Kingsman: The Golden Circle

I'm not sure about this. This movie and its predecessor seem to want to be a looser, updated version of James Bond, and in some ways it pulls that off. It's got all the action--in spades--the gadgetry, the humor, the 'save the world' trope...it's all in place, and I can't really say it's not entertaining. And once again, the filmmakers have a certain amount of political insight where they try to deliver a satirical but somewhat cogent point. All well and good. But--and it's a huge 'but'--there are problems here, too. The combination of sophisticated and crude will clash a bit too much for some viewers. This film (and this applies to the previous entry, too) relies almost obsessively on long action sequences that are heavy on visual and camera gymnastics: stuff that looks good at first, but gets tedious after a while, despite the director's obvious love affair with his own shot-making cleverness. And, in addition to being crude, this outing is also remarkably violent; only the John Wick movies are a match for the violence displayed here, and those flicks are substantially darker in tone. This is almost like "playful psychopathy" here--which isn't always funny and entertaining. Toning it down a bit would probably make for a better movie--though I wouldn't count on seeing that in the seemingly inevitable third installment.

Evolution

How could a film with so much going for it be this stupid? A good cast--no meatheads a la Sandler or Diesel here--a good premise (with pretty good special effects) and a good director (Ivan Reitman, with one certifiable classic--Ghostbusters--on his resume)...where did it all go wrong? Well, the writing is stupid, without even an attempt to make the scientist characters anything near intelligent. (Yes, they’re supposed to be doofus junior college teachers, but then again Duchovny’s character is supposed to have a history with a more rigorous scientific background.) The humor indulges in “stupid fat guy” clichés (not something to get on my good side). And several of the characters (especially the villainous general and governor) are so cardboard cutout that they distract from the story, or the humor, or anything the film tries to achieve. No wonder this movie tanked at the box office; even the stupid multiplex crowd probably found it sub-par. Avoid it.

Don Jon

Yes, a positive review, but I’m not sure it should be. Perhaps that PURR is the product of all the goodwill Joseph Gordon-Levitt has built up over the last few years. As writer-director here, JGL makes a lot of typical rookie mistakes--the usual super-self-conscious “director-y” camera work and such--but he also presents an intriguing story, too. There’s some pretty deep stuff going on with these characters...and yet, the presentation almost invites the audience to view everything on the most superficial level. The important stuff might get lost on some viewers. Still, the movie holds your interest all the way through, so it accomplishes that crucial goal. A tough call, but I think this one’s good enough to merit your attention.

The Shipping News

When people think about a good time at the movies, the word "somber" rarely comes to mind. You get plenty of that here. The story's thesis--that there's a place where everyone belongs--is not so bad, and it is gratifying when Kevin Spacey's hapless schlub finds some measure of redemption in the end. But that's not enough to lift this movie high enough for most viewers.

Short Cuts

You can't really call someone's creative work 'pointless,' can you? Well...of course you can, and here's a fine example. Slice of life vignettes about uninteresting people yield uninteresting results. I only got about an hour into this one, so maybe it got better as it went along. I'll never know--I can't envision going back for more.

Laws of Attraction

I wanted to rave about this one, because it starts out nice and nasty (or at least acerbic, and often that's enough), but then it kind of wimped out towards the end. Ah, well, it's still an enjoyable film to watch, largely on the strength of the leads. Pierce Brosnan once again demonstrates that he'd have a grand film career if he could just get away from that Bond stuff. And Julianne Moore gives a smart, vibrant performance (and looks just fabulous in the process). Give it a shot in one of your lighter moments.

The Hours

I'm not impressed; guess I get to go sit in the corner for a while. Everyone else loved this one, so maybe I'm the problem. To me, the story seemed both contrived and overly convoluted; better to tell one story clearly and lucidly than to lose yourself in three intertwined tales. The weakness is almost overcome by good performances from a great cast, but it's not enough for me.

Magnolia

A bit overwrought, and the interwoven stories can be difficult to keep straight, but the ultimate payoff is worth it. Just wondering: Who came up with that whole frog idea? (Watch it; you'll understand.)