Safe Haven

Nicholas Sparks has become such a massive force in American romantic films that it only takes a few signifiers to recognize his work. A beach setting, with marshes in the background glinting with sunlight. A couple, almost always white, either in casual resort wear or bathing suits, embracing. There's always something dark looming, be it a secret from the past or a tragedy the characters don't see coming, but the glowing smiles of the lovers overcome it-- these are movies painstakingly engineered to bring its fragile audience just to the brink of raw emotions before planting them back in the pastel-colored, soft and generous Sparksian world.

Safe Haven, the latest film to roll off the Sparks assembly line, follows every one of those instructions to the letter, though he fiddles with the formula enough here that longtime fans might be wooed. The darkness in Safe Haven comes not from some looming future tragedy but from the past, as Katie (Julianne Hough) tries to start a new life in Southport, North Carolina while her abusive husband Kevin (David Lyons) tracks her from Boston. The parallel narrative structure is unusual for a Sparks film, as we watch Katie flirt and fall for local shopkeeper Alex (Josh Duhamel, 16 years older than Hough but who's counting?) while Kevin, a detective, hunts her like a bloodhound.

The contrasting styles of a stalker thriller and a fluffy romance could lend Safe Haven some interesting wrinkles, but director Lasse Hallstrom has no idea how to play out that tension, offering pointless misdirection about Kevin's real identity and revealing clues about how he'll hunt Katie down well after the audience has noticed them. He's more comfortable with the brighter romantic scenes, thanks to experience on the likes of Dear John and Salmon Fishing in the Yemen. The North Carolina locations are sumptuous as ever, and Alex's two moppets (Noah Lomax and Mimi Kirkland) are actually cute, at least when not saddled with dialogue. Hough and Duhamel have no chemistry whatsoever, and their characters are bland and featureless as a bowl of grits, but you paid money to see them romance each other in bathing suits, and they dutifully comply.

Even though it's essentially the same as every coastal Southern town depicted in a Sparks novel, Southport and its easy way of life is surprisingly alluring, and credit to production designer Kara Lindstrom for the effectively weathered general store that Alex owns, and Katie's bungalow in the woods that's the kind of place we'd all run away to, abusive husband or not. Safe Haven's February release is obviously timed for Valentine's Day, but it works as a mental summer vacation as well-- when you get bored of watching Katie and Alex gaze at each other or the convoluted plot that keeps them apart, you can admire their summer clothes and the coastal greenery and start counting down the days until your own beach vacation.

Until, that is, the film's climax, which includes one twist you definitely saw coming-- that abusive husband wasn't going to stay away forever, now was he?-- and one you might not have, a twist so gutsy it will probably be all anyone talks about after. As it turns out, you can complain all you want about Nicholas Sparks's conflict-free stories, but when conflict is introduced it totally ruins the gauzy vacation vibe. Safe Haven doesn't have a whole lot to offer, with a plot so familiar and stars so uninterested in each other, and its resolution only undermines what it's truly best at being-- a cheap North Carolina vacation.

Read More

The Master

In his last and possibly best film, There Will Be Blood, Paul Thomas Anderson dove headlong into a character who is a very specific, very important American archetype. Daniel Plainview, who was almost an instant icon, was the American Dream embodied and curdled, a salesman and sociopath who shaped the wilderness of the country in his own image. In his new film The Master, Philip Seymour Hoffman plays a uniquely American character not unlike Daniel Plainview, a man who chooses to shape people rather than nature. But the film's focus is divided between Hoffman's cult leader Lancaster Dodd and Joaquin Phoenix's Freddie Quell, a drifter who falls under Dodd's spell. It gives the film a range of themes and some powerhouse scenes between the two, but also muddles its focus; The Master is beautiful and thought-provoking, but also frustratingly inaccessible and opaque about its meaning.

In a way that's always always been Anderson's style-- who can claim they know the deal with those frogs at the end of Magnolia?-- but The Master is a film about ideas that's also oddly disconnected from them, exploring the nascent cult Lancaster Dodd has founded without ever giving real meaning to his teachings. Hoffman plays Dodd as a fiery but uniquely entertaining man, holding his followers and the audience in rapt attention through vague speeches about achieving higher awareness and the existence of past lives. He is calm when prodding his followers to new "revelations" but quick to anger in the face of skeptics, ebullient on his daughter's wedding day but cold the next. He's mercurial but giving and endlessly confident, which is what makes him such a great leader-- and such a fascinating figure to follow and never quite understand throughout the film.

But he's nothing compared to Freddie, the film's untamable and menacing heart, a man cut loose from the all-or-nothing morals of World War II into a country that doesn't have room for him. We meet him first on a Navy beach outpost where he takes every joke too far and does insane things like drink rocket fuel; after the war he's left taking portraits at a posh department store, and who can be surprised when that blows up in his face. Like any good American origin myth, Freddie's meeting with Dodd happens entirely by accident, hopping on board a gleaming party boat that's sailing away beneath the Golden Gate Bridge. After a intense kind of psychotherapy called "processing" and some straight talk with Dodd's wife Peggy (Amy Adams), Freddie is brought into Dodd's confidence-- and the insular, unblinking world of The Cause-- before he or we quite understand how it happened.

Despite all the talk of Dodd being a thinly veiled take on L. Ron Hubbard, nothing in The Master reflects that heavily on the real world, and for all the ways we see Freddie and Dodd straining against the confines of post-war American life, their story isn't presented in the mythic tones you might expect. The best parts of The Master are when it condenses down into tinderbox scenes between Freddie and Lancaster, the two of them probing and defying each other, sometimes exploding-- as in an unforgettable scene in a prison cell-- or gazing at each other with the kind of sadness and affection you might expect from lovers. Freddie is not like the devoted, thoughtful followers Dodd has already amassed-- he's like a feral animal, with poor impulse control and disturbing sexual obsessions, and that challenge to overcome his base nature fits neatly into Dodd's rambling teachings about connecting to a higher self.

Shot in rich, detailed 70 mm that adds unexpected depth and clarity to even the simplest scenes, The Master is gorgeous in its careful construction, but also a little distant and hard to grasp. A second viewing seems practically a requirement, like many of Anderson's films, and it's a little painful to write this review now, knowing I haven't yet gotten the whole picture. Based around undeniably great performances, impeccable design and Anderson's unnerving confidence behind the camera, The Master is unforgettable, but like the mercurial men at its center, the harder you try to read into it, the more it slips away into the distance.

Read More

Beautiful Creatures

Your Twilight alarm may be screaming at first glimpse of Beautiful Creatures, a supernatural romance between two teenagers-- one human, one immortal-- who long to be together, and express that longing in a lot of gorgeous natural locations while scored to modern pop music. And while the world of Beautiful Creatures is no less absurd than Twilight, filled with witches called "casters" and curses from the Civil War and an all-knowing Viola Davis, it possesses a crucial self-awareness to actually allow you to get in on the fun. It's not always easy to follow the rules of this new supernatural world, but by not getting caught up in the details and exploring the giggly thrill of teen romance, Beautiful Creatures is way more fun than your Twilight-weary soul might imagine.

It starts, surprisingly enough, with the two attractive young leads, both of whom commit to the high emotions of romance without forgetting that they're supposed to be, y'know, enjoying each others' company. Alden Ehrenreich slaps on a syrupy Southern accent to play Ethan Wate, a sweet-natured kid itching to escape his South Carolina hometown, but also stuck caring for his dad following his mother's death. He's drawn immediately to the new girl in town, Lena (Alice Englert), who's staying with her uncle Macon Ravenwood (Jeremy Irons) in a run-down old mansion that everyone thinks is haunted (the connection between Macon and To Kill a Mockingbird's Boo Radley is stated early, one of many hints that Beautiful Creatures is smarter than it looks). Ethan pursues Lena not with smoldering glances but an easy smile and a willingness to look silly, and the imperious Lena eventually softens-- but not before revealing the family secrets that could keep them apart.

You see, Lena is a caster-- the terms for witch used in Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl's novels-- and on her approaching 16th birthday she will be "claimed" for either the dark or light side. In the chaotic group of supporting characters we see both the light side (Margo Martindale in an insane wig, mainly) and the dark (Emmy Rossum's vampy Cousin Ridley), and Lena's own dark caster mother Seraphine comes to town, possesses the body of the local Moral Majority snoop (Emma Thompson) and tries to meddle in Lena's life enough to make her dark transition a guarantee. On top of all that, there's also a curse left over from the Civil War that guarantees that Lena's love for a mortal will make her dark forever. Being 16 ain't easy, y'all.

When Thompson first appears as the schoolmarmish yokel she seems wildly out of place, but when she transforms into Seraphine with one delicious monologue delivered to Irons, she lights a rocket under the movie and delivers its purpose. Yes, all the Southern accents in this movie are awful. Yes, it's impossible to keep track of which caster is meddling with Lena in which way. Yes, there are moments where we peek into Lena's magical world and something completely nonsensical-- like a man with his entire body painted like clouds-- is presented as if we should understand it. But even when Beautiful Creatures is nonsense, it is stylish, captivating, gloriously enjoyable nonsense, with all of its performers well aware of what they're given. Director Richard LaGravanese, seemingly grateful to have assembled this kind of cast, lets his actors cut loose, but all are smart enough not to turn it into a joke. You'll find yourself believing in it all despite yourself; like the Civil War re-enactments featured in the final action scene, it all looks insane on the surface, but has a mighty power to suck you in.

Englert, with her moody eyes and powerful charisma, is an obvious star in the making, but Ehrenreich matches her not in sex appeal, but boy-next-door relatability-- the two of them alone are worth a sequel to dip back into this loony-tunes world. As a South Carolinian I think I finally understand what it's been like for Louisianans to watch True Blood all these years, seeing their culture transformed into something howling and maybe even offensive. I also can't wait to see it happen again.

Read More

Oz The Great And Powerful

In a world of sequels, reboots, remakes, re-adaptations and re-imaginings, prequels have become one of Hollywood?s hardest nuts to crack. There have been far fewer successes than notorious missteps, from George Lucas? second Star Wars trilogy to X-Men Origins: Wolverine. In directing Oz The Great and Powerful, Sam Raimi was facing an uphill battle working to live up to the legacy of Victor Fleming?s classic The Wizard of Oz, but by embracing what was great about the old film while introducing plenty of new to the world, he has succeeded.

The legacy of both Disney and Oz both could have found a way to stifle Raimi?s style, but Oz The Great and Powerful is undeniably a Raimi film. The director brings all of his little flourishes that he?s had since The Evil Dead to the new blockbuster - most notably the quick-zooms that distinguish scenes of chaos ? and he?s also even able to play around with some scarier elements. The film is never any more frightening than The Wizard of Oz is, but between dragon-winged baboons, intense witches and a scene involving some freaky plant monsters, the movie will raise your pulse at times.

And credit to Raimi for actually building Oz for his actors to interact in instead of a bunch of green screens. Not only does it give the film a surreal quality, convincing the audience of its otherworldliness, it?s also a boon to the 3D cinematography, which succeeds in not making the characters look like cardboard cutouts against a matte painting. But where the CGI does come in its fantastic, particularly in the design and integration of the China Girl, who looks impressively photorealistic.

As an origin story for The Wizard of Oz, this film cleverly balances its own story while also embracing the elements that made the original great to begin with. Raimi includes many nods to Fleming?s movie, including the sepia-toned 4:3 aspect ratio opening that turns to color and widescreen in the Land of Oz, and the fact that both stories have a group of unlikely heroes joining together to go on a great adventure, but keeps the story surprising and clever enough for it all to play as loving homage. The troupe that the movie pulls together - which includes Oz (James Franco), the con-man/magician/presumed wizard destined to save the land from the wicked witch; Finley (Zach Braff), a flying monkey who owes a life-debt to Oz; and the aforementioned China Girl (Joey King), a sassy young porcelain doll who Oz rescues ? has wonderful chemistry and conflicting personalities, while the three witches Glinda, Evanora and Theodora (Michelle Williams, Rachel Weisz, and Mila Kunis) all get interesting new backstories that add surprising depth to previously underdeveloped characters.

Fun as Franco is in the eponymous role, it?s surprisingly his CGI co-stars that wind up stealing the show. As Finley, Braff has the benefit of getting the lion?s share of the funniest one-liners and quips, but the actor deserves the credit for his great timing and simply having the perfect voice for the part. King, meanwhile, brings the ideal level of pluck and cute humor to the China Girl without ever being cloying or reducing the character to being a stereotype.

Unlike 2011?s The Thing, Hannibal Rising or Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd, Oz The Great and Powerful is the rare prequel that fans will want to rewatch back to back with the original classic, not only finding the places where the stories sync up, but also just enjoying the story of it all. It?s an entertaining family movie, a true Sam Raimi film, and a fun return to a merry old land.

Read More

Stoker

The best way to watch Stoker, the new film from director Park Chan-wook, is as if you have the senses of its lead character. India Stoker, played by the brilliant Mia Wasikowska, has a special gift where she can hear and see things imperceptible to the rest of us, seeing the world for all of its smallest details and elements. Watching the movie, audiences should completely absorb themselves in it, pushing back reality to focus on every line, every cut, every pan and every sound. It?s the only way to properly view something this magnificent.

Mixing elements of the modern day, the Victorian gothic era and the mid-20th century, Stoker is a stunning mix of coming of age tale and horror/thriller that begins on India?s 18th birthday ? the day her father (Dermot Mulroney) is killed in a terrible car accident. But it isn?t until the funeral that she discovers she won?t be alone in her giant house with her unbalanced mother, Evie (Nicole Kidman). It is there that she first learns of her mysterious Uncle Charlie (Matthew Goode), family she has never knew existed. From there, Park and screenwriter Wentworth Miller weave a captivating and phenomenal tale of mystery and terror, as sexual and psychological tension constantly rises between the mother, daughter and uncle and India?s fascination with her estranged relative unravels not only his past, but also her future.

Every frame in Stoker feels like it was crafted with satin-gloved fingertips and a pair of tweezers held by a filmmaker in complete control. Park makes regular use of long, flowing shots that take the audience around the palatial Stoker estate, lending the film not only a feeling of elegance, but a creepy, underlying voyeurism. ?The sound design is otherworldly, as we occasionally dip into India?s perceptions and listen to the world the way she hears it, from the light breathing and shallow gulps during a quiet family dinner to the shatter of a gunshot and gurgling blood. The film creates an opulent, wonderful landscape of senses that lures you in and snaps like a bear trap when the dark undertones become extreme overtones.

Leading the cast and lending a stoic, mesmerizing quality to India, Wasikowska is a stand-out in a cast replete with awesome performances. The young actress creates an impressive balance for the character, accentuating her great strength (like when she strikes back at bullies tormenting her at school) while also making her vulnerable (particularly when in the presence of Uncle Charlie). Goode?s take on the film?s mysterious antagonist is frighteningly reminiscent of Anthony Perkins? Norman Bates in Psycho, while Kidman?s turn is blessed with subtlety that makes Evie?s instability all the more engaging. When the three gather in one room you can palpably feel the emotions between all the characters and it?s immediately clear you?re watching something special.

You won?t find any jump scares in Stoker. Nor will you find any demonically-possessed children, CGI beasts, or half-assed twist endings. The movie forgoes any stunts and tropes and instead generates genuine terror from flawless filmmaking, a collection of outstanding performances and a story of bubbling monstrosity and bad blood. If this is what Park Chan-wook can bring to the American film world, then hopefully he will stay for a very long time.

Read More

The Last Exorcism Part II

New Orleans is a really spooky place. It?s a strange mix of buttoned up Christianity, hidden superstitions and nighttime sin. It has its own pace, its own bilingual history and its own demons. In many ways, it?s the perfect setting for a horror movie interested in creepy and off-putting visuals and/ or backstories involving slavery, vampires and old mansions that have fallen into disrepair.

At times, The Last Exorcism really seems to understand the potential in its location. It cuts to creepers in Mardi Gras masks and disturbing painted street performers. It even throws in some voodoo-like rituals, but none of it is enough to save a flat exorcism story arc that few of us asked for and even fewer will enjoy.

Even casual horror fans have probably seen at least one young woman?s body twisted, contorted and raised into the air. If not, they?ve at least seen one member of a weird cult or religious organization get called out of the bullpen to try his home spun remedies on a protagonist slowly losing his or her mind. That?s why exorcism movies have to be about the characters now, as as characters go, The Last Exorcism is short on good ones.

After the de-possession story of the first The Last Exorcism, Nell Sweetzer (Ashley Bell) is discovered in the woods and brought to live in a group home for troubled young girls. After repeatedly being told the demon who possessed her, Abalam, isn?t real, she starts to make a real life for herself. There's a potential boyfriend (Spencer Treat Clark) to awkwardly go to the zoo with, a gaggle of girlfriends to talk about it with, and a job as a maid in a local hotel, but alas, we all know that bliss can?t last in an exorcism movie. Abalam reappears in various forms to sometimes torture her, sometimes woo her and consistently confuse the hell out of any viewers with common sense.

There?s a difference between a genre movie not answering every possible question a viewer might have and a horror movie straight up not making sense, and The Last Exorcism 2 is on the wrong side of that unforgiving line. We?re told Abalam is powerless without Nell; yet, he?s apparently capable of inhabiting people?s bodies and committing a boatload of felonies with only a marginal bit of effort. Sometimes we?re given evidence to believe certain characters and certain behaviors are figments of people?s imaginations, and sometimes we?re given evidence to believe certain characters and certain behaviors are actually happening. It?s a big jumbled, needlessly complicated mess.

The Last Exorcism worked because it made clever use of a skeptic, got a great performance from its lead actress and offered just enough genuine scares. The Last Exorcism 2 gets that same great performance from Bell, but beyond that, it doesn?t offer much more than confusion and the occasional New Orleans shoutout. Unlike its predecessor, this one isn?t destined for good word of mouth, and if we?re in luck, it won?t be destined for another sequel either.

Read More