The new Coen, the next Lebowski? Burn After Reading. A review.

I love the Coen Brothers. They are like Stanley Kubrick or Wes Anderson: Their movies have a unique style that you will always be able to pick out. Rather than special FX, they rely on a good story, strong characters and dialogue. Burn After Reading is very Coen.

The Coens have done quite a bunch of comedies by now. Raising Arizona is a classic, while films like O Brother and Ladykillers dissapointed me. The Big Lebowski is in my opinion one of the best not only in the genre, but also one of the best films of all time. The love of detail in that movie is extraordinary. Yet, Lebowski had too many interwoven plots which was confusing for many people. Also Lebowski was a follow-up to an Oscar winning, more serious, film so expectations ran very high. This is also something that can be said of Burn After Reading.

I fear a lot of critics will have the same problems with Burn After Reading.

Where the film really differs from the Lebowski is, that it doesn't really have a central character. Or at least one that is that obvious. Which actually fits perfectly with the whole spy/agent theme of the film. So here is the plot in a nutshell:

Osborne Cox (John Malkovich) works for the CIA but gets the boot from his current assigment. Because of that he quits his job altogether. Unfortunately his wife Katie (Tilda Swinton), is not too happy with the situation because she is having an affair with womanizer Harry (George Clooney) and ultimatly wants a divorce. She secretly recovers all data from her husbands computer, which also contains his memoirs about working at the CIA, to give to her divorce lawyer. All this data however, ends up in the hands of fitness trainer Chad (Brad Pitt) and his co-worker Linda, played by Francis McDormand, who needs money to get some plastic surgery done. So they put a plan in motion to blackmail Osborne. And of course, that's where all the trouble starts.

As I mentioned earlier, the biggest problem of the film is, that there is no obvious central character that takes you by the hand throughout the movie. But that really remains the films only problem, if you will call it that. Other than that, I have to say this is definitely one of the best Coen movies so far. And that says a lot. Every single person you see in this film, and I really mean that, is so perfectly cast and detailled. The dialogue is incredibly funny and smart. Seriously, if you like Coen films, you will laugh your ass off at some of the things being said on screen. This movie also showcases the formidable acting of all the participants. The performances drew me in and didn't let me go.

Burn is a gem. Many people will not get it, just like the Lebowski, because the humor happens on many different levels and doesn't hit you blunt in the face. And while being funny, in that Coen kind of way, it also has dark and brutal moments, also in that Coen kind of way, that remind me of Fargo. Once again, the Coens prove that they are the masters of showing the human tragedy. Burn After Reading is not as heavy as No Country but you can definitely watch it more often. I know I will. This is a Coen Classic.

Don' bogart that joint: Pineapple Express Review

Ever since I saw the trailer to Pineapple Express, which is perfeclty edited to MIAs Paper Planes, I had wanted to see that film. But trailers can often fool you and when you see Pineapple Express you might get a lot more then you bargained for. And that is not necessirally a good thing. What I mean is, that Pineapple Express isn't just an ordinary stoner comedy, it is actually more of a stoner action flick.

Rogen plays once again the role he does so well: the likable underdog with flaws but is good at heart. Mostly stoned out of his mind, he goes about his everyday job. It all goes wrong though once he buys a special kind of weed called Pineapple Express from his dealer Saul (James Franco). As Dale (Rogen) smokes a joint in his car before he can call it a day, he becomes witness to a brutal murder and flees the scene. The only evidence left behind is the joint he threw out. In shock of what he just saw, Dale ends up at Sauls place. But as luck might have it, the people who Dale saw murder someone, happen to be supplying that weed to Saul. And since Saul is the only one selling Pineapple Express, they find out pretty quickly who to look for.

This film heavily relies on the two main characters. And they do have their funny moments. There are the typical stoner conversations that you will catch yourself chuckling at, though the acting at times can be quite amateurish. Franco plays the pothead a bit too over the top to be really believable. Overall, the relationship between Saul and Dale doesn't feel natural though. Their friendship seems too forced and therefore moments that show emotions are not really touching.
As I said in the beginning, Pineapple Express is also packed with action. Some of it is so gruesome that you can't help but laugh. The two killers played by Kevin Corrigan and Craig Robinson share some great onscreen time and even have more chemistry than Franco and Rogen. And then there also is Red played by Danny McBride - who certainly is the secret star of the movie - the middleman between Saul and the headhoncho Ted (Gary Cole from Office Space). A lot of the stuff that McBride delivers is just hilarious.

Besides some of the acting I felt that the editing of the movie wasn't that good. At times, the film feels chopped together without a right sense of direction. But that could also be attributed to the script of the film.

In the end Pineapple Express isn't the supergrow of stonerflicks it would like to be or could have been. It is more of a constant mellow trip. Too bad the trailer already shows some of the best parts. But besides the flaws I did feel entertained. Not laughing-my-balls-off entertained but entertained nonetheless. But if you are going to see only one movie this summer with Judd Apatow's name attached to it, I would make it Step Brothers.

Double Feature: Mummy 3 and Stepbrothers

Saw these two movies lately. I'm gonna cut straight to the chase and not waste too much time talking about the story of either movie.


Mummy 3
The first Mummy flick with Brendan Fraser was not too bad. It tried to follow the footsteps of Indiana Jones, but never reached the quality of any of the fims starring Harrison Ford. There were some good ideas but just too much CGI stuff. The second part didn't really improve the franchise and just got more ridiculous. And now part 3 is here...

...and sunk the ship once an for all. Rachel Weisz who played Brendan Fraser's love interest in the previous installments knew why she didn't sign on again: the script and story is just not good. First off, a mummy, for my part, is from egypt, lives in a pyramide and looks like it has a toiletpaperfetish. And I don't want to hear: "But other cultures have mummified their leaders too." When I go to see a movie like that, I don't really give a damn about history. And I bet when the word "mummy" is tossed into room full of people, they for sure as hell won't be thinking of an asian one made of clay.

Besides getting a mummy that's not really a mummy, Brendan Fraser and his "new" wife Maria Bello get in quarrels about rising their annoying meathead son. Most of the the jokes feel out of place and too constructed to really start a spark. Mummy 3 might not be horrible, it's just worse than the previous installment.


Stepbrothers
Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly meet in this over the top R rated comedy about two middleaged guys who all of a sudden become stepbrothers and end up living under the same roof. Of course they don't like each other and trouble ensues.

While many movies pick up a great idea but ultimately don't really execute it that well or are too tame. Neither can be said about this flick. This film would never have worked if it would have gotten a PG-13 rating. It is the the combination of Ferrell and Reilly not holding back yet acting like a bunch of mildly retarded idiots that makes this film so good. There are so many funny situations in this movie that it is hard to pick your favorite. You can actually tell they had fun filiming this one. It might not be as good as Anchorman but Ferrell and Reilly could be the new Sonny and Cher. And when they sing their tune, you will laugh you balls off.

Superman is a jerk: Hancock

Remember in Superman 3 when good ol' Sup starts acting like an asshole, drinking and doing whatever he likes with his superpowers? Yeah, I liked that part too. And obviously I am not the only one because the guys behind "Hancock" took that idea to bring us one of this summers blockbusters starring Will Smith, Jason Bateman from Arrested Development und Charlize Theron. Smith plays Hancock, a Superhero who gets it all wrong. Saving people seems more of a burden to him and in the process causes a lot of damage and destruction. So instead of being hailed as a savior, nobody really likes him. In comes Bateman who tries to clean up his image starting by making him go to jail for his misdeeds. Of course, sooner or later, the city realizes that without Hancock, crime will rule.

While the movie directed by Peter Berg, who also is an actor (Great White Hype, Smokin' Aces), is being torn apart by critics around the country, let me assure you: Nope, it is not that bad. It does have its flaws though. The movie has a nice amount of action with okay effects paired with many funny moments due to the selfish nature of Hancocks character. And let's be serious, who would not want to (ab)use their superpowers when they are drunk? Thought so. Yes, the film does change pace midpoint and shifts the focus. It also delivers a lot more plotholes in the second part of the movie and leaves questions to be answered, yet it still remains to be a somewhat enjoyable ride. At least for me. But not everybody will agree with the decision to take Hancock in another direction halfway through because it might feel too forced and illogical. One could say they crammed two movies into one.

Also I wonder what the movie would have looked like with the initial R-Rating it was going to have. But since money makes the world go round, the studio edited it to get a PG-13 rating to rake in the teen audience. But be assured, there are still offensive moments in the film. Still, I wish there would have been more of that.

WIth Hellboy 2 and The Dark Knight coming up, I am sure Hancock will not be this summers most well received blockbuster. But concerning it doesn't have years of comic book history to look back on, it still is better than many other superhero adaptations.

Senor Rickay at Kips Bay: Wanted

I just saw "Wanted" by the russian director Timur Bekmambetov, who also brought us "Night Watch" and "Day Watch". What made those films so special? Well in most part the completely over the top action with loads of even more over the top FX. Also a promising story which in parts was too incomprehensible to follow. Good ol' Timur stays true to the action formula in his latest film - which is based on a comic - starring Angelina Jolie, Morgan Freeman and James McAvoy (the cool version of Shia Lebeouf). The action is fast and stylized and people will compare it to "The Matrix", of course. Most likely also to "Shootem Up" with Clive Owen which I felt, tried way too hard and therefore failed miserably. What "Wanted" boils down to is this: Stylish action, Angelina Jolie, car chase, stylish action, Special FX, typical average guy must become hero-type badass training scene, Angelina Jolie, generic Story with plotholes and foreseeable twist, somewhat bad endfight. In a nutshell so to speak. McAvoy gives a good performance and shows that he also can carry a blockbuster. Jolie on the other hand seems to have only one facial expression in this film. But her role doesn't really ask for much more either. So is it worth seeing? Yeah it is alright. The action is fast and well shot and there are some scenes which really are quite funny. And "Wanted" does have some amazing action sequences that are jawdropping. Unfortunately, the rest that holds the picture together didn't live up to my expectations.

Where did I go see it? Well pretty much right around the corner where I live: Kips Bay Theater on 2nd Ave.


Larger Map
Actually the theater is a bit further down the northeast part of the road. Right next to a petshop where they have the cutest little kittens. The movie theater isn't bad. The seats are comfortable, the snacks overpriced. The usual so to speak. But the greatest part is, that you don't have assigned seats (unlike in good ol' Germany) and you don't have to endure shitty commercials in the beginning (again, sorry Germany). The show started at 9PM. Lights out, several Trailers (Pineapple Express will rock) and - BAM - Movie starts. Love it.