Showing posts with label John Goodman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Goodman. Show all posts
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Flight
Robert Zemeckis makes his return to directing live-action films with Flight (his last live-action film was 2000's Cast Away, he has a thing for plane crashes apparently). Denzel Washington stars as an alcoholic pilot, who deals with the aftermath of a plane crash in which he saved all but 6 people on board, but was drunk and high on cocaine at the time. With the investigation, he could go to jail for a few years for flying under the influence or for the rest of his life if they find his state was the cause of the crash and, thus, the 6 deaths. Or, with the help of his union's lawyer, he could go free.
The beginning of the film is fantastic. Whip wakes up from a night of drinking and sex with one of the flight attendants, Katerina. To wake himself up after the rough, late night, he snorts a couple lines of cocaine. He goes to the airport and prepares for the flight and shows no ill-effects. They take off in rough weather, experience severe turbulence but finally pull through it (an excellent fake-out when you know a crash is coming). The crash sequence is excellent. It's uncomfortable and hits at that innate fear of crashing that even people who are not afraid of flying must have. When they roll the plane it is absolutely terrifying. Finally, Whip lands the plane in a field by a church.
In the hospital, Whip makes the decision to quit drinking. His friend Harling (played by John Goodman) brings him supplies but he tells Harling to take away the alcohol he brought. In the hospital, he sneaks into a stairwell for a cigarette and meets Nicole, a former photographer in the hospital after overdosing on heroin.
When he's discharged from the hospital, Whip goes to his deceased father's farm instead of his own home to avoid the press. He's able to keep away from the press, however, there is the matter of the NTSB investigation into the crash he has to deal with. After a few days of successfully avoiding the temptation to drink, the pressure of the investigation drives him back to drinking. His drinking drives away Nicole, with whom he had a budding relationship, as she tries to deal with her addiction issues.
He spirals out of control and eventually shows up at the home of his union handler to keep him clean in the days leading up to his NTSB hearing. He's kept clean for a week and the night the before the hearing he's checked into a hotel with a guard and a mini-fridge stocked with non-alcoholic beverages. However, during the night, he discovers the door connecting the hotel room next door is ajar. And their mini-fridge is full of alcohol. The next morning, the morning of his hearing, he's found drunk, passed out on his bathroom floor. He's woken up and asks for Harling, who comes and peps Whip up with a few lines of cocaine. He gets through the hearing, his union lawyer was able to get his toxicology report thrown out for being done improperly and with out-of-calibration equipment. The NTSB knows that a couple bottles of vodka were consumed during the flight (which Whip drank), though there was no drink service on the flight, so they could only have been consumed by the crew. Katerina's toxicology report was the only one that was admissible that came back positive for intoxication. When he's asked if, in his opinion, she drank the bottles, he has a change of heart and admits that it was him and he was drunk.
The movie lost me here because what kind of a question is that? In his opinion, did she drink those bottles of vodka? Who would ask that? It just feels like a purely movie question meant to make a movie character have a change-of-heart movie moment. It didn't feel real in the slightest. And when the rest of the movie did a pretty good job of being realistic with emotions and motivations (though the union rep and union lawyer assenting to call Harling to drug Whip in order to protect him was a bit of a stretch, though humorous), that sort of thing is a real let down.
I also found the religious overtones a bit out of place. They seemed to go out of their way to have characters express religious beliefs and sentiments. For instance, when Whip meets Nicole in the stairway, they also meet a cancer patient who's sneaking out for a cigarette as well. He talks about how God gave him cancer, it's God's plan, it was God's plan for Whip to land the plane and save those people, it was God's plan for Whip and Nicole to meet. This guy is never seen again. Was God involved in any of it? I don't know. God is mentioned all throughout, it makes you think there's going to be something to it. But it's just, sort of...there. I can't even say that Whip's reversal at the hearing was some sort of divine epiphany – it seemed more as though Whip couldn't bring himself to tarnish the memory of someone he cared about (Katerina died in the plane crash, the result of helping a boy who fell out of his seat when the plane rolled and being unable to get herself back into her seat before the crash). He clearly cared for her, when he woke up after the crash he wanted to know if she survived. So why'd they make such a big point of that stuff if it didn't add anything or lead anywhere?
In the end, it felt like an uneven film. There's some good stuff to the story and there's some that didn't really work. The highlight is Denzel's performance. It's fantastic. A great performance, no doubt. John Goodman is also great as Harling, extremely funny, however it's somewhat disappointing how little he's in the film. He shows up in the beginning for a few minutes then disappears until another few minutes at the end. Don Cheadle also shines as the union lawyer. It's these performances and the crash sequence that carry the movie. Flight is a good film, I just wasn't sure what it was going for at times, so I'm not sure what it was aiming for or if it hit the mark.
3 out of 5
Labels:
Denzel Washington,
Don Cheadle,
Flight,
John Goodman,
Robert Zemeckis
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Argo
Argo is Ben Affleck's latest film, following Gone, Baby, Gone and The Town. It's based on the true story of what is referred to as the Canadian Caper – in the middle of the Iranian hostage crisis, ex filtrating 6 embassy workers, who escaped as the students stormed the embassy and were in hiding at the residence of the Canadian ambassador to Iran, under the guise of being a Canadian film crew scouting locations.
The film starts with a brief history lesson on what led to the taking of the American embassy. The United States' involvement in overthrowing the Iranian leader and supporting a dictator before a revolt overthrew the American-backed government and replaced the shah with the Ayatollah Khomeini. The shah fled Iran, eventually seeking medical treatment in the United States. The Iranians wanted the shah sent back to Iran so that he could be tried for the abuses of his regime. The United States' refusal to send him back thus led to rising anger, demonstrations, and, finally, storming the American embassy and taking hostages.
As the students were taking over the embassy, six workers were in a part of the embassy that they could escape onto the streets. They managed to evade detection and get bounced from embassy to embassy looking for a place to hide. Finally, the Canadian ambassador agreed to let them stay in his residence. In Washington, D.C., when they get the news of the six escapees (from the Canadian government, the film underplays the role of the Canadians), the C.I.A. gets to work planning a way to get them out.
The best (best-bad) idea they have is to create a cover story of a film crew scouting locations for a science-fiction movie in need of exotic locations. With the help of a Hollywood make-up artist, who had worked with the C.I.A. previously, a script is purchased (titled Argo), production company set up, offices obtained, casting calls set up, script readings done, and press releases put out. All in order to create a convincing cover story.
The film moves from drama to comedy with ease. John Goodman as make-up artist John Chambers (Oscar winner for his work on Planet of the Apes) and Alan Arkin as Lester Siegel (a fictional producer) are great comic relief. They ease the tension inherent in trying to set up and execute a rescue plan in a hostile territory. When plans can fall apart and the ruse be discovered, with the possibility of death, at any moment, it's good to provide that release or else the movie could be unbearably dark and heavy.
The film is well-paced and plotted. The words “based on a true story” should let you know that the film takes liberties with the truth – it's drama, not docu-drama. But it's to create a compelling film-story. The story is focused and clear, despite having to bounce between Iran, Washington, D.C., and Hollywood. You don't get lost in it or confused about what's going on and what people are doing. Credit for this has to go to screenwriter Chris Terrio and Affleck as director, they handle it with skill and confidence.
The film is well-acted by Goodman, Arkin, Bryan Cranston, and, yes, Affleck. Affleck keeps everyone on point. It's well-shot by Rodrigo Prieto. The film is compelling and incredibly enjoyable. A tense, funny, dark political-thriller and Hollywood-send-up.
4 1/2 out of 5
Labels:
Alan Arkin,
Argo,
Ben Affleck,
Bryan Cranston,
John Goodman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)