The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

HobbitPosterMy affinity for J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit goes back a long way. In elementary school I purchased a copy of White Fang from one of those Scholastic book order flyers that got sent home once a month, and thought it was the best book I had ever read. It was a gripping tale of adventure set amid a fantastic backdrop of otherworldly (to my midwestern self) locations with a main character for whom I could root wholeheartedly.  White Fang, as far as I knew at the time, was the epitome of literature.  That was, until my friend Joe showed me one of his favorite books-a 300-page tale with a funny-looking green cover about a three-foot-tall munchkin. I was skeptical about The Hobbit at first, but soon found that it had everything I adored about White Fang, but so much more. I became lost in the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and his traveling troupe of 13 tawdry dwarves. I wondered at the wisdom of the wizard Gandalf, and marveled at the beauty of Imladris. I began daydreaming of journeying through the black overgrowth of Mirkwood, exploring the halls of the Elven kingdom, and sneaking around inside Erebor, the lonely mountain which was home to the malevolent dragon Smaug.

I quickly devoured Tolkien’s other tales in the Lord of the Rings series, and though I never made it all the way through his other works like The Silmarillion, I remain an enthusiastic fan of his tales of Middle-Earth to this day. When Fellowship of the Ring came out in 2001, I saw it twice on opening night clutching my copy of the book tight while trying to ward off an ill stomach after eating movie theater popcorn and Coke for dinner.  Peter Jackson’s interpretation of the fantasy realms Tolkien dreamed up while fighting in the trenches of World War I had me hooked, and to this day I don’t think I have seen another movie that has so thoroughly captivated me while engrossing me into an entirely different world.

It was, then, with a bit of nervousness that I went into the theater last weekend to see the first in The Hobbit trilogy, An Unexpected Journey. The trailers were amazing, but early reviews suggested some problems with run time and creative licenses taken by Peter Jackson and his film crew. Would The Hobbit live up to my expectations? Would it crumple under the weight of all the extra material from Tolkien’s other books that were appended to the storyline? Would it be anywhere near as good as its forebears released over a decade ago?

Soon I realized my fears were unfounded. Bilbo Baggins and his adventure were in fine hands, and after ten minutes of cautious trepidation I settled down and let myself become immersed once again in the beauty and majesty of Middle-Earth.

Thorin Woodenbow...I mean, Oakenshield

Thorin Woodenbow…I mean, Oakenshield

The Hobbit is not a perfect movie. It might not even be a great movie. But it is a thoroughly captivating fantasy tale, the likes of which you have probably not seen onscreen since Return of the King. The pacing is a bit off, with the first half burdened by a great deal of exposition and backstory, often told through flashback, that seems somewhat extraneous but is critically important for understanding the larger context in which Bilbo’s tale of mischief and burglary is set.  For a Lord of the Rings geek, these deviations do not serve as a distraction and in fact enhance an already familiar tale with nice flourishes that others might find extraneous.  I can understand why casual theater patrons might be somewhat put off by the many inclusions in this film that seem to have little bearing on the story at hand, but I say bring ’em on. Tolkien crafted a beautifully complicated world, and if showing a bit more of it means an extra ten minutes in a theater seat then I’m all for it.  Rest assured all the core elements from the book are present and accounted for, if altered slightly for the cinematic presentation.  The troll campfire, the visit to the Last Homely House, the passage through the mountains, the riddle scene…they’re all here and all very well done. While some might take issue with the changes Jackson made to some of these, particularly when Bilbo and Gollum (who looks even better and more expressive than he did in the previous trilogy) match wits to determine Bilbo’s fate, I mostly just sat there with a stupid grin on my face enjoying the fact that I was getting to watch all of this on the big screen.  Picking nits about changes from the source material here is kind of irrelevant for me, when the resulting film is so engrossing.

Even Frodo shows up, though his character wasn't born yet. Don't worry, it all makes sense when you see the movie.

Even Frodo shows up, though his character wasn’t born yet. Don’t worry, it all makes sense when you see the movie.

However, there are a few structural issues that did bother me and detract from the film as a whole.  There are essentially two main characters in the film, even though the book focuses almost entirely on Bilbo.  The titular hobbit is the one with whom we spend the most time, as is to be expected. But Thorin, the leader of the company of dwarves, receive almost equal billing.  He is essentially this film’s Aragorn, and a somewhat obscure enemy named Azog is brought out from the depths of Tolkien’s extended materials in order to give Thorin a mortal enemy with whom to do battle. His inclusion is somewhat of a dumbing down of the main storyline, and his pursuit of the band of treasure-seekers is rather unnecessary given the many perils the company encounters along their journey already.  I can understand this from a storytelling perspective, as the Thorin/Azog battle helps propel Jackson’s version of Tolkien’s story and leads to a climax absolutely dripping with gratuitous cinematic clichés that probably appeal to the casual moviegoing types or significant others dragged to the theater against their will, but it’s something that this film could have done without.

I have read more than a few complaints about the length of The Hobbit, and I must admit that this type of criticism puzzles me. I tend to doubt that few moviegoers who are even remotely familiar with Jackson’s previous Lord of the Rings movies would go in to The Hobbit expecting a 90-minute cartoon. This is heady stuff, and Jackson’s vision of Tolkien’s world is one that I enjoy letting wash over me and consume my senses. I enjoyed the almost three-hour run time, and it was filled with such fantastic scenery and interesting characters that I almost wish it were longer (and will no doubt be when it is released on Blu-Ray).  As far as I’m concerned, the longer run time simply meant more movie to enjoy.

The Hobbit is not the epitome of literature, and the movie is not the apex of film. But it is a good book, and this is a genuinely good adaptation. For anyone even remotely interested in fantasy movies, this is certainly one to see.  For those on the fence, it’s worth a shot and you might find yourself pleasantly surprised.

Rating:[Rating:4.5/5]

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2

Regardless of who you are, for better or for worse, you have been waiting for the final chapter of The Twilight Saga.  The series has become the butt of all movie jokes over the last four years for reasons I can only fathom stem from its towering success.  Critics and audiences love to hate the popular one, and despite Twilight’s often deafening writing, I’ve come to accept that the films have been designed to appeal to a very select audience of teenage girls.

Now we have reached the fifth and final installment of this wooden epic—the ultimate morose love story drawn out over ten hours.  Breaking Dawn Part 2 finds Bella (Kristen Stewart) as a newborn vampire with a half immortal-half human child, Renesmee.  She’s married to Edward (Robert Pattinson) and on the cusp of a major attack from the Volturi, led by Aro (the maniacally over-acting Michael Sheen), upset by the disturbance in the undead force.  A half-blood of sorts has never been seen in the blood-sucking world.  Aro is under the impression that the abomination child is a toddler vampire, a being outlawed by the cloaked tyrannical reign.  The Cullens must assemble of horde of vampire companions to interact with Renesmee and prove to the Volturi she is not a full-blown vampire, but rather a half-blood and therefore not against the law.

An endless list of vampire characters are introduced through expository means from all corners of the world.  The group becomes an X-Men of sorts with varying powers in preparation for the ultimate throwdown with the powers at be.  Bella learns of her power as a ‘shield,’ able to stop another vampire’s gift and protect those she chooses from harm.  She can also apparently conduct a powerpoint presentation in her brain and send it to Edward.

If you’re wondering whether or not the battle for vampire supremacy takes place, rest assured it does.  Men will have something to watch as they did in Eclipse.  The battle often pushes the limits of its PG-13 rating, and features more beheadings than 300.

Brothers if not twins if not clones.

At this point I didn’t expect anything to change regarding this franchise.  The writing, the tolerable performances from Stewart and Pattinson, the awful performances from Lautner and some other supporting actors, the silliness of it all—very much intact.  Add in some impressive action, a few sprinkling surprises (one of them being Robert Downey Jr’s clone—Omar Metwally), and a baby’s face drowned in embarrassingly hideous CGI (seriously, it looks worse than the talking E-trade baby!), and you have what Twilight has always been, only now it’s over.

This installment is passable, no better than the series’ highs, and not quite the series’ low—New Moon.  If you’re a Twi-hard, you’ll love it.  If you’re in the hater camp, you’ll still hate it.  But can we all finally admit that these movies really aren’t the worst movies ever made?  Oh wait, yeah, there is New Moon.  And even the first film has gotten much worse over time.  I better just stop thinking about it.

[Rating:3/5]

 

Skyfall

I have to guess that Daniel Craig’s James Bond doesn’t like his job much.  He continues his profession to fill a void with another void.  After all the hammy fun of previous actors playing the role, Craig’s interpretation is probably the most realistic because he approaches the character as an actual human being with a scarred soul, rather than an immortal playboy hero. Yet, I still wonder if Craig is ever going to have any fun.

Sam Mendes’ Skyfall, the latest of the 007 franchise, attempts to humanize the infamous covert British agent by tearing away at Bond’s wounds, wounds we never knew he had as far as the films are concerned.

Could it be more ironic that Craig feels a bit of disdain for the role?  Especially since Skyfall has the character about to walk away from his profession following the series’ most explosive opening sequence in which he is accidentally shot by his own agency.  Bond survives the bullet and attempts to leave behind the hired gun by drinking himself into the night with scorpions resting on his arm.  Once danger strikes London, he reconsiders early retirement.

He returns home with a problematic shoulder and in desperate need of a shave.  M, or Mom (Judi Dench), is about to lose MI6 after a bombing on the agency’s headquarters, as well as the hacking of her own confidential files including the identities of the agents on her payroll.  As soon as these spies begin turning up as corpses, M only trusts Bond to seek out the individual responsible.  This leads Bond to Shanghai where he reunites with his former partner (Naomie Harris).  He also finds himself introduced to Sévérine (Bérénice Marlohe), a woman under the threatening grip of a mad villain, Silva (Javier Bardem).  I call Silva mad, but really as played by Bardem, he is the most terrifying of all Bond villains, kind of like a blending of the Joker and Bane in terms of insanity, genius, intimidation, and character backstory.  How fitting it is then that Bond takes on the persona of Bruce Wayne throughout the film.

Silva is interested in the destruction of MI6 and has stolen the computer files necessary to track down its agents and kill them.  Bond and a few others may be the last hope to save the organization.  Mendes, the very capable director here, gives Bond, M, and Silva plenty of dimension and texture with this film.  Why do we actually care about Bond?  Why do we root for him after 50 years?  Why is Silva so evil?  Why is M so attached to Bond?  Mendes actually answers some important questions all the while dazzling our senses.  In fact, the more I reflect on Skyfall, the more I’ve come to appreciate it a lot more than I did a week ago.

This is by-and-large the most visually stunning and entrancing James Bond adventure we will ever get.  The exotic locales of Instabul, Shanghai, and even London look absolutely gorgeous.  The action is filmed in a much-appreciated, non-contemporary style—meaning you can actually see what’s happening.  Try making any sense of the action in Quantum of Solace.  Skyfall also boasts terrific performances from the entire cast.  Attempt to pin down a disappointment in this bunch… I dare you.

While Craig has never been my favorite Bond, he fills the role perfectly for this particular film.  I’ve never appreciated the grit and glum of his interpretation.  But this generation is all about the dark and grim.  And given the backstory Mendes presents for the character, we begin to understand why this Bond resembles a tattered Bruce Wayne, or a thankless Jason Bourne.  In fact, this film really marks a turning point for the character and for the franchise.

Before the film fizzles into a tense-thriller version of Home Alone, Skyfall centers on Bond looking at himself, literally reflecting in mirrors, and making sense of his past.  MI6 also does the same as the government attempts to shut them down.  With changing times and new threats afoot, are 007 and his cohorts necessary?  Is it time for a new agency?

But Skyfall reminds us of Bond’s brand of justice, and the immortality of rogue action-taking.  Perhaps that’s the immortality of this franchise.

[Rating:4/5]

Looper

Looper Science fiction movies like this don’t come along very often.  Though Looper has all the hallmarks of the genre, such as time travel, futuristic weapons, and head-scratching plot twists, it offers something rather unique among its peers of late: a unique and compelling story with enough grounding in a familiar reality to keep even casual moviegoers interested.  This smartly directed actioner-slash-head-scratcher does not dwell on the ins and outs of its central conceit too long, and instead focuses on keeping the pace solid and the action tight.  Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) works as a Looper, whose job it is to dispose of the scum of the earth…from the future.  30 years from now, when targets are captured by criminal organizations they aren’t just offed and dumped in a river like in The Godfather.  Instead they are sent back in time where Loopers blow ’em away and burn the bodies.  No fuss, no muss.  What could possibly go wrong?

All is well and dandy for a while, and Joe goes on living his shallow life of partying, doping, and hooking up with women at the local strip joint until he finds himself staring down the barrel of his blunderbuss at a particularly troublesome target: himself.  This, in Looper parlance, is known as “closing the loop.”  It’s the point at which a looper paradoxically ends his own life, thus resigning himself to three decades to live, until he is captured by the criminal organization in the future which sends him back in time to the present, at which point he shoots himself in the chest.

Confused?  Try this trick: just don’t think about it.  This sentiment, trite as it may be, is actually recommended to us by Joe as he converses with his future self in a diner.  Older Joe (Bruce Willis) urges his younger self to not dwell on the whole past/present/future thing too long, and soon afterwards the two of them are firing weapons, breaking windows, and dodging bullets like one would expect in any action movie.

Instead of dwelling on the nuts and bolts of temporal displacement and other quantum conundra, it’s best to just enjoy Looper for what it is: a smart, well-paced above-average popcorn flick with a healthy dollop of cerebral icing on the cake.  Think of it as this summer’s version of Inception, but a bit more dark and a lot more violent.

Following Joe’s failure to close his loop, he finds himself on the run from his boss Abe (Jeff Daniels, chewing through scenery worse than Willem Dafoe in Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man. But gosh, it sure is good to see him in a grumpy-old-man role like this.) who simply will not tolerate this sort of failure from anyone in his organization.  Joe escapes to a remote farmhouse where he encounters someone who may, or may not, hold the answers to some of the questions that have plagued his future self for years.  The resulting shootouts and climax are taut and emotional, with a particularly poignant performance from child actor Pierce Gagnon that is certain to have some parents in the audience squirming in their seats.  Topping things off is Gordon-Levitt’s pitch-perfect imitation of Bruce Willis, which is so nuanced it ought to earn him an Academy Award for Impersonating a Co-star.

Looper doesn’t have the weight-of-the-world heaviness of Terminator 2, the flat-out action of Aliens, or the suspense of Predator.  But its tight narrative and thought-provoking questions almost earn it a presence among its cinematic counterparts.

Rating:[Rating:4/5]

Taken 2

Luc Besson brings back the ultimate 60-year-old preventer, Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson), last seen gunning through Paris hunting down the sex-trafficking Albanians that kidnapped his teenage daughter, Kim (Maggie Grace). He saved her of course, but because Bryan killed so many men, the families belonging to the pile of dead bodies want revenge.  So much so that they are willing to dispatch more of their cold-blooded killer family members to go after Bryan, Maggie, and Bryan’s ex-wife, Lenny (Famke Janssen) while on vacation in Instabul.

Bryan may fend off more Albanians for the Luc Besson-produced cash-grab sequel Taken 2, but the film ignores the whole ticking-clock kidnapping angle that made the first film suspenseful.  Taken was no masterpiece, but it was wholly effective.  Taken 2 approaches the idea of a follow-up in a semi-interesting way—rather than rehashing his daughter’s kidnapping—Mills must fight vengeful pursuers that abduct him and his ex-wife, while his daughter’s safety also hangs over hot coals.  There’s no 4-day deadline.  The problem?  The change doesn’t work.

By the midway point, Taken 2 is a painful slog to watch.  Keep in mind, this is only a 90-minute movie.  The filmmakers simply have no idea what to do with the narrative.  Mills and Lenny get kidnapped.  Kim—believe it—must rescue her parents.  Then Mills must leave his wife behind to save his daughter.  Then Mills has to return and save his wife.  The villains exist to be villains.  The chases exist for chasing’s sake.  The gunplay and fistfights occur because they are expected to.  The filmmakers throw in obstacles—such as the slight slitting of Lenore’s throat and her being hung upside down with only 30 minutes to live—in an attempt to give the film its predecessor’s sense of urgency.  But the obstacles are quickly resolved.

Rather than Mills having the singular forward momentum of the previous film, he runs around Instabul in a strained back-and-forth pursuit.  The editing doesn’t help matters either.  Director Olivier Megaton is notorious for having an obnoxiously sloppy visual style.  You can’t understand any of the action’s choreography—and it looks about as atrocious as his previous efforts Colombiana and Transporter 3.  Mr. Megaton, I don’t know who you are and I don’t know what you want.  But if you come back for Taken 3, I will not see it.  I will not rent it.  I will not catch it on cable TV.

While this sequel had the opportunity to not be a simple retread by embracing the villain revenge angle, Taken 2 can’t overcome the dumping ground storytelling, directing, and editing.  Poor Liam Neeson is about as engaging and convincing as he was the last time out, but this time even he can’t save us.

[Rating:2/5]

 

Red Tails

Producer George Lucas took on an ambitious project when he set out to make Red Tails. He had to finance it mostly himself because, as he later said in an interview, studios didn’t want to make the picture because there weren’t enough rolls for white people. (Check out this link at 5:00.) Interesting that liberal Hollywood tried to stop a film with an all-black cast. Political commentator Alfonzo Rachel would later say that Hollywood did so because they don’t want young blacks to start wanting to learn about the Tuskegee Airmen (our protagonists, the first black squadron to see combat in WWII), because if they do, they’ll learn that most of them, like most blacks of the time, were Republicans. While there might be something to this theory, I tend to think Hollywood’s reluctance has less to do with the racial politics of the ‘40s than with those of today. Certain stigmas on the portrayal of blacks in film can make it really hard to make a good movie with too many black characters. Red Tails bears the marks of these stigmas – not as deeply as some movies, but they’re there nonetheless. Consequently, a movie that could have been another Memphis Belle had to settle for being just another Flyboys. It has some good action and a few good lines along the way. It also contains one of the funniest performances I’ve seen in awhile, as Cuba Gooding Jr. trying to play the grizzled, old Major Stance. He spends the whole movie sucking on a pipe, doing his best General MacArthur impression. Hilarious. Terrence Howard does considerably better as Colonel Bullard. Red Tails works fine as a popcorn flick, but gets annoying at times because it thinks it’s in the same league as Saving Private Ryan. It isn’t.

The first reason for this is its total lack of intensity. For all the action, the squadron suffers two dead, one wounded and one captured through the whole movie. The text at the end says that the historical Tuskegee Airmen lost 66 men with more wounded, but you sure wouldn’t know it from the film. This is because, even as Red Tails seeks to tell a story disproving racist claims of the past, as I said above, it bears the marks of the racism of today. Hollywood continues to be afraid to portray black characters as having any flaws, needing to learn anything, or failing at anything they do. Consequently, we see ridiculous things in this movie. In addition to the lack of casualties, we actually see Lightning (David Oyelowo), the squadron hot shot, blow up a destroyer with machine gun fire. This is slightly more realistic than the destruction of the destroyer in Mega Piranha. Slightly.

You can see from Red Tails why it’s so hard to make good movies about black people. This movie never breaks a sweat. We know the Red Tails can’t lose, and can hardly suffer a setback, so there’s never any suspense or sense of danger. The movie tries to build up some tension with ominous talk of the new jet fighters the Germans are developing, but when it comes down to it at the climactic battle, even the most cutting-edge technology is no match for the coolness of Hollywood-packaged black guys.

When I saw The Memphis Belle, I was on the edge of my seat the whole way through. I desperately wanted the bomber crew to make it home, and I wasn’t sure that they would. With Red Tails, I never worried.

What’s more, the film suffers from a drive to inflate the contribution its heroes made to the war. The film opens with a scene of white fighter pilots abandoning the bombers they are supposed to escort, and the line by a man on a bomber, “Damn those glory-grabbing bastards, again!” The bomber squadron is then cut to ribbons by the Germans. Later, a general tells Bullard that “We need to change the way we fight,” and he is giving the Red Tails a chance because he needs fighters that will stay with the bombers. The first time the Red Tails rendezvous with a bomb squadron, the pilots of the lead bomber are disappointed when they see that their escort is black. (Humorously, the black pilot they are looking at is several hundred feet away, and obscured by two canopies, and his whole body is covered, except for his eyes. How can they even tell?) Then, when the Red Tails refuse to chase a German “decoy squadron,” the bombers are shocked. “They’re giving up glory to save our asses!” Toward the end of the movie, a white squadron who is supposed to relieve the Red Tails fails to even show up. All this is, frankly, a loogie to the face of every non-black man who risked or sacrificed his life to save the world from Hitler and Tojo. Throughout the war, every flier on all sides knew that the job of the fighters was to protect the bombers, and non-black fighter pilots consistently did so. What is portrayed in Red Tails is nothing more than fiction concocted to make the Tuskegee Airmen seem revolutionary. The historical Red Tails fought with courage and dedication, but they did not turn the war around.

Can you tell which of these pilots is black? Here’s a better question: can you tell which of them is a brave American defending his home?

A lot of commentators have complained about a lack of interest in movies that focus on black people, and have blamed racism for it. But what racism is actually doing is taking the life out of such movies as they get made. Great war movies put us in the reality of the moment, to get some sense of the fear and the pain of war (if only through a glass, darkly). They have us wrestle with the questions the men wrestled with and make us understand the moral uncertainties that come even when you believe in what you’re fighting for. There is a moment in The Memphis Belle I will never forget, during the protagonists’ final mission. The copilot of the Belle is angry that he has spent the whole war in the cockpit, and doesn’t want to go home without being able to say he shot some Nazis. Before the last mission, he slips the tail gunner a pack of cigarettes to let him take over shooting for part of the mission. When the moment comes, he slips into the turret and begins blasting away. Before long, he knocks out a high-flying German fighter. He whoops with delight as the fighter plummets … Straight into an American Bomber. The bomber is cut in half, and the copilot listens, over the radio, to the pitiful wails of the men aboard as they plummet to their deaths. Obviously, words fail me. But I remember The Memphis Belle because the characters were real, not supermen. I jumped every time a bullet came through the wall of the plane. I felt with the plane medic as he struggled to save a wounded crew member, then wrestled with the urge to drop him out of the plane with a chute, hoping the Germans would take him to a hospital.

Something that’s interesting to note about Saving Private Ryan: Steven Spielberg, a Jew, included a Jewish character in the story, named Mellish. For some reason, he made Mellish one of the least likable characters in the movie, and ultimately had him lose to (of all people) a Nazi in face to face combat. I have no idea why Spielberg chose to do this, but, whatever his reason, it shows a certain contemplative humility that either white guilt or black narcissism just won’t allow into films like Red Tails. If the makers of black cinema want to see a wider interest in their films, they need to start putting their characters in a realistic light.

[Rating:3/5]

The Expendables 2

I enjoyed the first Expendables, but felt like it was missing a little something. It had all the elements of a great action film, but the end result was a tad hollow and left me wanting more. Enter Sylvester Stallone and his crew of misfits for another round of violence, mayhem, and bloodshed in Expendables 2.  It is, in every way, a far more over-the-top version of its predecessor and, in fact, nearly every action movie before it. The plot, such as it is, serves merely as a thin foundation upon which director Simon West builds a gigantic celluloid edifice in tribute to the glorious excesses of the 80’s, and then blows it to smithereens. This film a flurry of bullets and one-liners, delivered with such gleeful tongue-in-cheek earnestness that I couldn’t help but laugh out loud during the late-night screening (along with most of the audience too). In the first movie, Barney Ross (Stallone) and Lee Christmas (Jason Statham) led the titular gang of mercenaries on a mission to overthrow an evil dictator in the South American island of Vilena.  It was a great way to reunite virtually every great action star from the days of yore, but too much exposition and narrative twists bogged down what could have been a nice nostalgic romp. Fortunately, all that is gone in the sequel and what we are left with is the basic elements of a great ‘splode-fest with none of the window dressing.  It’s straight-up good guys vs. bad guys here, and of course the latter outnumber the former by at least twenty-to-one which, as one might expect, means a whole lot of cannon fodder for the good guys.

The movie opens with Ross and his crew infiltrating (read: demolishing and incinerating) a secret compound in order to retrieve a valuable hostage. Turns out there are two individuals worth rescuing: a Chinese billionaire and Trench (Arnold Schwarzenegger), Stallone’s rival from the first film. Upon their rescue, Trench searches for a big weapon and asks Ross’s team member Cesar (Terry Crews, no doubt lathered up in Old Spice) if he can have his. Cesar agrees, and lets Trench know that if he damages the weapon he will be “Terminated.” Cue cheering and applause from the theater audience, and an almost-visible wink from Schwarzenegger.  Yes, director Simon West is assuring us here, we are in for two raucous hours of craziness.  And it’s going to be a fun ride.

No subtlety or nuance here. Just big dudes with big guns.

New to the Expendables team this time around is sniper Billy the Kid (Liam Hemsworth, giving the girlfriends who got dragged to this movie something to look at), fresh out of the Army but reluctant to sign off on a life of unpredictable globetrotting with the rest of the team. He agrees to go with the crew on one more job, handed to them by the quazi-secretive Church (Bruce Willis) who wants a rather valuable package retrieved from a plane crash. Along the way they run into Villain (Jean-Claude Van Damme, slipping into this caricatured role like a comfy pair of old jeans), the leader of another band of mercenaries who takes the cargo the Expendables were sent to rescue.  I can’t give away too much here, but suffice it to say that after the mission is over, The Expendables have a much more personal reason to get the package back and kill Villain even if it means destroying half of Europe in the process.

Let’s not kid ourselves here, though: the main reason to see Expendables 2 is not the plot, the visuals, or the even action: it’s all about the actors: we’re here to watch Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Willis, Statham, Couture, Lundgren, and Li take on the bad guys and leave no man standing. The movie works only because it is these individuals, the titans of the genre, doing the fighting and spouting off one-liners like “I now pronounce you…man and knife” while dispatching evildoers with aplomb. When the team asks Booker (Chuck Norris) what happened after an encounter with a cobra snake, he replies with one of the infamous Chuck Norris Facts: “After five days of agonizing pain…the cobra died.” Schwarzenegger and Willis trade barbs near the end of the film, poking fun at each other’s “I’ll be back” and “Yippie-ki-yay” lines from Terminator and Die Hard while practically cheering along with the audience in the process. Clearly this is not a movie meant to be taken seriously, and it’s all the more fun because of it.

In the 1985 Schwarzenegger classic Commando, there’s a scene in which Arnold racks up over 50 bodies in 3 minutes. It’s ridiculous, ludicrous, illogical–and thoroughly entertaining. Scenes like this allow us to root for an unstoppable here who will do whatever it takes to right the wrongs in this cruel world. The Expendables 2 is an extension of that mentality: there’s no double-crossing, no love story, no shady political backhanded maneuvers, no inner conflict, and no need to dodge bullets (we all know such puny projectiles have no effect on action heroes).  Instead we have a binary world where good is good, bad is bad, and heroes who simply take care of business.  In a summer full of brooding billionaires and squabbling superheroes, Expendables 2 is a reminder of that sometimes all we want is just a rock-solid back-to-the-basics action flick. And boy, does it deliver.

Rating:[Rating:5/5]

Machine Gun Preacher

This is one film that has already had an impact in the real world, if only because it has suddenly made it cool again for Facebookers to lament the actions of child killer Joseph Kony, and send around anti-Kony Slogans that you are supposed to “like” and “share.” Machine Gun Preacher is a movie laden with violence, swearing and some sensuality, so kids shouldn’t see it, but, to be fair, it’s actually rather mild compared to the way it could have been. It portrays southern Sudan and northern Uganda in a realistic light. It confronts the politically incorrect, but very real fact that African Christians, and other non-muslims, are being persecuted and killed by Muslim jihadis, and have been for a long time.  But it focuses primarily on the menace of Kony, who leads his cult under a weird mix of Islam, Christianity and witchcraft, and kidnaps children, forcing them to kill for his army or be killed by it.

But we get another story first. In Pennsylvania, Sam Childers (Gerard Butler) is being released from prison. Childers has spent his life on the street, learning to use, deal, and fight. He has made his living as hired muscle for drug runners, and has hurt and killed more people than the law will ever uncover. Butler was an excellent choice to portray Childers. He’s taller and slimmer than the man he plays, but otherwise looks very similar. He has the build for the action part of the roll, and his acting in this picture is tour-de-force. Incidentally, he did this film for one thirtieth of his normal rate. Childers’ wife, Lynn, (Michelle Monaghan) picks him up and drives him home. Believing that she is still working as a stripper, he asks her what time she has to work that night. She tells him that she has given that up because it “isn’t right in the eyes of God.” He derisively asks “Oh, you found God?” She replies “He found me. And He helped me change.” At first Sam is angry that she’s left a profitable job, but he soon starts to realize that his old habits are coming back with a vengeance, and that he is on a fast track to be back in prison or dead. One day, Lynn catches him in the bathroom, trying to wash blood off of himself. All he can say is “help me.”

From left: Marco, unknown, Childers, Deng.

The following Sunday, Sam goes with Lynn and their daughter Paige to church. This movie was played in theaters all over America. I rejoiced when I saw that, not only was the portrayal of a Christian church fair and respectful, but that the gospel of Jesus Christ was accurately communicated. At the end of the service, Childers answers the pastor’s call to get wet in the baptismal font. A lot of serious Christians have legitimately argued that spur-of-the-moment alter calls such as the one depicted send more people to Hell than they save from it. But history does show us that Childers, at least, was a changed man afterword, and when watching a Hollywood movie, I don’t see any point in getting greedy. So there you have it: a conversion story from Hollywood. A rushed and watered-down conversion story to be sure, but a conversion story nonetheless.

Childers and Butler at the premier.

Childers eventually travels to Uganda as a construction worker, to help a mission. He hears about Kony and the so-called “Lord’s Resistance Army,” and sees a woman who’s face has been mutilated by them. Knowing that he can take care of himself, he leaves the beaten path and sees the aftermath of an LRA attack on a village. The last shot is of him howling in grief over a dead child. He returns home and eventually tells his wife God has told him to build two things: the last thing America needs (one more church building) and the first thing the Sudan needs (one more orphanage, only this one will be near Kony’s territory).

In reality, this orphanage is now the largest in Southern Sudan and has fed and housed over 1,000 children. Today, more than 200 children are being raised and educated there. Most of the staff is composed of orphans that grew up there themselves. And while this is never mentioned in the movie, Lynn works closely with Sam on the ministry, and they have a group called Angles of East Africa that they founded together.

The two “rescue vehicles” of Childer’s mission.

The strange thing is, you would usually expect a movie that is based on a true story to sensationalize and make it bigger. From what I’ve read, this movie seems to do the opposite. Don’t get me wrong, there’s plenty of action, but the story seems blunted, almost as if the director doesn’t really want us to see Childers as a hero. A lot of things are never explained. For example, we never see how Childers came to be giving orders to the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army, but after a few scenes he’s leading a team of five men, including Deng (Souleymane Savane) and

The newly saved Lynn waits for her murderer husband to emerge from prison.

Marco (Mdudzi Mabaso), into life-or-death missions. We’re left to assume he simply inspired a few of them to follow him and do something about Kony. After a while, Childers starts treating his family like dirt. The movie eventually leads up to one of the most abrupt and unsatisfying non-endings I have ever seen. Perhaps worst of all, the last bit of spiritual dialogue we hear in the movie is Childers lashing  out at God for not saving some kids. I didn’t have a problem with it being there. After all, what Christian hasn’t wrestled with feelings like this? But I see no reason to finish the movie on that note, especially when the real Sam Childers doesn’t have that attitude today.

All in all, this movie brings plenty to the table: good visceral action, some hard questions to wrestle with, and a story that remained untold for far too long. Most of the problems it does have can be attributed to trying to tell an absolutely massive story, on two continents, in just over two hours. It’s far from being a perfect movie, or a perfect spiritual message. But it’s a darn good movie, and even as a spiritual message it has something to offer. This is a movie that needed to be made, and that you need to see.

[Rating:4/5]