Search
Search results
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated 47 Meters Down (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Down Down, Deeper and Down.
It’s summer again; it’s a shark movie. Lisa and Kate are two sisters on holiday in Mexico with one grieving a lost relationship and the other looking for fun. Against their better judgement they go shark cage diving 5 metres below a vessel that looks like it should have been in the salvage yard 20 years ago. After a mechanical failure the cage plummets down to the sea bed….. (Go on, how deep? Have a guess. Go on, go on, go on …)
With sharks circling and air running low, will the girls survive their ordeal?
Last year, one of the surprise movies of the year for me was “The Shallows“, which I really enjoyed. A tense, well made yarn held together by a solid performance by Blake Lively and with a genuine escalation of tension (albeit let down by a poor ending).
“47 Metres Down” differs from that film in three major respects: B-movie acting, from Mandy Moore and Claire Holt (with Holt being significantly better than Moore); a screenplay by Johannes Roberts and Ernest Riera that is both ponderous and unbelievable; and dialogue that is at times truly execrable.
The film really takes its time to get to the ‘sharp end’ (as it were). Once there, the actions of the girls are so clinically stupid that they are deserving of Darwin Award nominations. Fortunately, the IQs of the sharks (well realised as CGI by Outpost VFX) are only marginally greater: the sharks will appear and then go away for ten minutes at a time, just so that the implausible plot can progress unmolested.
These films always need an escalator for the tension: in “The Shallows” it was the rising tide; in this film it is the air supply. This element works well and adds an additional element of claustrophobia to the film that is already at 11 on the scale (you surely don’t need me to tell you that claustrophobics need to avoid this film!).
Much of the dialogue is expository regarding what is going on in the darkness and is so repetitive (“We ARE going to get out of here Kate!”) that it would make a good drinking game. The worst dialogue award though goes to Matthew Modine (“Memphis Belle”) who’s repeated medical descriptions of “the bends” becomes mildly comical – I literally got a fit of the giggles at one point.
I’m not going to completely savage the film though, since there IS a nice twist to the ending, albeit one that’s heavily signposted. And instead of reaching constantly for the classic “Ben’s head in the boat” jump scare, the film occasionally teases the audience with set-ups that ultimately just feature murky water and nothing more.
My recommendation: if you’ve not yet seen “The Shallows”, check that out on DVD and give this one a miss.
With sharks circling and air running low, will the girls survive their ordeal?
Last year, one of the surprise movies of the year for me was “The Shallows“, which I really enjoyed. A tense, well made yarn held together by a solid performance by Blake Lively and with a genuine escalation of tension (albeit let down by a poor ending).
“47 Metres Down” differs from that film in three major respects: B-movie acting, from Mandy Moore and Claire Holt (with Holt being significantly better than Moore); a screenplay by Johannes Roberts and Ernest Riera that is both ponderous and unbelievable; and dialogue that is at times truly execrable.
The film really takes its time to get to the ‘sharp end’ (as it were). Once there, the actions of the girls are so clinically stupid that they are deserving of Darwin Award nominations. Fortunately, the IQs of the sharks (well realised as CGI by Outpost VFX) are only marginally greater: the sharks will appear and then go away for ten minutes at a time, just so that the implausible plot can progress unmolested.
These films always need an escalator for the tension: in “The Shallows” it was the rising tide; in this film it is the air supply. This element works well and adds an additional element of claustrophobia to the film that is already at 11 on the scale (you surely don’t need me to tell you that claustrophobics need to avoid this film!).
Much of the dialogue is expository regarding what is going on in the darkness and is so repetitive (“We ARE going to get out of here Kate!”) that it would make a good drinking game. The worst dialogue award though goes to Matthew Modine (“Memphis Belle”) who’s repeated medical descriptions of “the bends” becomes mildly comical – I literally got a fit of the giggles at one point.
I’m not going to completely savage the film though, since there IS a nice twist to the ending, albeit one that’s heavily signposted. And instead of reaching constantly for the classic “Ben’s head in the boat” jump scare, the film occasionally teases the audience with set-ups that ultimately just feature murky water and nothing more.
My recommendation: if you’ve not yet seen “The Shallows”, check that out on DVD and give this one a miss.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Green Lantern (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Bursting onto the screen with a winning combination of action and dazzling effects DC Comics’ “The Green Lantern” has arrived to the delight of comic fans the world over. The film stars Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan, a talented but cocky test pilot who is haunted by the untimely passing of his father during a test flight when young Hal was a child.
Hal avoids commitment and leads his life as a brash individual who does things his way and answers to no one.
After a close call during a training flight that puts him at odds with his employer, Hal is enveloped by a green ball of energy which transports him to a crash site where he encounters a dying alien. While unsure of what he is seeing, Hal attempts to comfort and aid the alien creature who informs Hal that he has been selected for great honor. The dying alien bestows upon him a ring and a lantern and leaves Hal with far more questions than answers.
In time, through the powers of the ring, Hal is transported to an alien world called Oa where he encounters a myriad of alien creatures and learns that he has been selected by the ring to become a member of the Green Lantern Corps. The Lanterns act as interstellar peacekeepers with each of the 3600 members assigned to a sector of space to patrol and defend. Since there’s never been a human selected, the noble and fearless Lanterns believe that the ring must have made an error in selecting an individual who is more full of bravado than real courage.
The fact that Jordan is human and replacing the revered Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison), does not sit well with a powerful Lantern named Sinestro (Mark Strong), who torments and mocks Hal, literally pounding into Hal how unworthy he is. All the while, a deadly menace with the power to destroy Oa and the Green Lantern Corps named Parallax, freed from the prison he was placed in by Abin Sur, is laying waste to everything in his path including several Lanterns who seem powerless to stop him.
Jordan must also deal with Hector (Peter Sarsgaard) who, unbeknownst to Hal, has become infected by Parallax. As if his life wasn’t complicated enough, Jordan also has to address his feelings for his childhood friend Carole (Blake Lively). Hector, fueled by jealousy over Carole and Jordan’s relationship, and resentment for his for his politico father (Tim Robbins), becomes the embodiment of evil, requiring Hal battle his own doubts and shortcomings and stand alone against an enemy that is bent on destroying all life on earth.
While Lively is relegated to little more than a love interest in the film, Reynolds seizes the character and gives Jordan a vulnerability and sense of humor rather than making him all brawn and fooldhardiness. While much of the film that is devoted to the interplay between the characters and setting up the Green Lantern universe, the film has some amazing visual effects and solid action sequences that, although are presented in converted 3-D, come cross in a spectacular fashion.
While I avoid reading reviews in advance of the screener it had not escaped my attention that the film was getting severely panned by many old guard reviewers. I would question whether any of them had actually read the comic in which the film was based. Director Martin Campbell and his team of writers have crafted a solid summer action picture that not only delivers but is faithful to the source material. This is a comicbook based movie after all and whoever is looking for dynamic plots, award-winning acting, and complex and intertwined character development, will certainly miss the point. Plot and dialogue are usually kept in a simple and straightforward manner in summer action films and I believe Lantern actually goes a step beyond the usual summer offerings in this regard.
While the film is certainly resplendent with its amazing visual effects, it is, at its core, a human story about overcoming weaknesses and finding qualities we did not know we possessed. Many people are quick to lambaste films that focus solely on action and effects yet “The Green Lantern” attempts to add depth to the characters by touching on their past associations and their deep understanding of each other. While it would be impossible in a two-hour movie to go into the depth that a comicbook can, it was nice to see that some effort was made to flesh out the characters.
Yes, the film does follow a formulaic route in terms of a hero rising to the occasion and dealing with some inner turmoil and emotional conflicts which has been the staple ever since stories were first written. That being said, there is a delightful energy about the film and Reynolds’ enthusiasm for his part.
Hal avoids commitment and leads his life as a brash individual who does things his way and answers to no one.
After a close call during a training flight that puts him at odds with his employer, Hal is enveloped by a green ball of energy which transports him to a crash site where he encounters a dying alien. While unsure of what he is seeing, Hal attempts to comfort and aid the alien creature who informs Hal that he has been selected for great honor. The dying alien bestows upon him a ring and a lantern and leaves Hal with far more questions than answers.
In time, through the powers of the ring, Hal is transported to an alien world called Oa where he encounters a myriad of alien creatures and learns that he has been selected by the ring to become a member of the Green Lantern Corps. The Lanterns act as interstellar peacekeepers with each of the 3600 members assigned to a sector of space to patrol and defend. Since there’s never been a human selected, the noble and fearless Lanterns believe that the ring must have made an error in selecting an individual who is more full of bravado than real courage.
The fact that Jordan is human and replacing the revered Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison), does not sit well with a powerful Lantern named Sinestro (Mark Strong), who torments and mocks Hal, literally pounding into Hal how unworthy he is. All the while, a deadly menace with the power to destroy Oa and the Green Lantern Corps named Parallax, freed from the prison he was placed in by Abin Sur, is laying waste to everything in his path including several Lanterns who seem powerless to stop him.
Jordan must also deal with Hector (Peter Sarsgaard) who, unbeknownst to Hal, has become infected by Parallax. As if his life wasn’t complicated enough, Jordan also has to address his feelings for his childhood friend Carole (Blake Lively). Hector, fueled by jealousy over Carole and Jordan’s relationship, and resentment for his for his politico father (Tim Robbins), becomes the embodiment of evil, requiring Hal battle his own doubts and shortcomings and stand alone against an enemy that is bent on destroying all life on earth.
While Lively is relegated to little more than a love interest in the film, Reynolds seizes the character and gives Jordan a vulnerability and sense of humor rather than making him all brawn and fooldhardiness. While much of the film that is devoted to the interplay between the characters and setting up the Green Lantern universe, the film has some amazing visual effects and solid action sequences that, although are presented in converted 3-D, come cross in a spectacular fashion.
While I avoid reading reviews in advance of the screener it had not escaped my attention that the film was getting severely panned by many old guard reviewers. I would question whether any of them had actually read the comic in which the film was based. Director Martin Campbell and his team of writers have crafted a solid summer action picture that not only delivers but is faithful to the source material. This is a comicbook based movie after all and whoever is looking for dynamic plots, award-winning acting, and complex and intertwined character development, will certainly miss the point. Plot and dialogue are usually kept in a simple and straightforward manner in summer action films and I believe Lantern actually goes a step beyond the usual summer offerings in this regard.
While the film is certainly resplendent with its amazing visual effects, it is, at its core, a human story about overcoming weaknesses and finding qualities we did not know we possessed. Many people are quick to lambaste films that focus solely on action and effects yet “The Green Lantern” attempts to add depth to the characters by touching on their past associations and their deep understanding of each other. While it would be impossible in a two-hour movie to go into the depth that a comicbook can, it was nice to see that some effort was made to flesh out the characters.
Yes, the film does follow a formulaic route in terms of a hero rising to the occasion and dealing with some inner turmoil and emotional conflicts which has been the staple ever since stories were first written. That being said, there is a delightful energy about the film and Reynolds’ enthusiasm for his part.
Darren (1599 KP) rated Accepted (2006) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: Accepted starts when serial slacker Bartleby (Long) fails to get accepted into any colleges when his high school run concludes. Bartleby isn’t the only one that lost his chance to go college, he decides to join Sherman (Hill) and Daryl (Short) in creating a fake college South Harmon Institute of Technology.
To make his parents believe this is a real college, he works with his friends to refurbish a building to be a college, only for the college to take off having numerous students turn up leading to a battle with the local real college.
Thoughts on Accepted
Characters – Bartleby is the student at high school everyone turns to for fake ids, he is a slacker at heart, not knowing where he wants to go and getting rejected by all the colleges that he applied to. To keep his parents happy, he creates a college only for everything to get out of hand he needs to use his quick-thinking ideas to keep the cover on. Sherman is the only one of the group of friends that did get into the college he wanted, he helps Bartleby get the college up and running while trying to keep everything in his own future together. Monica is the love interest for Bartleby, always been the girl that he dreams off, she has her own passion, which her college isn’t going to give her. We get plenty of characters that are struggling to find their place in the next stages of their life and the rich students who get into college without any problems.
Performances – This movie has a big cast of actors that would be great picks for any teen comedy in the early 2000s. Justin Long takes the leading role and he is great because the character he plays is the one we are seeing him play a lot. Jonah Hill gets good laughs from his role, but this is before he transformed his comedy to hit more often. Blake Lively is a good love interest for the film, the whole supporting cast does well through the film.
Story – The story is about one student that creates a fake college to cover up the fact he never got accepted into any college and things get out of hand. The story is told in a comic tone, even though it does tackle the serious problem school students face when it comes to the end of their run, before college, what happens if they don’t make it, what if they do make it and can’t handle the pressure. In fairness the telling of the story is done well for a teen comedy and is easily one that can be enjoyed by the fans of the genre.
Comedy – The comedy in this film does work for the most part, it is mostly teen comedy material which is fine to enjoy.
Settings – The film is a college set movie, it gives an idea of creativity the characters will be facing.
Scene of the Movie – The case.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t get enough focus on why so many students got rejected from other colleges.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the fun modern college movie, it tells an important message about dealing with the added pressure of college life.
Overall: One for the teen comedy movies.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/06/03/justin-long-weekend-accepted-2006/
To make his parents believe this is a real college, he works with his friends to refurbish a building to be a college, only for the college to take off having numerous students turn up leading to a battle with the local real college.
Thoughts on Accepted
Characters – Bartleby is the student at high school everyone turns to for fake ids, he is a slacker at heart, not knowing where he wants to go and getting rejected by all the colleges that he applied to. To keep his parents happy, he creates a college only for everything to get out of hand he needs to use his quick-thinking ideas to keep the cover on. Sherman is the only one of the group of friends that did get into the college he wanted, he helps Bartleby get the college up and running while trying to keep everything in his own future together. Monica is the love interest for Bartleby, always been the girl that he dreams off, she has her own passion, which her college isn’t going to give her. We get plenty of characters that are struggling to find their place in the next stages of their life and the rich students who get into college without any problems.
Performances – This movie has a big cast of actors that would be great picks for any teen comedy in the early 2000s. Justin Long takes the leading role and he is great because the character he plays is the one we are seeing him play a lot. Jonah Hill gets good laughs from his role, but this is before he transformed his comedy to hit more often. Blake Lively is a good love interest for the film, the whole supporting cast does well through the film.
Story – The story is about one student that creates a fake college to cover up the fact he never got accepted into any college and things get out of hand. The story is told in a comic tone, even though it does tackle the serious problem school students face when it comes to the end of their run, before college, what happens if they don’t make it, what if they do make it and can’t handle the pressure. In fairness the telling of the story is done well for a teen comedy and is easily one that can be enjoyed by the fans of the genre.
Comedy – The comedy in this film does work for the most part, it is mostly teen comedy material which is fine to enjoy.
Settings – The film is a college set movie, it gives an idea of creativity the characters will be facing.
Scene of the Movie – The case.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We don’t get enough focus on why so many students got rejected from other colleges.
Final Thoughts – This is one of the fun modern college movie, it tells an important message about dealing with the added pressure of college life.
Overall: One for the teen comedy movies.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/06/03/justin-long-weekend-accepted-2006/
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Savages (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Over the past 15 years, Oliver Stone’s films have been kind of hit or miss to me. It’s as if Stone is still trying to make the same controversial films he became popular for in the 80’s and early 90’s. Only, as an audience, we have become keen to his filmmaking style and therefore his more recent work suffers from the apathy of a “show me something new” culture. Still, despite his failures, Stone does not makes apologies for his work while he continues in his quest to make films about controversial subjects. This time around Stone strives to take us into the violent world of the Mexican drug cartels though a film adaptation of the novel Savages by Don Winslow.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.
As the film opens we are introduced to “O” (Blake Lively) who, as our narrator, acquaints us with the open yet loving relationship she shares with our two protagonists, Chon and Ben. Chon (Taylor Kitsch), an ex-Navy SEAL, is unquestionably the muscle of the trio’s operation. Chon was the original financier for his high school friend Ben, (Aaron Johnson) the peaceful, charitable, botany genius who has created the most potent marijuana in the world. Together these two embody the perfect man for O, while the three of them enjoy the spoils of the small marijuana empire they created in southern California.
That is until they gain the attention from a Mexican cartel intent on creating a stronger foothold in the southern California area. The cartel offers them a partnership and explains that by teaming up their business will triple in three years. But when the trio refuse the offer, the ruthless head of the cartel, Elena (Selma Hayek), instructs her enforcer, Lado (Benicio Del Toro), to kidnap O and hold her hostage so the boys will cooperate. Soon our heroes use their network of connections, like crooked DEA agent Dennis (John Travolta) and financial broker Spin (Emile Hirsch), to battle the cartel in a series of savage maneuvers to get back their one “shared” love.
Stone has been known to inspire his actors to give Oscar worthy performances. Sadly, you will not find any such performances here. That is not to say that the acting was terrible. It just seemed that the characters themselves are uninspired which is a shame because I would have liked to have seen some growth in this young cast, especially from Taylor Kitsch.
I feel that many critics will be hard on Taylor Kitsch because of his previous epic fails of 2012 (John Carter and Battleship) however I am surprised to admit that, for this movie at least, he gets a pass in my book. Not because he delivers a fantastic performance that makes me believe he’s truly an up and coming talent, but rather because he is convincing in his portrayal of Chon. When O describes our protagonists as each being one half of the perfect man, she refers to Chon as “Hard Steel,” which is exactly what Kitsch plays him as, a one-dimensional, emotionally devoid character with no growth or any real redeeming qualities other than the ability to go to war. Regardless of whether or not Kitsch has any additional acting range not showcased in this film, I cannot penalize him for his performance in this movie. He fit the part that he was cast in fine.
Blake Lively (Gossip Girl, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants) plays O, short for Ophelia. And yes she channels the mad, love-struck, melancholic character from Hamlet after whom she is named. And while it is easy to make those comparisons to the character of this film, they only appear to be on the surface, if anything. And herein lies the problem. Regardless of how you feel about her open relationship with Ben and Chon, the more I learned about her, the less I cared. Like Kitsch’s character, O is boring and one dimensional. She is the product of being a pretty little rich girl whose mother is off somewhere with husband number twelve. She has been getting stoned every day since she was young and the only place she finds herself loved is in with the company of Chon and Ben. Tragic, I know. While watching the film I honestly thought to myself, if I was Ben or Chon, I would say, “Fuck it. Cut her loose and let’s go to Asia.” She has no redeeming qualities other than being good looking and a good lay. So why would they go through so much trouble for her? The trio’s relationship is weakly tied together by her telling us through narration but never really materializes on screen. At times you get some of a feeling that Ben actually loves her but that love is never really reciprocated from O. It is safe to say that that I did not derive any loving connection from Lively’s performance, though her deliver as a narrator was tolerable.
Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) is the one redeeming performance from this young cast. In contrast to Chon, O describes Ben as “Soft Wood” which makes him the better half. Ben is the one character who actually goes through some kind of character arc and growth. Using the wood analogy, we watch him bend from the peaceful Buddhist businessman to the man who will sacrifice everything, to get back this woman he loves. Nowhere is this better embodied than when Ben is faced with the tough choice of sticking to his peaceful beliefs or incinerating a man in cold blood during one of their moves against the cartel. I found myself actually curious about what Ben would do next. Unlike Chon and O, Ben has some depth and struggles with his personal beliefs, his love for O and what needs to be done. Needless to say, Johnson delivers a believable performance that actually helps move along the action and was the only protagonist that kept me interested in their battle.
In addition to Johnson, the film is littered with several strong supporting cast members who all deliver solid performances. Selma Hayek is strong as Elena, the leader of the cartel that challenges Ben and Chon. She is a ruthless and shrewd businesswoman and yet has a better “sense of morality” as she explains during her interactions with O and her own daughter. Her enforcer Lado is played by Benicio Del Toro who, with the help of an uncomfortable rapist mustache, comes off as an extremely menacing character. Del Toro solidifies himself on screen by being down right creepy and yet intelligent in his own savage way. During every moment of screen time you expect him to kill someone just because it is good for business.
A needed bit of change of pace is provided by an unexpected performance by Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild) as Ben and Chon’s witty financial broker, Spin. As well as by John Travolta who plays Dennis, the dirty DEA agent who’s in Ben and Chon’s pocket. In fact, even though Travolta’s screen time is maybe a total of 12 minutes, his performance steals the show with his sole bit of comic relief, for lack of a better explanation. Perhaps the strongest acted moment of this film is during a standoff scene between Del Toro and Travolta that in many ways makes me want to know more about those characters. And what that movie would be about.
In typical Stone fashion the movie is shot in a variety of film angles and stylistic devices used to foreshadow and at times create a foreboding presence. Visually the movie provides a strong and believable feeling for the world these characters live in and the way that they operate their business. In addition, narration is used at points to move along the action and provide the audience with insight that otherwise would not have been possible on performances alone. I personally have no problem with narration as long as it is set up from the beginning and used to advance the story, which it is. However in the final act, the movie introduces a film device from left field that completely kills the already weak pacing of the movie. I cannot get into it without giving away the story, but I can see how this device could completely ruin the movie for those patrons who are already disinterested by the time the final act rolls around. Especially for those who do not find any connection to any of the characters. In which case, the pacing of this film will seem slow and drawn out.
I am torn about my review of this film. Savages is something that I wanted to like more than I did. Two of the three protagonists are one dimensional and if it was not for Johnson and the strong supporting cast I might have found the movie boring. It was also completely different from the expectations set by the commercials. Those looking for an action movie will feel misled and will more than likely be disappointed with the film. Not that there is not any action, only it comes between very long periods of dialogue and slow pacing. By the end of the movie, you are either invested in these characters or just waiting for the lights to come up in the theater. And in typical Oliver Stone fashion the movie tries to make us question our own perception of just what it means to be a savage.