
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
"The Social Network" - With Friends Like These...
FARCE/FILM Episode 62: Wall Street, The Town
Colin: | |
Kevin: | |
Tyler: |
"Wall Street 2"
Colin: | |
Kevin: | |
Tyler: |
"The Town"
Kevin: | |
Tyler: |
"Jack Goes Boating"
Colin: | |
Kevin: |
This week, Tyler unloads some classic films he has just gotten around to seeing. What are some of your most embarrassing ‘I Can’t Believe You’ve Never Seens’?
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
"Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" Review

But greed is not the antagonist in “Money Never Sleeps.” Debt is. Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas) is released from prison after an eight-year stretch for insider trading only to discover that his money now torments him in its very absence. Picking up in 2008, the entire cast of affluent characters in the film is haunted by the global economic crisis and even more intimate money matters.
Shia LaBeouf plays Jake Moore, a trader who invests his million-dollar bonus the night before the market collapses, just after buying an extravagant wedding ring to propose to his girlfriend, Winnie Gekko (Carey Mulligan). After Moore gets the opportunity to speak with his new father-in-law, the two begin a series of unorthodox transactions; Gordon wants an opportunity to get closer to his estranged daughter, which Jake orchestrates in exchange for the opportunity to further his career.
In that way, “Money Never Sleeps” follows a similar template to the original, with Gekko acting as protégé to a young, cutthroat trader. The sequel, however, has a more ambitious, branching story and what feels like a much larger cast. It suffers somewhat for its sprawling narrative, but the film is grounded by a strong emotional center. “Wall Street” is still the more rousing film, but “Money Never Sleeps,” is appropriately more dour, downbeat and moody; the films are alike only in their committed reflection of their respective economic climates.
Both “Wall Street” films seem to find Oliver Stone at his most experimental. His multimedia gimmickry doesn’t always work, but he never seems to be at a loss for a new way to present information. “Money Never Sleeps” paints the stock market index across the New York skyline, fractures into split-screens, and cedes itself entirely to illustrated figures that would seem more at home in a documentary. Stone can sometimes be a frustratingly predictable director, and small flourishes like these are what make the “Wall Streets” stand out in his filmography.
But viewer beware, for all its stylishness, “Money Never Sleeps” will bore many. It is an uncompromisingly slow film, especially in its drooping middle—devotees of the fast-paced original will be particularly let down. But while the clock-check quotient is relatively high in places, I believe it ultimately reaches a satisfying payoff.
After all, what makes these films tick is their characters, and this sequel is no slouch. They make not be as vibrant or distinct as the people who populated the 1987 film, but again, they have to support a modern disillusionment with the market that didn’t exist back then. The characters in Stone’s original are eccentric, quirky, domineering, and vivacious. The characters in “Money Never Sleeps” are sullen, worn, and scared.
And then there’s Gekko. It’s interesting that Douglas’ portrayal of him is the most enduring part of the original film; but then it’s obvious when you see him as that character. He is capitalism, a physical manifestation of it. Douglas owns the performance, and though Gekko has been beaten into a shell of his former self in “Money Never Sleeps,” he’s still plain fun to watch. The charisma is there, and Douglas supplements a terrific irony to the character in playing him broke. “Bet you don’t have one of these,” he boasts to Moore during their first encounter, flashing his NYC MetroCard.
“Money Never Sleeps,” for better or for worse, is the “Wall Street” our generation gets. It’s a time capsule from 2010, an imperfect but equally relevant window into our languishing economy. In twenty years, we can only hope it all looks like science fiction.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
"Devil" Review

Written by Brian Nelson (“30 Days of Night,” “Hard Candy”) and directed by John Erick Dowdle (“Quarantine”), it stands to reason that M. Night, after pitching the idea and relinquishing creative control, would have receded into the background. The problem, I think, is that Shyamalan’s fingerprint is still so clear on the final product. Psychologically speaking, I suspect many are dismissing it purely by association.
And to be clear, there are perfectly valid reasons to dismiss “Devil,” but Shyamalan isn’t one of them. He did his job; the premise is solid, and the building blocks of the story are, for the most part, rightly placed. Its blemishes, therefore, would be more aptly laid on Nelson and Dowdle’s shoulders. While the work of either is only seldom outright bad, their collaboration is never better than average.
It’s their fault that “Devil” never gets under our skin, and the most obvious explanation is because half the film takes place outside the elevator, where a second storyline and protagonist divide audience attention. No doubt that dynamic existed in Shyamalan’s original outline, but Nelson and especially Dowdle seem to favor it and Police Detective Bowden’s (Chris Messina) attempts to break into the jammed elevator over its five passengers’ attempts to break out.
As a result, the claustrophobia never sets in. The viewer never feels trapped because, narratively, they’re being transported to safety every five minutes. Dowdle also fails to demonize the elevator to the extent it really should be. Instead, he focuses on painting the entire building his antagonist, drawn against dark storm clouds and introduced in an ominous upside-down aerial shot. It’s a noble attempt, but it’s no small feat to conjure dread from a flat piece of reflective modern architecture.
For Nelson’s part, he runs with probably the worst idea of anyone by forcing all the ‘devil’ exposition out of a cringe-worthy (but thankfully short-winded) Catholic maintenance operator (Jacob Vargas), who unconvincingly persuades Bowden to consider the supernatural element at play. The character also narrates.
They may seem like minor gripes, but somehow, the individual misfires of Nelson, Dowdle, and Shyamalan add up to more than the sum of their parts; they comprise a film that is almost entirely unaffecting. “Devil” works, but it works the way an imitation Walkman works, which is to say, not very well. The whole thing has a plastic, perfunctory feel to it.
Still, “Devil” isn’t such a bad little flick. It was made on a $10 million shoestring, runs only eighty minutes, and still delivers on its premise with the benefit of established filmmakers behind it. It’s unclear how quick their production cycle was, but be it time, budgetary, or creative limitations, it’s a shame neither screenwriter nor director shine through. Ultimately, it might as well be a Shyamalan film, though I think even his most pink-faced detractors will agree “Devil” isn’t half as bad as “The Happening.”
Shyamalan’s fall from grace has been almost on the level of a political scandal; people now recognize his name and boo it. I suppose some of that hostility is warranted when you disappoint people as consistently as he has, but I can’t help but wonder how warranted his latest critical lashing has been.
“Devil” is far from a perfect film, but M. Night is the least of its concerns.
Monday, September 20, 2010
"Easy A" Review

"Easy A" is kind of a minor miracle. Every shred of evidence indicated it would be another forgettable teen sex comedy; common sense should have kept me away. And yet, thanks to my self-regimented diversity quota (recommended), I inadvertently purchased a ticket to one of the goofiest, most effortlessly charming, surprisingly irreverent, and original satires in years—After all, it isn’t everyday you see a sex comedy about imaginary sex.
But "Easy A" treads tired ground in a pair of flashy high heels; its unique spin on the subject of high school promiscuity doesn’t condescend, nor does it overstate its relevance. Rather, the film manages to humorously capture the social enormity of sex without being explicit, perverse, or preachy. Quite the contrary. Olive (Emma Stone), our intelligent, precocious, and often glib protagonist turns the genre on its head, detailing her “rumor-filled and totally false account” of how she became the classroom slut.
What follows is an unusually forward riff on gossip in the information age and bizarro prostitution, whereby a white lie in the ladies’ restroom wheels its way through the rumor mill, only to come out a geyser on the other end. Olive’s notoriety for an alleged sexual encounter prompts the school’s desperate male denizens to bolster their own reputations through tales of carnal exploits with her—Boasting rights for which she receives hundreds of dollars (price negotiable according to the agreed-upon fiction) in Gap or Office Max gift certificates.
The sharp sense of humor and amusing social commentary really cannot be undervalued in an age where the foremost discussion of sexuality for teenage girls is in "Twilight." "Easy A" ultimately adopts a populist ‘when you’re ready’ sentiment in regards to sex, but its best quality is its consistent tonal levity. The film makes light of licentiousness, sexual orientation, religion, parenting, adoption, friendship, and more over a breezy ninety minutes, and though its flippancy sometimes comes at the expense of convincing drama, you’ll be laughing too often to care.
Judd Apatow be damned. His movies are undeniable landmarks in the topography of 21st century comedy, but it’s telling that one of "Easy A"'s best features is its cast—Conspicuously devoid of the likes of Seth Rogen and/or Jonah Hill. Instead, Emma Stone and Amanda Bynes lead a team of up and comers, backed by terrific character actors like Stanley Tucci, Patricia Clarkson, Thomas Haden Church, and Malcolm McDowell, who make even the ‘boring adult’ roles pop. The ensemble seldom misses a beat, playing to their strengths and having a blast in the process.
"Easy A" gleams with their bright performances, but the real treasure is buried just below its surface: the screenplay by Bert V. Royal. As a first time screenwriter, Royal deserves special recognition for his success, especially in a genre as delicate as comedy. "Easy A" might even be the funniest film of 2010, although there’s next to no contention for that title. Royal never quite gets his big narrative cogs going, but his comedy runs like clockwork, with the benefit of a very strong premise to keep it going.
The title of his film is a less than subtle reference to Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter, which Olive and her classmates are conveniently studying in school. However, the reappropriation of the crimson "A" as a badge of honor is just one of the many ways Royal refreshes not only a tired comedic subgenre, but a hundred and fifty year old novel as well. "Easy A" is one of the most amiable left-field surprises of the year, and an experience for which I have only my complete lack of common sense to thank.
4/5