier release date, and bumped up from March 2011 to December of 2010, it was taken as a good sign. Though there are exceptions, March isn't generally thought of as a great month for box-office intake, and considering that the film boasted the first ever pairing of Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie, the move seemed like a smart bet. But having seen the film, the studios behind it should have gone with their original release date. With lowered expectations, the film wouldn't be at as much risk. But by throwing it out in the holiday/awards season for everyone to see, the studio now gets to watch its film stand as one of the true misfires of the year.

Despite the pedigree of its director, the trailers only indicated that the film was meant to be zippy, twisty, popcorn fun. After all, when you've got Depp and Jolie together, you're probably aiming to turn a nice profit, and you want them in something accessible. And even though I spend a lot of time obsessing over awards season, I have nothing against "popcorn" movies in the slightest. That is, unless they simply flat-out suck, and unfortunately, that's the case with The Tourist.

From its opening scenes, where we follow Elise (Jolie) as she evades police forces on her way from Paris to Venice, the main word that comes to mind is "flat." Not even for an instant does The Tourist generate an ounce of suspense or fun. And even though the opening is forgivable, as the movie progresses, it only gets worse. When Jolie and Depp meet for the first time (on a train), they barely generate sparks. Rather, they sputter amusingly for a few minutes and then die out completely. So lacking is their chemistry that the film descends into boredom and worse, tedium. When Elise kisses Frank (Depp, obviously), it feels more like a story-telling obligation, rather than a genuine moment of romantic intrigue. They talk about their pasts; he's a math teacher from Wisconsin (Michigan? ah, who cares), she's the girl-friend of a man who's gone missing (and has also stolen nearly $1 billion from a London mobster). And like that kiss, these conversations also feel like obligations. Donnersmarck has talked extensively of his influences, namely 2005's Anthony Zimmer, along with classics like Charade. Yet for all of his talk, Donnersmarck and screenwriters Christopher McQuarry (The Usual Suspects) and Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) deliver very little.

And that's what's most disappointing about The Tourist: its total lack of ambition. For a movie that runs 1 hr 40 min, it feels as though a rather large segment has gone missing. The film's plot adds very little when it introduces an unexpected (yet still weak) twist about an hour in, and there's next to nothing of value in terms of plot points and details. If you're expecting a caper with the level of mischief of Ocean's 11, you're going to be sorely disappointed; the stakes are almost never raised, and when they are, it's minimal. Adding to the disappointment are the flat action scenes, and the indistinguishable goons that the gangster Shaw sets upon Elise and Frank. And, not to be outdone, the film also throws in a police force (headed by Paul Bettany) filled to the brim with incompetence. It's not as bad as the idiots in Unstoppable, but it's close. The only good thing is that it provides an opportunity for Alessio Boni (from the fantastic The Best of Youth) to show up, even if all he does is look stern. Worst of all, without spoiling anything, is the use of Rufus Sewell's mysterious, name-less character. When his role in the proceedings is finally explained, you'll be left dumbfounded at just how lazy the script becomes. Clearly McQuarry or Fellowes simply wanted to end the damn thing, and they do it horrendously.

As far as our leading man and lady are concerned, there's little to praise or harp on. Depp fares better and brings his trademark quirks and awkwardness to Frank, ensuring that a handful of lines produce a mild chuckle. Jolie looks gorgeous (albeit a bit gaunt) through the whole thing, but her only direction seems to have been "be glamorous and mysterious and...that's it." Everyone else plays their one-note roles with relatively little energy, and neither the lush Venice vistas nor the energetic score by James Newton Howard ever pick up the slack. As a thriller, a romance, and a star-vehicle, The Tourist fails on just about every level. Look for it to do decent-to-strong business opening weekend (although Voyage of the Dawn Treader could crush it), and then drop off the face of the earth shortly afterward. It's not worth the time or the money, or even a rental. It's not the worst movie of the year, but it's certainly not a good one, or even a remotely satisfying one. You'd be better off simply going to Venice and hoping that you'll randomly spot either Jolie or Depp there on vacation; it's likely to satisfy you more than this film ever will.

Grade: C-

Trailer for "The Tourist"

All in all, this looks like surprisingly standard normal-guy/girl-gets-roped-into-espionage/criminal-hijinks, (we already saw this with Knight and Day, albeit with the genders flipped). They're obviously banking more on the star power, which is something of a big deal considering that these two mega-stars have never worked together, let alone in co-lead roles. It could be lush, exotic (it's hard to mess up the visuals when the setting is Venice), and hugely entertaining, but I think we can scratch this off of the list of potential Oscar contenders, even with its director's pedigree (The Lives of Others).

First look at "The Tourist"

The first official trailer will hit tomorrow (exclusively on Yahoo! for the first two hours before it is sent to other sites). Originally slated for 2011, Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck's follow-up to The Lives of Others is certainly much more commercially friendly with Jolie and Depp headlining, but the 10 second clip, repeated OVER and OVER again for your viewing pleasure, doesn't do much to excite me. Granted, it's only 10 measly seconds, but Depp seems a little too close to Capt. Jack for my liking with that "aaaaaaaghgotta go!" bit. Maybe it will all seem less jarring in the full trailer, but considering the star power involved, I'd hate for one of the two leads to be a let down. Ah well, let's suspend trailer judgement until we actually see the trailer in question.

"Salt" - REVIEW

Salt, the latest action-thriller headliner for Angelina Jolie, might best be compared to a high stakes race: after brief set-up, it's basically GO GO GO with the only stops being those that are required. In Phillip Noyce's (Rabbit Proof Fence) political-thriller, Jolie plays Evelyn Salt, a CIA operative who is accused, by a Russian defector, of actually being a Russian plant whose plan is to kill the Russian president at the funeral of America's Vice President. Salt may not have the dark intricacies of The Dark Knight or the memorable characters of Pirates of the Caribbean or Iron Man, but it fits comfortably into that third tier of big-budget entertainment: wholly enjoyable, slightly silly fun that doesn't leave a lasting impression.

After an opening straight out of Die Another Day (did they use the same bridge?), Salt returns home to resume work at the CIA. After the accusation, in which the defector tells of a the K.A. Program designed to plant agents (sometimes for decades) to be activated to take out targets of the Russian government) she flees, which leads to a conflict of interests. Her co-worker (Liev Schreiber) tries to stay optimistic, never caving in to the idea that she could be a Russian plant, while a Homeland Security official (Chiwetal Ejiofor) seems more inclined to immediately proclaim her guilty. But after the set up, the movie pretty much becomes "See Angelina Run and Jump," and surprisingly, that's not a bad thing. Though the chases aren't necessarily inventive in their staging or choreography (kudos though, for finding the most out there way to incorporate a church organ into an action scene). All in all, it's relatively routine stuff, but the script keeps the film lean, without too many characters or subplots mucking up the works. Salt is all forward momentum, and it manages to be convincing enough even as the plot's magnitude expands by a factor of 100 halfway through, and feels like a mix between a 70s paranoia thriller and the most overblown of James Bond films.

As far as performances go, like the film, they're competent, engaging, and tough, though not terribly nuanced (not that they really need to be...). Jolie once again confirms my belief that she's best suited to these sorts of roles, and I think we should all be glad that Tom Cruise dropped out of the role. Jolie has the looks and personality to keep you guessing along with the constant revelations, whereas someone like Cruise would simply smile and we'd guess which side he's on. But really, out of everyone, perhaps the best thing about the movie isn't within the movie itself. It's actually the marketing for the film, which, as best as I remember, doesn't show as much as a second of footage from the film's second half, where the scale is upped almost constantly. After a scene in a crypt reached its climax, my friend turned to me and asked, "wait...so it's over already?" Oh no, far from it. Salt is, through and through, extremely ordinary, but it's ordinary action film making done with enough competence, and so refreshingly lacking in clutter, that it's hard to ding it for too much. It won't break your heart like Toy Story 3, and it won't warp your mind like Inception, but it will keep you entertained and engaged. And regardless of what your thoughts on this summer have been (as far as mainstream film are concerned), it's hard to deny that you'll have enough fun spending 100 minutes asking the question, "Who is Salt?"

Grade: C+

On tour with Angie and Johnny

The first (official) still from Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck's The Tourist has emerged, and aside from the lack of visible equipment, it looks just like any previous stills. The film, Donnersmarck's first since his Oscar-winner The Lives of Others (2006), centers on Frank (Depp), a tourist in Italy trying to "mend a broken heart," who crosses paths with a mysterious woman named Elise, played by Jolie (source: IMDb). The film is slated for an early 2011 release, which isn't the best sign, and it feels like the filming process on this has taken quite a long time. That said, Donnersmarck is no slouch, not to mention the fact that he's working from a screenplay by Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) and Chris McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects), which only adds to the appeal. Depp and Jolie are two of the world's biggest stars, so it should be interesting to see how they play off of each other as romantic (?) leads.

New trailer for "Salt"

Now THIS is the trailer I've been waiting for. I'm still not super excited, but at least this time my interest is piqued. That first trailer just bored me.

Angelina Jolie passes on "Gravity"

Angelina Jolie Passed on Gravity, Too
Source:Entertainment Weekly February 27, 2010


On Friday, Vulture reported that Angelina Jolie had pulled out of the planned Wanted sequel and that she would instead star in Warner Bros.' Gravity, a space thriller said to be directed by Alfonso Cuarón.

Entertainment Weekly now reports that Jolie's reps have confirmed that Jolie will not reprise her role in Wanted 2. They say the script was already complete and Universal had hoped to start shooting the sequel this year.

However, EW adds that the second part of Vulture's report is not accurate. Jolie's reps say the actress has passed on doing Gravity as well. Warner Bros. told the magazine that it hasn't been able to confirm whether Gravity is even set up at the studio.

Jolie is currently shooting The Tourist with Johnny Depp in Paris. Her next project is to be determined.

Source: http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=63717

When Angie met Alfonso: Angelina Jolie drops "Wanted 2," joins Cuaron's "Gravity"

In other news, psychics predict Wanted 2 bombing if it ever sees the light of day. I like the sound of Gravity, even if it does sound a little too much like Duncan Jones' criminally under recognized Moon. Cuaron's one hell of an interesting director, and I'm sure he'll be able to make this work.

Source: NYMag.com

Angelina Jolie Says No to Wanted 2, Killing the Sequel

Universal craved a sequel to Angelina Jolie’s assassination tango/loom tutorial Wanted. Unfortunately for the studio, Jolie is leaving them…wanting. We’ve just heard the actress has pulled out of the planned Timur Bekmambetov-directed sequel at Universal, and the studio has pulled the plug rather than recast the film. As for Jolie, we hear she is now intent on starring in Warner Bros.’ Gravity, a space thriller to be directed by Children of Men’s Alfonso Cuarón from a script he wrote with his 28-year-old son, Jonás.

Like Wanted 2, Gravity had previously been set up at Universal, with Jolie set to star. But a few weeks ago, the studio put Gravity into turnaround, possibly because it’s such an artistically challenging project: Jolie would be alone on-screen for much of the movie, playing the sole surviving human member of a space mission, desperately trying to return home to Earth and her daughter. (In that way it’s reminiscent of the brilliant, little-seen Moon with Sam Rockwell. Seriously, why won't you see it?) Now Warners has snapped it up, and it will be produced by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows producer David Heyman and Legendary Pictures